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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meng et al (US 2021/0360350 A1) in view of Salvatti (US 2016/0212546 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Meng et al disclose a planar transducer, comprising: a basket, inside which an accommodation chamber is provided (Meng et al; Fig 14; basket 10e), one end of the accommodation chamber having an opening (Meng et al; Fig 11; Para [0058] upper side of basket 10e interpreted as opening); a magnetic circuit assembly, which is arranged in the accommodation chamber (Meng et al; Fig 14; Para [0058]); wherein the magnet assembly comprises N first magnets and N-1 second magnets, where N is larger than or equal to 3 (Meng et al; Fig 14; Para [0064] 7 magnet 21e and 6 magnet 23e); the first magnets and the second magnets are alternately attached to each other in sequence (Meng et al; Fig 14; Para [0064] magnet 21e alternate with magnet 23e), a magnetic pole direction of the first magnets and a magnetic pole direction of the second magnets are perpendicular to each other (Meng et al; Fig 14; Para [0064] a magnetic pole direction of the first magnets 21e and a magnetic pole direction of the second magnets 23e are perpendicular to each other), and any two adjacent magnets that are of the same type and arranged alternately with the other type of magnet in the magnet assembly have opposite magnetic pole directions (Meng et al; Fig 14; Para [0064] magnet 21e and magnet 23e adjacent magnets that are of the same type and arranged alternately with the other type of magnet in the magnet assembly have opposite magnetic pole); a membrane assembly, which comprises a base layer and a voice coil layer (Meng et al; Fig 11; Para [0060] base layer 32d); wherein the base layer is provided at an opening of the accommodation chamber and covers the opening (Meng et al; Fig 11; Para [0060] base layer 32d provided at an opening of the accommodation chamber of box 10d and covers the opening), the voice coil layer is attached and connected to one side of the base layer (Meng et al; Fig 11; Para [0060] voice coil layer 311d is attached and connected to one side of the base layer 32d), and the other side of the base layer is arranged toward the magnetic circuit assembly (Meng et al; Fig 11; Para [0060] the other side of the base layer is arranged toward the magnetic circuit assembly 20d); and a cover plate, which is provided at the opening of the accommodation chamber and covers the opening, and which is arranged opposite to the voice coil layer (Meng et al; Fig 11; Para [0058]; cover 121d), but do not expressly disclose and which comprises a magnetically conductive plate and a magnet assembly attached to a plate surface of the magnetically conductive plate; a first sound output hole being provided on the cover plate. However, in the same field of endeavor, Salvatti discloses a device a magnetic circuit assembly, and which comprises a magnetically conductive plate and a magnet assembly attached to a plate surface of the magnetically conductive plate (Salvatti; Fig 3; Para [0050]; conductive plate 316) a first sound output hole being provided on the cover plate (Salvatti; Fig 16; port 408). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the conductive plate taught by Salvatti to support the magnetic circuit in the device taught by Meng. The motivation to do so would have been to increase smoothness of frequency response and power handling (Salvatti; Para [0042]).
Regarding claim 2, Meng et al in view of Salvatti disclose the planar transducer according to claim 1, wherein the direction of the magnetic induction lines of the first magnet is parallel to the plate surface of the magnetically conductive plate (Meng et al; Fig 14; direction of the magnetic induction lines of the first magnet 23e is parallel to the plate surface of the magnetically conductive plate (as modified with Salvatti’s substrate in Fig 3, 316)), and the direction of the magnetic induction lines of the second magnet is perpendicular to the plate surface of the magnetically conductive plate (Meng et al; Fig 14; direction of the magnetic induction lines of the first magnet 21e is perpendicular to the plate surface of the magnetically conductive plate (as modified with Salvatti’s substrate in Fig 3, 316)); or the direction of the magnetic induction lines of the first magnet is perpendicular to the plate surface of the magnetically conductive plate (Meng et al; Fig 14; direction of the magnetic induction lines of the first magnet 23e is parallel to the plate surface of the magnetically conductive plate (as modified with Salvatti’s substrate in Fig 3, 316)), and the direction of the magnetic induction lines of the second magnet is parallel to the plate surface of the magnetically conductive plate (Meng et al; Fig 14; direction of the magnetic induction lines of the first magnet 21e is perpendicular to the plate surface of the magnetically conductive plate (as modified with Salvatti’s substrate in Fig 3, 316)).
Regarding claim 5, Meng et al in view of Salvatti disclose the planar transducer according to claim 1, wherein in a direction parallel to the plate surface of the magnetically conductive plate, a width dimension of the first magnet is smaller than a width dimension of the second magnet (Meng et al; Fig 14; height dimension of the magnet 23e is smaller than a height dimension of the magnet 21e), and a cross-sectional area of the first magnet is smaller than that of the second magnet (Meng et al; Fig 14; a cross-sectional area of the first magnet 21e is smaller than that of the second magnet 23e).
Regarding claim 10, Meng et al disclose a speaker, comprising the planar transducer (Meng et al; Para [0024]); but do not expressly disclose according to claim 1. However, in the same field of endeavor, Meng et al in view of Salvatti disclose a device according to claim 1. It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the device taught by Meng in view of Salvatti as transducer device in the device taught by Meng. The motivation to do so would have been to increase smoothness of frequency response and power handling (Salvatti; Para [0042]).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meng et al (US 2021/0360350 A1) in view of Salvatti (US 2016/0212546 A1) and further in view of Jacques (US 2018/0098156 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Meng et al in view of Salvatti disclose the planar transducer according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein end surfaces of any adjacent first magnet and second magnet on a side facing the magnetically conductive plate are alternately arranged in a concave and convex pattern, and end surfaces of any adjacent first magnet and second magnet on a side away from the magnetically conductive plate are flush. However, in the same field of endeavor, Jacques discloses a device wherein end surfaces of any adjacent first magnet and second magnet on a side facing the magnetically conductive plate are alternately arranged in a concave and convex pattern (Jacques; Fig 4a; Para [0039]), and end surfaces of any adjacent first magnet and second magnet on a side away from the magnetically conductive plate are flush (Jacques; Para [0032]-[0033][0039]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the magnet taught by Jacques as magnet of the magnetic circuit in the device taught by Meng. The motivation to do so would have been to reduce the drive power (Jacques; Para [0008]).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meng et al (US 2021/0360350 A1) in view of Salvatti (US 2016/0212546 A1) and further in view of Croft et al (US 2002/0118856 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Meng et al in view of Salvatti disclose the planar transducer according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein in a direction perpendicular to the plate surface of the magnetically conductive plate, a height dimension of the first magnet is smaller than a height dimension of the second magnet, and a cross-sectional area of the first magnet is smaller than that of the second magnet. However, in the same field of endeavor, Croft et al disclose a device wherein in a direction perpendicular to the plate surface of the magnetically conductive plate, a height dimension of the first magnet is smaller than a height dimension of the second magnet (Croft et al; Fig 8; Para [0114]), and a cross-sectional area of the first magnet is smaller than that of the second magnet (Croft et al; Fig 8; Para [0114]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the magnet taught by Croft as magnet of the magnetic circuit in the device taught by Meng. The motivation to do so would have been to maximize the available energy from the magnets of the magnet structure (Croft et al; Para [0115]).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meng et al (US 2021/0360350 A1) in view of Salvatti (US 2016/0212546 A1) and further in view of Chen (CN 106954159 A).
Regarding claim 6, Meng et al in view of Salvatti disclose the planar transducer according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the magnetically conductive plate comprises a main plate portion and side plate portions arranged on both sides of the main plate portion; the main plate portion and the side plate portions on both sides together enclose a U-shaped structure, and the multiple magnets are arranged inside the U-shaped structure and are attached to the plate surface of the main plate portion. However, in the same field of endeavor, Chen discloses a device wherein the magnetically conductive plate comprises a main plate portion and side plate portions arranged on both sides of the main plate portion (Chen; Fig 8; lower plate as main plate portion and side plate portions arranged on both sides of the main plate portion); the main plate portion and the side plate portions on both sides together enclose a U-shaped structure, and the multiple magnets are arranged inside the U-shaped structure and are attached to the plate surface of the main plate portion (Chen; Fig 8; multiple magnets are arranged inside the U-shaped structure and are attached to the plate surface of the main plate portion). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the magnet support taught by Chen as magnet support in the device taught by Meng. The motivation to do so would have been to provide high sound quality and high performance speaker (Chen; Page 2; lines 15-30).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meng et al (US 2021/0360350 A1) in view of Salvatti (US 2016/0212546 A1) and further in view of Lin et al (CN 210183530 U).
Regarding claim 7, Meng et al in view of Salvatti disclose the planar transducer according to claim 1, wherein the base layer and the voice coil layer of the membrane assembly are of an integrated structure (Meng et al; Para [0060]), but do not expressly disclose the base layer is a PI film and the voice coil layer is electrolytic copper attached to a surface of the PI film, and the electrolytic copper is etched to form the voice coil layer. However, in the same field of endeavor, Lin et al disclose a device wherein the base layer is a PI film and the voice coil layer is electrolytic copper attached to a surface of the PI film, and the electrolytic copper is etched to form the voice coil layer (Lin et al; Page 4; lines 25-45). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the film and copper taught by Lin as membrane in the device taught by Meng. The motivation to do so would have been to provide a more stable the vibration system (Lin et al; Page 4; lines 40-55).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meng et al (US 2021/0360350 A1) in view of Salvatti (US 2016/0212546 A1) and further in view of Lin et al (CN 210183530 U) and further in view of Nishimura et al (US 2005/0152577 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Meng et al in view of Salvatti and further in view of Lin disclose the planar transducer according to claim 7, but do not expressly disclose wherein the membrane assembly further comprises an anti-oxidation coating that covers a surface of the electrolytic copper of the voice coil layer. However, in the same field of endeavor, Nishimura et al disclose a device wherein the membrane assembly further comprises an anti-oxidation coating that covers a surface of the electrolytic copper of the voice coil layer (Nishimura et al; Para [0093][0121]). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the voice coil coating taught by Nishimura as membrane in the device taught by Meng. The motivation to do so would have been to enhance the sound conversion efficiency of the vibrating diaphragm (Nishimura et al; Para [0094]).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meng et al (US 2021/0360350 A1) in view of Salvatti (US 2016/0212546 A1) and further in view of Nishimura et al (US 2005/0152577 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Meng et al in view of Salvatti disclose the planar transducer according to claim 1, but do not expressly disclose wherein the membrane assembly further comprises a hanging edge, which is arranged around an edge of the base layer, and the base layer is connected to the basket through the hanging edge. However, in the same field of endeavor, Nishimura et al disclose a device wherein the membrane assembly further comprises a hanging edge (Nishimura et al; Fig 37(c); hanging edge 128), which is arranged around an edge of the base layer, and the base layer is connected to the basket through the hanging edge (Nishimura et al; Fig 37(c); base layer is connected to the basket through the hanging edge 128). It would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the application to use the voice coil coating taught by Nishimura as membrane in the device taught by Meng. The motivation to do so would have been to enhance the sound conversion efficiency of the vibrating diaphragm (Nishimura et al; Para [0094]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KUASSI A GANMAVO whose telephone number is (571)270-5761. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM-5PM.
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, Carolyn Edwards can be reached at 5712707136. 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.
/KUASSI A GANMAVO/Examiner, Art Unit 2692
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights