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
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.
1.Claims 1-10,12,13,15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Hook (Control of Vibration in a Plate Using Active Acoustic Black Holes).
With respect to claim 1 Hook discloses an acoustic black holes comprising:
In a first axis a variation from a first characteristic to a second characteristic, along a line; and
In a second axis different to the first axis, a variation from a first characteristic to a second characteristic along the second axis (see figure 1 and columns 2-3).
With respect to claim 2 Hook further discloses wherein the variation in the first axis is an acoustic black hole taper (see Section1, introduction spanning columns 1 and 2).
With respect to claim 3 Hook further discloses wherein in the second axis, the acoustic black hole comprises one or more regions of the second characteristic (refer to columns 4 and5 regarding Henleys compound or piezoelectric patches).
With respect to claim4 Hook further discloses wherein in the second axis, the second characteristic is different to a characteristic at the line along the second axis (that is to say that the variation as taught occurs in such a way, see columns 4 and 5).
With respect to claim 5 Hook further discloses wherein the line is a center line (as the elements taught have rotational symmetry this inherently the case.)
With respect to claim 6 Hook further discloses wherein in the second axis the variation from the first characteristic to the second characteristic is a variation in characteristics of a material from which the acoustic black hole is formed (see page 3 column 1 such a variation of the wall formation is disclosed).
With respect to claim 7 Hook further discloses wherein in the second axis a rigidity and or density of the material increases from a first value to a second value (see again page 3 column 1).
With respect to claim 8 Hook further discloses wherein in the second axis in a first direction and a second opposite direction a rigidity and or density of the material increases from a first value (see again page 3 column1 see also circular nature and this the perpendicular directions of variation).
With respect to claim 9 Hook further discloses the acoustic black hole and a primary structure (see abstract).
With respect to claim 10 Hook further discloses (see abstract and section 1) wherein the primary structure is a beam or plate.
With respect to claim 12 Hook further discloses wherein the second axis is perpendicular to the first axis (due to the rotational symmetry this is the case).
With respect to claim 13 Hook further discloses a damping material (Henley’s yellow damping compound as discloses on page 3) provided on at least a region of the acoustic black hole.
With respect to claim 15 Hook further discloses (see figures 4,5,6) the acoustic black hole according to claim 1 and at least one sensor, an actuator configured to apply an actuating force to the primary structure and or to the acoustic black hole; and a controller configured to control the actuator in dependance on a signal from the at least one sensor so as to provide structural damping of the primary structure.
With respect to claim 16 Hook further discloses (see again page 3 column 1) wherein in the second axis, the variation from the first characteristic to the second characteristic includes:
A variation in material (page 3 column discloses variation in material as a means of formation) from which the acoustic black hole is formed, such that the variation includes a first material and a second material that is different from the first material; and or
A variation in rigidity or density of the material from which the acoustic black hole is formed such that variation includes first rigidity and/or a first density value that is or are different from a second rigidity value or second density value (see again page 3 column 1).
With respect to claim 17 Hook further discloses wherein, in the first axis, the variation from the first characteristic to the second characteristic is a variation in a characteristic of a material from which the black hole is formed (see page 3 column 1).
With respect to claim 18 Hook further discloses wherein in the first axis the variation from the first characteristic to the second characteristic includes:
A variation in material (page 3 column discloses variation in material as a means of formation) from which the acoustic black hole is formed, such that the variation includes a first material and a second material that is different from the first material; and or
A variation in rigidity or density of the material from which the acoustic black hole is formed such that variation includes first rigidity and/or a first density value that is or are different from a second rigidity value or second density value (see again page 3 column 1).
With respect to claim 19 Hook further discloses wherein the second axis is perpendicular to the firs axis (by nature of the rotational symmetry this is the case).
With respect to claim 20 Hook further discloses a damping material (Henley’s yellow damping compound as discloses on page 3) provided on at least a region of the acoustic black hole.
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.
2.Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hook (Control of Vibration in a Plate Using Active Acoustic Black Holes).
With respect to claim 11 as Hook discloses the use of the black hole with a plate structure, the application to a plate having a zero curvature in one axis and a concave or convex curvature in the perpendicular axis would have been obvious as a matter of intended use of the device. The black hole structure would have been understood to be so usable and to damp in a consistent manner the vibrations, further the ABH structure is disclosed by Hook to be only in a portion of the primary structure.
It has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is
intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ F.2d 1647 (1987).
3. Calim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hook (Control of Vibration in a Plate Using Active Acoustic Black Holes) in view of Mendoza (US20230286639).
With respect to claim 14 Hook discloses the invention as claimed except expressly the use of the additive manufacturing method steps.
Mendoza (para 61) discloses the use of an additive manufacturing process in the formation of an acoustic panel.
It would have been an obvious matter to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing to combine the teachings of Mendoza to use such a 3d printing process as the additive manufacturing process of the formation of the device of Hook so as to provide a limited amount of waste material in the formation of complex shapes.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Miwa (US12499862) discloses a vibration absorber; Li (US12300207) discloses a flexural wave absorber; Ishii (US12211476) discloses a vibration damping device; and Schnitta (US12190854) discloses a sound inhibition system of shell form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FORREST M PHILLIPS whose telephone number is (571)272-9020. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9:00-5:00.
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, Dedei Hammond can be reached at (571) 272-3985. 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.
/FORREST M PHILLIPS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights