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 Amendment
This is in response to applicant's amendment which was filed on 7/16/2026 and has been entered. Claims 1-2, 6, and 10 have been amended. No claims have been cancelled. No claims have been added. Claims 1-10 are still pending in this application, with claim 1 being independent.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR 101776773) in view of Maruhashi (JP 2004304420).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches An acoustic output device comprising: an enclosure (Lee figures 23, frame 111, support member 114, enclosure 130, speaker mounting portion 20) comprising a front surface (Lee figures 2-3, support member 114) and a rear inner surface opposite the front surface (Lee figures 2-3, any surface of speaker mounting portion 20 that is inner and more centered relative to the sides of mounting portion 20); a speaker driver arranged inside and fixed by the enclosure (Lee figure 3, magnetic circuit 113, diaphragm 112, bobbin 115, coil 116, damper 117) and comprising a vibration plate exposed to the front surface of the enclosure (Lee figure 3, diaphragm 112 is exposed to support member 114), the vibration plate being configured to generate sound (Lee figure 3, a diaphragm of a speaker generates sound); and a filter (Lee figures 2-3, filter 141) arranged between a rear surface of the speaker driver (Lee figures 2-3, a rear surface of any of the speaker components can be considered a rear surface) and the rear inner surface of the enclosure (Lee figures 2-3, filter 141 is between speaker mounting portion 20 and the diaphragm 112), wherein the filter is distanced from the rear inner surface of the enclosure and comprises a plurality of through holes (Lee figure 3, filter 141 is spaced from the center of mounting portion 20 and ¶0038, “The filter (141) allows air and sound to pass through while preventing foreign matter, such as dust, from entering the inside of the enclosure (130),” it is implied that there are through holes for sound to pass), and wherein the filter is arranged closer to the rear inner surface of the enclosure than to the rear surface of the speaker driver (Lee figure 3, filter 141 is closer to the center surface of mounting portion 20 than the rear of the diaphragm 112), however does not explicitly teach wherein the filter comprises a plurality of through holes.
Maruhashi teaches wherein the filter comprises a plurality of through holes (Maruhashi ¶0006, “foreign matter smaller than the mesh opening dimensions of the dustproof and drip-proof filter 11 passes through”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the known technique of Maruhashi to improve the known acoustic output device of Lee to achieve the predictable result of prevention of reduced sound quality (Maruhashi ¶0007, “attempting to address this issue by reducing the mesh opening size of the dustproof and waterproof filter 11 would hinder the amplitude of the diaphragm 16, preventing sufficient sound pressure from being obtained and resulting in inferior acoustic characteristics”).
Claim(s) 2-4, and 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR 101776773) in view of Maruhashi (JP 2004304420) in further view of Kim2 (US 2019/0007768).
Regarding claim 2, Lee in view of Maruhashi teaches the filter arranged between the rear surface of the speaker driver and the rear inner surface of the enclosure (Lee figures 2-3, filter 141 is between speaker mounting portion 20 and the diaphragm 112), however does not explicitly teach wherein the filter further comprises a first filter and a second filter sequentially arranged, and wherein each of the first filter and the second filter respectively comprise the plurality of through holes.
Kim2 teaches wherein the filter further comprises a first filter (Kim2 figure 2 and ¶0034, layer 2g+2f has through hole h + sound passage 1 which can be considered another through hole) and a second filter sequentially arranged (Kim2 figure 2 and ¶0034, layer 2e+2d has through hole h + sound passage 1 which can be considered another through hole) and wherein each of the first filter and the second filter respectively comprise the plurality of through holes (Kim2 figure 2 and ¶0034, layer 2g+2f has through hole h + sound passage 1 which can be considered another through hole. Layer 2e+2d has through hole h + sound passage 1 which can be considered another through hole).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the known technique of Kim2 to improve the known acoustic output device of Lee in view of Maruhashi to achieve the predictable result of reduction of extraneous noise (Kim2 ¶0013).
Regarding claim 3, Lee in view of Maruhashi in further view of Kim2 teaches wherein at least one of a shape or an arrangement of the plurality of through holes of the first filter and the second filter are different (Kim2 figure 2 and ¶0034, location of sound passage 1 and through holes h in layers 2e-2g are different).
Regarding claim 4, Lee in view of Maruhashi in further view of Kim2 teaches wherein the plurality of through holes have a shape of at least one of a circle, an oval, a polygon (Kim2 figure 2), or a polygon having round edges.
Regarding claim 7, Lee in view of Maruhashi in further view of Kim2 teaches wherein the filter comprises a plate shape on which the plurality of through holes are formed, and wherein the plurality of through holes penetrate a front surface and a rear surface of the filter (Kim2 figure 2, through holes h and sound passages 1).
Regarding claim 8, Lee in view of Maruhashi in further view of Kim2 teaches wherein the filter has a size corresponding to the rear surface of the speaker driver (Kim2 figure 1, filter 2).
Regarding claim 9, Lee in view of Maruhashi in further view of Kim2 teaches a sound absorbing material one surface of the filter (Kim2 ¶0044).
Regarding claim 10, Lee in view of Maruhashi in further view of Kim2 teaches wherein a distance between the filter and the rear inner surface of the enclosure is based on a distance between the rear surface of the speaker driver and the inner surface of the enclosure (Lee figure 3, a PHOSITA would be able to calculate the distance between the filter and the rear inner surface of the enclosure based on the distance between the rear surface of the speaker driver and the inner surface of the enclosure, with further parameters such as distances, angles and etc..).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR 101776773) in view of Maruhashi (JP 2004304420) in further view of Shin (US 2016/0302000).
Regarding claim 5, Lee in view of Maruhashi does not explicitly teach wherein the plurality of through holes are arranged in a matrix form.
Shin teaches wherein the plurality of through holes are arranged in a matrix form (Shin figure 10 and ¶0072 “filter 27 forms a plurality of through holes 29”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the known technique of Shin to improve the known acoustic output device of Lee in view of Maruhashi to achieve the predictable result of adjust the frequency response to the desired values.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (KR 101776773) in view of Maruhashi (JP 2004304420) in further view of Kim (US 2020/0221215).
Regarding claim 6, Lee in view of Maruhashi teaches wherein the enclosure further comprises an upper inner surface and a lower inner surface (Lee figure 3, filter 141 is attached to parts of passage connected to the cover portion 131 and the rim 133), wherein the filter further comprises an upper part and a lower part (Lee figure 3, top and bottom surface of filter 141), and wherein the upper part is fixed to the upper inner surface and the lower part is fixed to the lower inner surface of the enclosure (Lee figure 3, both surfaces of filter 141 is attached to cover portion 131 and rim 133), however does not explicitly teach wherein the enclosure is hollow and has a rectangular shape.
Kim teaches the enclosure is hollow and has a rectangular shape (Kim figure 5, enclosure 210),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the known technique of Kim to improve the known acoustic output device of Lee in view of Maruhashi to achieve the predictable result of desired frequency response and audio output direction.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NORMAN YU whose telephone number is (571)270-7436. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon - Fri 11am-7pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ahmad Matar can be reached on 571-272-7488. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Va. 22313-1450
Or faxed to:
(571) 273-8300, for formal communications intended for entry and for
informal or draft communications, please label “PROPOSED” or “DRAFT”.
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Arlington, VA 22314
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.
/NORMAN YU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Prosecution Insights