DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 5, 10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roh et al. (KR 101808585 B1, citations made to copy of English machine translation included in 17/434,013), hereinafter “Roh,” in view of Otto et al. (US 2017/0129143 A1), hereinafter “Otto.”
As to claim 1, Roh discloses membrane unit for a speaker device (Figs. 2-8), the membrane unit comprising:
a membrane, the membrane acting as a vibration diaphragm and being substantially flat and having a major surface (p. 3, ¶08 and Figs. 3-5. Diaphragm 70. “A vibration plate 70 attached to the edge 60 and a power connection portion 80 attached between the upper surface of the voice coil 50 and the lower surface of the diaphragm 70.”);
at least two coils each extending along a respective longitudinal axis, the respective longitudinal axis of the at least two coils being arranged in parallel and perpendicular to the major surface of the membrane, the at least two coils being positioned adjacent to each other and mechanically connected to the membrane (p. 3, ¶08 and p. 4 ¶04, Figs. 3-7. Coils 50. “The upper end of the voice coil 50 is attached to the lower surface of the diaphragm 70.”); and
wiring to the at least two coils (p. 4 ¶04, Fig. 3. “The upper end of the voice coil 50 is attached to the lower surface of the diaphragm 70, the electric wire W is connected to the outer end thereof, So that the voice coil 50 and the electric wire W can be easily connected to each other in a conductive state.”).
Roh does not expressly disclose the wiring at least partly embedded in the membrane.
Otto discloses the wiring at least partly embedded in the membrane (Otto, ¶0063. “It is also possible to embed a wire loop into the membrane, with connections to the voice coil, providing a greater stability and durability to the wire connections.”).
Roh and Otto are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to small loudspeakers.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to at least partially embed the wiring in the membrane, as taught by Otto. The motivation would have been to a greater stability and durability to the wire connections (Otto, ¶0063).
As to claim 2, Roh in view of Otto discloses wherein the wiring is embedded in a wiring support element (Otto, ¶0063. “It is also possible to embed a wire loop into the membrane, with connections to the voice coil, providing a greater stability and durability to the wire connections.”).
The motivation is the same as claim 1 above.
As to claim 5, Roh in view of Otto discloses wherein the at least two coils are attached to a respective bobbin, the respective bobbins being attached to the membrane (Roh, p. 3 ¶14 and Fig. 5. “The voice coil 50 is provided in a pair and is provided inside the through hole 11 so as to surround the upper surface of the plate 40 and the magnet 30 and is wound around a cylindrical bobbin.”).
As to claim 10, Roh in view of Otto discloses wherein the membrane unit further comprises a suspension element attached to the membrane, or to a peripheral edge thereof (Roh, (p. 4 ¶02-03 and Figs. 4-5 and 7. Edge 60. “The diaphragm 70 is attached to a lower surface of the edge 60.”).
As to claim 15, Roh discloses a speaker device comprising a membrane unit (Figs. 2-8), the membrane unit comprising:
a membrane, the membrane acting as a vibration diaphragm and being substantially flat and having a major surface (p. 3, ¶08 and Figs. 3-5. Diaphragm 70. “A vibration plate 70 attached to the edge 60 and a power connection portion 80 attached between the upper surface of the voice coil 50 and the lower surface of the diaphragm 70.”);
at least two coils each extending along a respective longitudinal axis, the respective longitudinal axis of the at least two coils being arranged in parallel and perpendicular to the major surface of the membrane, the at least two coils being positioned adjacent to each other and mechanically connected to the membrane (p. 3, ¶08 and p. 4 ¶04, Figs. 3-7. Coils 50. “The upper end of the voice coil 50 is attached to the lower surface of the diaphragm 70.”); and
wiring to the at least two coils (p. 4 ¶04, Fig. 3. “The upper end of the voice coil 50 is attached to the lower surface of the diaphragm 70, the electric wire W is connected to the outer end thereof, So that the voice coil 50 and the electric wire W can be easily connected to each other in a conductive state.”).
Roh does not expressly disclose the wiring at least partly embedded in the membrane.
Otto discloses the wiring at least partly embedded in the membrane (Otto, ¶0063. “It is also possible to embed a wire loop into the membrane, with connections to the voice coil, providing a greater stability and durability to the wire connections.”).
The motivation is the same as claim 1 above.
Claims 3-4, 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roh in view of Otto, as applied to claims 2 and 15 above, and further in view of Kim (KR 101305164 B1, citations made to copy of English machine translation included in 17/434,013).
As to claim 3, Roh in view of Otto does not expressly disclose wherein the wiring support element is a printed circuit board, the printed circuit board forming the membrane.
Kim discloses wherein the wiring support element is a printed circuit board, the printed circuit board forming the membrane (Kim, Abstract and p. 3 ¶04 and Figs. 2-3. “The present invention relates to a flat panel speaker, and more particularly to a flat panel speaker using a PCB or FPCB itself as a diaphragm.” “In the diaphragm 203, the PCB 201 itself serves as a diaphragm.”).
Roh, Otto and Kim are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to flat speakers.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the PCB serve as a diaphragm, as taught by Kim. The motivation would have been to develop and manufacture an ultra-thin speaker, thereby contributing to maximizing the productivity and quality of the flat speaker (Kim, p. 2 ¶11).
As to claim 4, Roh in view of Otto as modified by Kim discloses the printed circuit board being solely responsible for the conversion of mechanical vibration to sound (Kim, Abstract and p. 3 ¶04 and Fig. 2. “The present invention relates to a flat panel speaker, and more particularly to a flat panel speaker using a PCB or FPCB itself as a diaphragm.” “In the diaphragm 203, the PCB 201 itself serves as a diaphragm.”).
The motivation is the same as claim 3 above.
As to claim 16, Roh in view of Otto as modified by Kim discloses the wiring to the at least two coils is embedded in a wiring support element (Otto, ¶0063. “It is also possible to embed a wire loop into the membrane, with connections to the voice coil, providing a greater stability and durability to the wire connections.”); and
the wiring support element is a printed circuit board, the printed circuit board forming the membrane (Kim, Abstract and p. 3 ¶04 and Figs. 2-3. “The present invention relates to a flat panel speaker, and more particularly to a flat panel speaker using a PCB or FPCB itself as a diaphragm.” “In the diaphragm 203, the PCB 201 itself serves as a diaphragm.”).
The motivation is the same as claims 2 and 3 above.
As to claim 20, Roh in view of Otto as modified by Kim discloses wherein the membrane is a printed circuit board (Kim, Abstract and p. 3 ¶04 and Figs. 2-3. “The present invention relates to a flat panel speaker, and more particularly to a flat panel speaker using a PCB or FPCB itself as a diaphragm.” “In the diaphragm 203, the PCB 201 itself serves as a diaphragm.”) and
the speaker device comprises input and output signal connections routed to the at least two coils via the wiring to the at least two coils (Roh, Figs. 2-3. “The upper end of the voice coil 50 is attached to the lower surface of the diaphragm 70, the electric wire W is connected to the outer end thereof, So that the voice coil 50 and the electric wire W can be easily connected to each other in a conductive state.” Input/output signal connections for a speaker are implicit.).
The motivation is the same as claim 3 above.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roh in view of Otto, as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Guenther (US 6,654,476 B1).
As to claim 6, Roh in view of Otto does not expressly disclose wherein a part of the wiring to the at least two coils is provided on a surface of the respective bobbins.
Guenther discloses wherein a part of the wiring to the at least two coils is provided on a surface of the respective bobbins (Guenther, Abstract and Col. 6 lines 8-16, Figs. 3a. “The voice coil is preferably implemented using a polyimide form or bobbin, which has patterned lead-in conductors embedded therein to bring power to wire windings on the perimeter of the coil.” “The preform 30a, has extending arms 31 that each include patterned lead-in conductors 34a, 34b embedded therein. As shown the conductors 34a, 34b resemble conventional circuit board conductive lines and may be formed by a similar process.”).
Roh and Guenther are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to voice coil speakers.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to include conductive traces on the bobbin, as taught by Guenther. The motivation would have been to save space and to also provide a symmetric and balanced centering suspension to further resist eccentric movement when the coil is subject to extreme levels of drive power (Guenther, Col. 6 lines 25-32).
Claims 7, 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roh in view of Otto, as applied to claims 5 and 15 above, and further in view of Sadaie et al. (US 2009/0116681 A1), hereinafter “Sadaie.”
As to claim 7, Roh in view of Otto does not expressly disclose the surface of the respective bobbin being an inner surface of the respective bobbin.
Sadaie discloses the surface of the respective bobbin being an inner surface of the respective bobbin (Sadaie, ¶0059, Fig. 2. “Each internal-winding voice coil 11 of the voice coil assembly 10 includes a rectangular bobbin 12 having a rectangular cross section with a rectangular space 12a defined therein, and the internal rectangular coil 9 fixed to an inner wall surface 12b defining the rectangular space of the rectangular bobbin 12.”).
Roh, Otto and Sadaie are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to flat loudspeakers.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the coil on the inner surface of the bobbin, as taught by Sadaie. The motivation would have been to increase the bobbin rigidity, reduce divided vibrations of the bobbins, and suppress operation defects (Sadaie, ¶0033).
As to claim 8, Roh in view of Otto as modified by Sadaie discloses wherein the respective bobbins are hollow and arranged to receive a magnetic pole of a magnetic assembly (Sadaie, ¶0056-0057 and ¶0063, Figs. 2-3. “The 14 main magnets 22 are each fixed in advance to the rectangular plate 23, and are grouped into two that are magnetized so that the first group have the north pole near the rectangular plate 23 and the second group have the south pole near the rectangular plate 23. The magnetized 14 main magnets 22 are arranged and fixed to the plate portion 21a of the yoke 21 by means of a jig so that adjacent magnets have different polarities.” “Therefore, in the flat thin loudspeaker 1 using the voice coil assembly 10, the internal rectangular coils 9a and 9b are arranged so as to face each other with two inner wall surfaces 12b or outer wall surfaces 12c of the rectangular bobbins 12 being interposed between two adjacent rectangular plates 23 of the lattice-shaped magnetic gap of the magnetic circuit 2, as shown in FIG. 3.” Magnetic circuit 2 received in bobbin 12.).
The motivation is the same as claim 7 above.
As to claim 18, Roh in view of Otto as modified by Sadaie discloses a magnetic assembly (Sadaie, ¶0056. Magnetic circuit 2.), wherein:
the at least two coils are configured for magnetic engagement with the magnetic assembly (Sadaie, ¶0064, Figs. 2-3. “The internal rectangular coils 9a and 9b are arranged so as to face each other with two inner wall surfaces 12b or outer wall surfaces 12c of the rectangular bobbins 12 being interposed between two adjacent rectangular plates 23 of the lattice-shaped magnetic gap of the magnetic circuit 2… The internal rectangular coils 9a and 9b each have an electromagnetic force acting in the upward or downward direction.”);
the at least two coils are attached to a respective bobbin (Sadaie, ¶0060, Fig. 2. “Therefore, the internal rectangular coil 9 of the internal-winding voice coil 11 is adhered and fixed to the inner wall surface 12b by an adhesive while being fit in the rectangular space 12a of the rectangular bobbin 12.”), each respective bobbin being:
directly attached to the membrane (Sadaie Fig. 3. Bobbins 12 attached to diaphragm 6. ); and,
hollow and arranged to receive a magnetic pole of the magnetic assembly (Sadaie, ¶0056-0057 and ¶0063, Figs. 2-3. “The 14 main magnets 22 are each fixed in advance to the rectangular plate 23, and are grouped into two that are magnetized so that the first group have the north pole near the rectangular plate 23 and the second group have the south pole near the rectangular plate 23. The magnetized 14 main magnets 22 are arranged and fixed to the plate portion 21a of the yoke 21 by means of a jig so that adjacent magnets have different polarities.” “Therefore, in the flat thin loudspeaker 1 using the voice coil assembly 10, the internal rectangular coils 9a and 9b are arranged so as to face each other with two inner wall surfaces 12b or outer wall surfaces 12c of the rectangular bobbins 12 being interposed between two adjacent rectangular plates 23 of the lattice-shaped magnetic gap of the magnetic circuit 2, as shown in FIG. 3.” Magnetic circuit 2 received in bobbin 12.).
The motivation is the same as claim 8 above.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roh in view of Otto, as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Honda et al. (US 2016/0234618 A1), hereinafter “Honda.”
As to claim 9, Roh in view of Otto does not expressly disclose wherein the membrane comprises a wiring support element, the respective bobbins being integrally formed with the wiring support element.
Honda discloses wherein the membrane comprises a wiring support element, the respective bobbins being integrally formed with the wiring support element (Honda, “Bobbin 43 may be integrally formed with diaphragm 53 by being insert-molded during the process of producing diaphragm 53.”).
Roh, Otto and Honda are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to small speakers.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to integrally form the bobbin and diaphragm, as taught by Honda. The motivation would have been to increase the production of the diaphragm (Honda, ¶0065).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roh in view of Otto and Kim, as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Honda.
As to claim 17, Roh in view of Otto as modified by Kim discloses a printed circuit board forming the membrane (Kim, Abstract and p. 3 ¶04 and Figs. 2-3. “The present invention relates to a flat panel speaker, and more particularly to a flat panel speaker using a PCB or FPCB itself as a diaphragm.” “In the diaphragm 203, the PCB 201 itself serves as a diaphragm.”),
wherein the at least two coils are attached to a respective bobbin (Roh, p. 3 ¶14 and Fig. 5. “The voice coil 50 is provided in a pair and is provided inside the through hole 11 so as to surround the upper surface of the plate 40 and the magnet 30 and is wound around a cylindrical bobbin.”),
Roh in view of Otto and Kim does not expressly disclose the respective bobbins integrally formed with the printed circuit board.
The motivation is the same as claim 3 above.
Honda discloses the respective bobbins integrally formed with the printed circuit board (Honda, “Bobbin 43 may be integrally formed with diaphragm 53 by being insert-molded during the process of producing diaphragm 53.”).
Roh, Otto, Kim and Honda are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to small speakers.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to integrally form the bobbin and diaphragm, as taught by Honda. The motivation would have been to increase the production of the diaphragm (Honda, ¶0065).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-14 and 19 are 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES K MOONEY whose telephone number is (571)272-2412. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00 AM -5:00 PM 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, Vivian Chin can be reached at 5712727848. 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.
/JAMES K MOONEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695