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.
Claims 1-3, 5 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application No. 2012/0039492 (Fincham).
Fincham teaches:
A speaker assembly (Figs. 4A, 4B, paragraph [0074], 8, 9E), comprising: a speaker body comprising an outer surface that comprises a first slit exit port and a second slit exit port (Figs. 4A-4B: left and right, in case separated by struts; Fig. 9E: 945, 947); a slit that extends within the speaker body between the first slit exit port and the second slit exit port (415), and includes a slit volume that is partially defined by inner surfaces of the slit (see Figs. 4A and 4B) ; and a first driver having a front end that forms part of the inner surface of the slit and defines a first portion of the slit volume (see Figs 4A and $4B).
With respect to claims 2 - 3, 13 and 14 note Figs. 6, 9E, 15 and 28A-28B.
With respect to claim 5, note paragraphs 0061 and 0113.
With respect to claim 12 , note Figs. 1, 2A, 2N, 4A, 4B, 8 and 9E.
With respect to claim 15, note Figs. 4A, 9E .
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 4, 7-9, 17 – 18 and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application No. 2012/0039492 (Fincham).
With respect to claim 4, such a design choice would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the Figs. In particularly, Fig. 9E.
With respect to claims 7, 8, 17 and 18 note paragraphs 0063 and 0088. In view of this it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as nothing more than obvious design choices.
With respect to claim 9, note paragraph 0063. A slot dimension of 10mmx60mm means a ratio of 1:6 which belongs to the claimed range defined between 1:9 to 5:6.
With respect to claim 20, in view of Fig. 17A-C, 20, 21 and 22. In addition, note Fig. 9E and the opening 2nd and 4th ports opposite to 1st and 3rd ports.
With respect to claim 21, such is obvious in view of combining Figs 15 and 9E. In addition, note the stack of the pair of drivers in Fig. 11 and the pair of drivers in Fig. 15. Combining such a combining would lead to an obvious design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 6, 10-11, 16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application No. 2012/0039492 (Fincham) in view of U.S. Patent No. 5,253,301 (Sakamoto et al.).
With respect to claim 6, Fincham teaches the claimed limitations except for the particulars of the slit width and height. However, Sakamoto et al. teach such as can be seen from Fig. 15. It would have been an obvious design choice to have incorporated the teachings of Sakamoto et al. into the Fincham system and method after one views Figs. 8, 9E and 28A-B of Fincham.
With respect to claim 10, Fincham teaches the claimed limitations except for the exact ratios. However, note the related texts to Figs. 1 – 2 (18cm diameters), Figs. 3-4 (25mm, 60mm diameters). Other undisclosed diameters would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. It would have been obvious, in view of Figs, 2B, 4B, 6, 9, 28A of Fincham, to have incorporated the teachings of Sakamoto et al. into Fincham as would have been for any diameter dimension. That is, it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to choose whatever dimension is deemed necessary .
With respect to claim 11, note Figs. 15 and 18B of Sakamoto et al.
With respect to claim 16, note rejection of claim 6 above.
With respect to claim 19, note Fig. 15 of Sakamoto et al. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to choose any ratio (width to height) whenever or wherever it was deemed necessary.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Note the Figs and Abstracts of the references cited on the accompanying 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to William Deane whose telephone number is 571-272-7484. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - FRIDAY from 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Ahmad Matar, can be reached on 571- 272-7488.
The official fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571 -273-8300. However, unofficial faxes can be direct to the examiner's computer at 571 273 -7484.
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 https://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).
12Jun2026
/WILLIAM J DEANE JR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Prosecution Insights