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 .
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 13 – 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fischer (GB 2 288 660).
With respect to claim 13, Fischer teaches a method comprising obtaining, by a system comprising a controller (Fig.5, Items 24 and 25), a frequency value representative of a frequency of an acoustic wave to cancel; and controlling, by the system, a heater (Fig.5, Item 5) to adjust temperature of air within a Helmholtz resonator unit cell (Fig.5, Item 4), based on the frequency of the acoustic wave, to resonate the Helmholtz resonator unit cell to cancel noise comprised by the acoustic wave (Abstract and Page 7, Lines 25 – 36), wherein controlling the heater comprises determining an amount of energy as a function of the frequency value, and applying the amount of energy to the heater to adjust the temperature to set a resonant frequency of the Helmholtz resonator unit cell to the frequency value, to cancel the noise (Page 7, Lines 9 – 36).
With respect to claim 14, Fischer teaches wherein the controlling of the heater comprises obtaining sensed temperature data representative of sensed temperature (Fig.5, Item 21b) of the air within the Helmholtz resonator unit cell, determining an estimated air temperature value based on the frequency of the acoustic wave, and applying a voltage bias (Fig.5, Item 25) to the heater (Fig.5, Item 5) to adjust the air temperature based on the estimated air temperature value.
With respect to claim 15, Fischer teaches wherein the controlling of the heater comprises obtaining (Fig.5, Item 21a) frequency data representative of the frequency of the acoustic wave, and applying (Fig.5, Item 25) a voltage bias to the heater (Fig.5, Item 5) to adjust the air temperature based on the frequency data.
With respect to claim 16, Fischer teaches wherein the controlling of the heater comprises obtaining noise level data (Fig.5, Item 21a) representative of the acoustic wave, and applying (Fig.5, Item 25) a voltage bias to the heater (Fig.5, Item 5) to adjust the air temperature based on the noise level data.
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.
Claims 1 – 12 and 17 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeon et al. (KR 20220023621) in view of Fischer (GB 2 288 660).
With respect to claims 1 and 17, Jeon et al. teach a system comprising a unit cell of a metasurface configured for sound absorption within a narrowband frequency range (Figs.1 – 4), the unit cell comprising an air cavity (Fig.4, Item S) within a support, the air cavity comprising a chamber and a neck port (Fig.4, Item 125); but fail to disclose a heater that heats air in the air cavity to determine a resonant frequency of the unit cell, to resonate the unit cell at the resonant frequency to phase cancel the incoming acoustic wave, responsive to being exposed to the incoming acoustic wave.
On the other hand, Fischer teaches a Helmholtz resonator comprising a chamber (Fig.1, Item 2) and a neck port (Fig.1, Item 3), and a heater (Fig.1, Item 5) that heats air in the air cavity to determine a resonant frequency of the unit cell, to resonate the unit cell at the resonant frequency to phase cancel the incoming acoustic wave, responsive to being exposed to the incoming acoustic wave (Abstract); and a controller (Fig.5, Items 24 and 25), coupled to the heater (Fig.5, Item 5) and comprising at least one processor, that obtains a frequency value representative of a frequency of the incoming acoustic wave to be canceled, determines an amount of energy as a function of the frequency value, and applies the amount of energy to the heater to set the resonant frequency of the unit cell to the frequency value to phase cancel the incoming acoustic wave (Page 7, Line 9 – 36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the Fischer resonator with the Jeon et al. configuration because it would control the resonator frequency as a function of the frequency of the source vibrations/noise in a broadband configuration.
With respect to claim 2, Fischer teaches wherein the heater comprises a resistive heating element (Fig.1, Item 5) that increases in temperature based on a controlled (Figs.1 and 5, Item 24) amount of energy applied to the resistive heating element.
With respect to claim 3, Fischer teaches wherein the heater comprises at least one heating element (Fig.1, Item 5) positioned proximate to a floor of the chamber (Fig.1).
With respect to claims 4 and 5, The Examiner considers that it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to provide the heater comprising at least one heating element positioned proximate to a side of the chamber because it could provide a desired assembly benefit that would not depart from the scope and spirit of the Fischer invention.
With respect to claims 6 and 19, Fischer teaches wherein at least part of the heater (Fig.1, Item 5) is within the air cavity (Fig.1, Item 2).
With respect to claim 7, Fischer teaches further comprising a sensor (Fig.5, Item 21a), and a controller (Fig.5, Items 24 and 25) coupled to the heater (Fig.5, Item 5), wherein the controller selectively applies energy to the heater to heat the air in the air cavity based on data sensed by the sensor (Fig.5, Page 7, Lines 25 – 36).
With respect to claim 8, Fischer teaches wherein the sensor comprises a temperature sensor (Fig.5, Item 21b) that senses air temperature data of the air within the air cavity (Fig.5, Item 2) as at least part of the data sensed by the sensor.
With respect to claim 9, Fischer teaches wherein the sensor comprises a noise sensor (Fig.5, Item 21a) that senses frequency data associated with a frequency of the incoming acoustic wave as at least part of the data sensed by the sensor (Page 7, Lines 25 – 36).
With respect to claim 10, the obvious combination of Jeon et al. and Fischer wherein the unit cell is a first unit cell having first air in a first air cavity, and further comprising a second unit cell having second air in a second air cavity, wherein the heater comprises a shared heating device that heats the first air in the first air cavity, and the second air in the second air cavity (as discussed above).
With respect to claims 11, 18 and 20, Jeon et al. wherein the unit cell is incorporated into a metasurface comprising an array of unit cells (Fig.1).
With respect to claim 12, The Examiner takes official notice that it is well-known in the art to provide an array of helmholtz resonators positioned proximate a server, and wherein the incoming acoustic wave at the unit cell results from operation of a cooling fan of the server, or wherein the an array of helmholtz resonators is positioned proximate to a rack of servers, and wherein the incoming acoustic wave at the unit cell results from operation of cooling fans of the servers of the rack of servers, as disclosed by Doll (US 7,314,113).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 07/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Examiner still considers that Fischer and in obvious combination with Jeon et al. teach the limitations described in the claims as discussed above.
Based on the language of Fischer Page 7, Lines 9 – 36 and Figure 5, Fischer indeed is controlling the heater based on a frequency value representative of the incoming acoustic wave, Fischer establishes that the phase angle between pressure vibration in the source and in the resonator is the most suitable control variable for the frequency control, and that the phase angel reacts very sensitive to frequency differences and is therefore the most suitable control variable for the heating output.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDGARDO SAN MARTIN whose telephone number is (571)272-2074. The examiner can normally be reached on 9:00 - 5:00 M - F.
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, Shawki S. Ismail can be reached on 571-272-39853985. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Edgardo San Martin/
Edgardo San Martín
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2837
September 16, 2026
Prosecution Insights