DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 28 September 2026 regarding claim 1 have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Umehara 252 does not explicitly disclose the vibration body as further defined in amended claim 1. However, as shown below, substrate 10 is both the substrate and the vibration body. In the instant invention, substrate 24 is part of vibration body 20. Substrate 10 of Umehara 252 appears to serve the same purpose. Thus, the rejection is maintained.
Regarding claim 6, it is agreed that paragraph 0016 of Umehara 252 does not mention an inner or outer ring. This was meant to reference Ueda paragraph 0016, which clearly teaches these components. However, it was stated last Office Action that Ueda is not combinable with Umehara 252. Therefore, even though Ueda teaches this limitation, as it cannot be combined with the rejection of claim 1, the claim is allowable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4-5, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Umehara (“Umehara 252”; US 2014/0202252).
Regarding claim 1: Umehara 252 discloses a vibration module (Fig. 2), comprising:
a movable unit including a base plate (30), a magnet (60), and a back yoke (70);
a stationary unit including a frame (30), a substrate (10), a coil (40), and an insulator (paragraph 0050); and
an elastic member (53, Fig. 3) between the movable unit and the stationary unit (paragraph 0060),
wherein the movable unit, the stationary unit, and the elastic member are arranged in a first arrangement direction (in this case, the vertical or Z-axis direction, Fig. 2),
the frame (30) in the stationary unit has a first surface at one side of the frame (the top side in the Z-direction in Fig. 2) in the first arrangement direction and attached to the movable unit with the elastic member, and the frame has a second surface at the other side of the frame in the first arrangement direction (bottom side of 30) and attachable to a vibration body (also 10, as “vibration body” is not defined any further in the claim, it is simply a body) supported by a support (such as the side legs of 20), the vibration body having an operation surface operable by a user (such as when the vibrator is vibrated), and the support supporting the vibration body to allow vibration of the vibration body (as the legs of 20 lead to 10), and
the movable unit is movable relative to the stationary unit in a second arrangement direction intersecting with the first arrangement direction (paragraph 0063 “forward-and-rearward direction”).
Regarding claim 4: Umehara 252 discloses an attachment member (21, Fig. 2) to be located between the second surface of the frame (akin to 30) and the vibration body to attach the frame to the vibration body (80),
wherein the second surface of the frame includes a protrusion protruding toward the vibration body (33a-d), and the attachment member has an opening accommodating the protrusion (23a-d).
Regarding claim 5: Umehara 252 discloses the base plate includes an attachment protrusion protruding toward the back yoke (into holes 371a-b, not shown in FIG. 12, paragraph 0113), and
the attachment protrusion is placed in a through-hole (371a-b) in the back yoke (370).
Regarding claim 8: Umehara 252 discloses the frame (30) has a surface being plate-like (flat part of 30) and a side surface extending in the first arrangement direction (it bends 90 degrees on each side), and the side surface has one end face connecting to the surface of the frame (as it’s a single structure).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umehara 252, in view of Ueda et al. (“Ueda”; US 2012/0169153).
Regarding claim 2: Umehara 252 discloses the base plate, but does not explicitly disclose the base plate has a surface facing the first surface of the frame, and the surface of the base plate has a recess accommodating the elastic member.
However, Ueda discloses wherein the base plate (8) has a surface facing the first surface of the frame (up), and
the surface of the base plate has a recess accommodating the elastic member (shown by the notch in 8 in Fig. 3 right below the elastic member 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the base plate of Umehara 252 to include the recess of Ueda in order to allow for a more compact design.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umehara 252 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Zhang et al. (“Zhang”; US 2020/0044527).
Regarding claim 3: Umehara 252 discloses the base plate and the frame, and the magnet, the coil, and the elastic member, but does not explicitly disclose a protector between the base plate and the frame, the protector being frame-like and extending along a periphery of the base plate, wherein the magnet, the coil, and the elastic member are located inward from the protector.
However, Zhang discloses a protector (150) between the base plate (112) and the frame (111), the protector being frame-like and extending along a periphery of the base plate (Fig. 1),
wherein the magnet (131), the coil (120), and the elastic member (140) are located inward from the protector (as shown in Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the module of Umehara 252 to include the protector of Zhang in order to better protect the components from colliding (paragraph 0020).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 7 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
The prior art of record, alone or in combination does not explicitly teach, suggest, or render obvious, at least to the skilled artisan the module of claim 6, specifically comprising:
a plurality of the magnets and a plurality of the coils are arranged in a second arrangement direction intersecting with the first arrangement direction, and the movable unit moves relative to the stationary unit in the second arrangement direction, in the context of the other components in the claim.
Claim 7 is allowable due to its dependency on claim 6.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN GUGGER whose telephone number is (571)272-5343. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 9:00am - 5:00pm EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, T.C. Patel can be reached at 571 272 2098. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/SEAN GUGGER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834
