1DETAILED ACTION
This communication is responsive to the response/amendment filed 06/04/2026.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 3-4, 7 and 9-15 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Azima et al. (U. S. Pat. No. – 6,377,695).
Regarding claim 1, Azima et al. disclose an apparatus (1), comprising: a vibration member (5); and a vibration apparatus (6) configured to vibrate the vibration member, wherein the vibration member includes an inner member (11) and an outer member (10) surrounding the inner member (Fig. 2), and the outer member is in direct contact with all surfaces of the inner member (Figs. 1, 2 and 2a).
Regarding claim 3, Azima et al. further disclose the apparatus, wherein the inner member (11) is embedded inside the outer member (10).
Regarding claim 4, Azima et al. further disclose the apparatus, wherein the inner member and the outer member are different materials (col. 6, lines 10-15).
Regarding claim 7, Azima et al. further disclose the apparatus, wherein the inner member and the outer member differ from each other in at least one of a stiffness, a density, and a Young’s modulus (col. 6, lines 10-15) as claimed.
Regarding claim 9, Azima et al. further disclose the apparatus, wherein a thickness of the inner member (11) is greater than a thickness of the outer member (10) in a region where the inner member and the outer member overlap vertically (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 10, Azima et al. further disclose the apparatus, wherein the outer member (8) comprises: a first outer member at a first surface of the inner member (upper portion); and a second outer member at a second surface of the inner member (bottom portion) opposite to the first surface of the inner member (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 11, Azima et al. further disclose the apparatus, wherein the first outer member accommodates the entire first surface of the inner member and a first portion of a side surface of the inner member, and wherein the second outer member accommodates the entire second surface of the inner member and a second portion of a side surface of the inner member (Figs. 2 and 2a).
Regarding claim 12, Azima et al. further disclose the apparatus, wherein the first outer member and the second outer member are the same material (Figs. 2 and 2a).
Regarding claim 13, Azima et al. further disclose the apparatus, wherein the first outer member and the second outer member have the same thickness (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 14, Azima et al. further disclose the apparatus, wherein the vibration apparatus (6) comprises: a vibration part including a piezoelectric material (col. 1, lines 56-63); and a cover member (Fig. 2) covering at least one of a first surface of the vibration part and a second surface of the vibration part opposite to the first surface of the vibration part (Figs. 2 and 2a).
Regarding claim 15, Azima et al. further disclose the apparatus, wherein the vibration apparatus further includes a signal supply member (wire connected to 6) electrically connected to the vibration part, and wherein a portion of the signal supply member is accommodated between the cover member and the vibration part (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 18, Fukuoka et al. disclose an apparatus (1), comprising: a vibration plate (5); a piezoelectric layer (6) disposed on the vibration plate; and a signal supply line (wire to 6) electrically connected between the piezoelectric layer and the vibration plate, the piezoelectric layer configured to vibrate the vibration plate via a signal provided by the signal supply line, wherein the vibration plate includes an inner member (11) and an outer member (10) surrounding the inner member (Figs. 2 and 2a); and the outer member is in direct contact with all surfaces of the inner member (Figs. 1, 2 and 2a).
Regarding claim 19, Fukuoka et al. further disclose the apparatus, wherein the piezoelectric layer includes a first piezoelectric layer (4a) and a second piezoelectric layer (4b), the apparatus further comprising: an intermediate layer (9) between the first piezoelectric layer and the second piezoelectric layer (Figs. 2B and 3A).
Regarding claim 20, Fukuoka et al. further disclose the apparatus, wherein one of the first piezoelectric layer (4a) and the second piezoelectric layer (4b) is connected to the vibration plate (Figs 1-3).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Claims 5-6, 8, 16-17 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Azima et al. (U. S. Pat. No. – 6,377,695).
Regarding claims 5-6, Azima et al. further disclose the apparatus, wherein the outer member is a plastic material (col. 6, lines 44-52) as claimed. But Azima et al. may not specially teach that said the inner member is a metal material as claimed. Since providing suitable core /inner member for a vibration member is very well known in the art (Official Notice), it therefore would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to be motivated to provide suitable core/inner member, such as including metal tunning weight, for the vibration member of the apparatus taught by Azima et al., in order to effectively manufacture the apparatus for certain application.
Regarding claim 8, Azima et al. may not specially teach that the density of the inner member is in a range of 1.7g/cm3 to 2.8g/cm3, or wherein the modulus of the inner member is in a range of 1GPa to 100GPa, or wherein the density of the outer member is in a range of 1.2g/cm3 to 1.4g/cm3, or wherein the modulus of the outer member is in a range of 2GPa to 10GPa as claimed. Since providing suitable core/inner member for a vibration member of an apparatus is very well known in the art (Official Notice), it therefore would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to be motivated to provide suitable inner/outer member, such as the density of the inner member is in a range of 1.7g/cm3 to 2.8g/cm3, or wherein the modulus of the inner member is in a range of 1GPa to 100GPa, or wherein the density of the outer member is in a range of 1.2g/cm3 to 1.4g/cm3, or wherein the modulus of the outer member is in a range of 2GPa to 10GPa, for the piezoelectric apparatus taught by Azima et al., in order to effectively manufacture the piezoelectric apparatus, for certain applications.
Regarding claims 16-17 and 19-20, Azima et al. may not specially teach a second vibration generating part stacked on the first vibration generating part as claimed. Since providing suitable additional piezoelectric element(s) for a piezoelectric transducer is very well known in the art (Official Notice), it therefore would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to be motivated to provide suitable addition piezoelectric element(s), for the piezoelectric vibration apparatus taught by Azima et al., in order to effectively manufacture the piezoelectric apparatus, with enhanced acoustic output.
Regarding claim 21, Azima et al. further disclose the apparatus, wherein a connection member (Fig. 2) disposed between the vibration apparatus (6) and the vibration member (5) as claimed. But Azima et al. may not specially teach the connection member comprises an adhesive layer as claimed. Since providing suitable coupling means for mounting a vibration apparatus onto a vibration member of an acoustic apparatus is very well known in the art (Official Notice), it therefore would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to be motivated to provide suitable coupling means, such as glue, for mounting the vibration apparatus onto the vibration member of the apparatus taught by Azima et al., in order to effectively and efficiently manufacture the apparatus.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 SUHAN NI whose telephone number is (571)272-7505. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 10:00 am to 6:30 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicants are 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, Duc Nguyen can be reached on 571-272-7503. 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.
/SUHAN NI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691
Prosecution Insights