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 9 June 2026 have been considered. However, Umehara 252 teaches the new amendment, it is not combinable with Ueda. Upon further review of Umehara 252, it discloses the entirety of claim 1. Thus, the new ground of rejection is made below.
Note, “vibration body” does not have a specific definition in claim 1, so it is just interpreted as a body, or component, in the vibration module. If Applicant believes this could be a distinguishing feature, it should be explicitly defined in the claim.
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), 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).
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umehara 252 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Umehara et al. (“Umehara 401”; US 2017/0104401).
Regarding claim 6: Umehara 252 discloses the magnet and a plurality of the coils are arranged in a second arrangement direction (horizontal or radial direction, shown in Fig. 2) intersecting with the first arrangement direction (vertical direction), and
the movable unit moves relative to the stationary unit in the second arrangement direction (paragraph 0016, there is expansion and contraction between the inner ring 103 and outer ring 101, Fig. 4, which a radial direction that intersects the vertical direction)
Umehara 252 discloses a magnet but does not explicitly disclose a plurality of the magnets.
However, Umehara 401 discloses a plurality of magnets (paragraph 0086).
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 magnet of Umehara 252 to be the plurality of magnets of Umehara 401 in order to increase the current generating capability.
Regarding claim 7: Umehara 252 discloses the base plate, but does not explicitly disclose the base plate has a surface facing the first surface of the frame, the surface of the base plate has a plurality of reception holes each accommodating a corresponding magnet of the plurality of magnets, and the plurality of reception holes are arranged in the second arrangement direction.
However, Umehara 401 discloses the base plate (81, Fig. 4) has a surface facing the first surface of the frame (upward in the z direction shown in Fig. 4), the surface of the base plate has a plurality of reception holes each accommodating a corresponding magnet of the plurality of magnets (shown best in Fig. 10, magnet 60 is flush in the hole in 81), and
the plurality of reception holes are arranged in the second arrangement direction (as the plurality of magnets, paragraph 0086, would be arranged in the x or y direction).
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 and magnet of Umehara 252 to be the plurality of magnets of Umehara 401 in order to increase the current generating capability.
Conclusion
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
Prosecution Insights