Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/769,792

ACOUSTIC APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 11, 2024
Examiner
DANG, JULIE X
Art Unit
2692
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Alps Alpine Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 0m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
388 granted / 465 resolved
+21.4% vs TC avg
Strong +18% interview lift
Without
With
+17.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 0m
Avg Prosecution
19 currently pending
Career history
484
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
54.1%
+14.1% vs TC avg
§102
22.5%
-17.5% vs TC avg
§112
10.6%
-29.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 465 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Claims filed 7-11-2024 Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2-3-2025 was filed after the mailing date of the application filed on 7-11-2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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(s) 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aylward 2007/0058824 in view of Ito 2005/0117767 Regarding claim 1. Aylward discloses an acoustic apparatus (Figs 1, 3, 4A-4B, para [26-27, 32, 36]) comprising: an enclosure; a duct (Figs 4A-4B the upper structure provided with the exist 22) communicating into an inner space (the space accommodating the transducer 14/speaker of the enclosure) and a speaker unit (4A-4B transducer 14, para [20-21, 27] configured to transmit sound pressures in opposite phases to an inside (Fig 4A-4B the right side of the transducer 14/speaker) and an outside (Figs 4A-4B the left side of the transducer 14/speaker; lower chamber exit 24) of the enclosure, respectively, wherein at least the enclosure and the speaker unit are fixed to a seat (Figs 4A-4B shows), and wherein a listening position is situated at a position at which a direct distance Ld from an exit of the duct is shorter than a direct distance Ls from a diaphragm of the speaker unit (Figs 4A-4B shows the distance ratio). Aylward does not explicitly disclose wherein a resonant frequency Fd of a Helmholtz resonator composed of the enclosure and the duct is higher than a resonant frequency F0 of a vibration mass including a mass of a vibrating part of the speaker and a load mass of air in the duct. Ito teaches wherein a resonant frequency Fd of a Helmholtz resonator composed of the enclosure (Figs 1, 3, 7-8, para [38-44, 48-49]) and the duct is higher than a resonant frequency F0 of a vibration mass including a mass of a vibrating part of the speaker and a load mass of air in the duct (Figs 1, 3, para [39, 44-45] teaches the acoustic tube 2 and drive speaker 3 which are housed in the speaker unit 100. The air inside the acoustic capacity B is vibrated by the drive speaker 3, sound is emitted with the highest sound pressure from the end 2b of the acoustic tube 2 at the Helmholtz resonance frequency, namely, the resonance frequency of the compliance of the acoustic capacity B and the air mass inside the acoustic tube 2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the teaching of Ito in Aylward’s invention, the listener enabled to listen to a reproduced sound enhanced in its bass region. Regarding claim 2. Aylward discloses the acoustic apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the speaker unit and the enclosure are stored in a seat back (Fig 3 shows speaker/transducer 14 store in a seat back), or a seat cushion (Figs 4A-4C shows speaker/transducer is positioned below the seat 32, para [32]), wherein one of the sound pressures in opposite phase to another one of the sound pressures that is transmitted to the enclosure is transmitted from the speaker unit to a listener seated in the seat, and the exit of the duct is opened near an ear of the listener (Figs 2A-2B, Fig 3, para [21, 23, 27] discloses the exit 22 of the duct is opened near an ear of the listener, and the exit 22 is acoustically coupled to diaphragm surface 16 and exit 24 is acoustically coupled to diaphragm surface 18. Diaphragm surfaces 16 and 18 radiate pressure wave of opposite phase). Regarding claim 3. Aylward discloses a duct (Figs 4A-4B the upper structure provided with the exist 22) communicating into an inner space (the space accommodating the transducer 14/speaker of the enclosure) and the tube is stored in the seat back at least partially as shown in Figs 3, 4A-4C. Aylward discloses the claimed invention excepted for the acoustic apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the duct is a flexible hose. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the duct is a flexible hose is just a matter of design choice, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art. The motivation for this would have yielded predictable results. Claim(s) 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aylward 2007/0058824 in view of Ito 2005/0117767 further in view of Tabata 2022/0225017 Regarding claim 4. Aylward does not explicitly disclose the acoustic apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the resonant frequency F0 of the vibration mass is less than 100 kHz. Tabata teaches wherein the resonant frequency F0 of the vibration mass is less than 100 kHz (Fig 6 teaches the resonant frequency F0 is located below 100Hz, para [45, 47]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the teaching of Tabata in Aylward’s invention as modified by Ito in order to enhance bass range to the ears of the listener. Regarding claim 5. Aylward does not explicitly discloses The acoustic apparatus according to claim 4, wherein a sound pressure obtained at the exit of the duct has a peak situated in a frequency band lower than 100 Hz, and another peak situated in a frequency band higher than 100 Hz. Tabata teaches wherein a sound pressure obtained at the exit of the duct has a peak situated in a frequency band lower than 100 Hz (Fig 6 teaches the resonant frequency F0 is located below 100Hz, para [45, 47]), and another peak situated in a frequency band higher than 100 Hz (Fig 6, teaches F0 is located above 100Hz para [47]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the teaching of Tabata in Aylward’s invention as modified by Ito in order to enhance bass range to the ears of the listener. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIE X DANG whose telephone number is (571)272-0040. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5. 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, Carolyn R Edwards can be reached at 571-270-7136. 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. /JULIE X DANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2692 /CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 11, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589987
Microelectromechanical Systems Sensor with Frequency Dependent Input Attenuator
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583738
MEMS DIAPHRAGM AND MEMS SENSOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12563331
IN-CANAL HEARING DEVICE INCLUDING SEALED VIBRATORY TRANSDUCER
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12538059
SPEAKER DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12538066
OPEN EARPHONES
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+17.7%)
2y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 465 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month