LOUDSPEAKERS

DETAILED ACTION This Communication is a First Action on the Merits (FAOM). Claims 1-20, as originally filed, are pending and have been considered as follows. 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 § 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, 4, 12 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHONG et al (CN 2019/20945171) in view of Levy (2022/0053261 A1). As per Claim 1, Zhong teaches a loudspeaker, comprising: a vibration diaphragm, configured to vibrate to generate air-conducted sound waves (Diaphragm/Loudspeaker Monomer: Figures 1-3 – References 20; Page 5, Paragraph [0005]; Page 6, Paragraphs [0001] and [0002]). (Note: On Page 5, Paragraph [0005]; Zhong describes a loudspeaker that includes a loudspeaker monomer [i.e. driver]. On Page 6, Paragraph [0001]; Zhong indicates a speaker unit includes a vibration system that includes a diaphragm which generates air-conducted sound waves) Zhong also teaches a casing, configured to form an accommodation cavity to accommodate the vibration diaphragm, the vibration diaphragm dividing the accommodation cavity into a front cavity and a rear cavity, the casing being provided with a sound outlet hole in flow communication with the front cavity, and at least a portion of the air-conducted sound waves being transmitted to the outside of the loudspeaker via the sound outlet hole (Shell/Front & Rear Cavity/Sound Hole: Figures 1-3 – References 14, 15 and 16; Page 5, Paragraph [0005]; Page 6, Paragraphs [0001] and [0002]; Page 7, Paragraph [0002]). (Note: On Page 5, Paragraph [0005]; Zhong indicates that the loudspeaker includes a shell [i.e. casing] housing a speaker unit with a connecting cavity to a sound hole. Zhong also indicates that the containing cavity is divided into a front acoustic chamber and a rear sound cavity. On Page 7, Paragraph [0002]; Zhong describes the loudspeaker transmitting air-conducted sound waves outside of the loudspeaker via the sound outlet hole) Zhong does not teach wherein the casing is provided with a sound absorption pipe, and the sound absorption pipe is in flow communication with at least one of the front cavity and the rear cavity and configured to absorb sound waves of a target frequency in the air-conducted sound waves, a length of the sound absorption pipe being in a range of 3/20-2/5 of a wavelength of the sound waves of the target frequency. However, Levy teaches wherein the casing is provided with a sound absorption pipe, and the sound absorption pipe is in flow communication with at least one of the front cavity and the rear cavity and configured to absorb sound waves of a target frequency in the air-conducted sound waves (Page 1, Paragraph [0018]), a length of the sound absorption pipe being in a range of 3/20-2/5 of a wavelength of the sound waves of the target frequency (Page 2, Paragraph [0025]). (Note: In paragraph [0018], Levy describes a straight transmission line [i.e. sound absorption pipe] that terminates in a port. A straight transmission line is fundamentally a long open-ended tube. Without sound absorption, a hollow tube would act like a giant organ introducing harmonic resonances and echoing midrange frequencies into the environment) (Note: The length of the transmission line is ¼ of the wavelength of the target frequency. In paragraph [0025], Levy indicates that the tuning frequency of the transmission line dictates the length of the transmission line. According to Levy the length of the transmission line is .25 of the wavelength of the target frequency. The recitation recites a range of between .15 to .4 of the wavelength of the target frequency which is taught by Levy) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the loudspeaker taught by Zhong with the loudspeaker taught by Levy to direct the speaker driver’s rear acoustic wave completely away from the diaphragm preventing internal out-of-phase reflections from bleeding back through the cone. As per Claim 4, the combination of Zhong and Levy teaches wherein the front cavity is in flow communication with the sound outlet hole through a sound guiding channel, and the sound absorption pipe is in flow communication with the sound guiding channel through the front cavity. (Note: On Page 10, Paragraph [0004], the cavity described by Zhong includes a cavity body and a connecting channel. As shown in Figure 3 of Levy, flow communication through the loudspeaker is guided to a sound absorption pipe to a sound outlet hole) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the loudspeaker taught by Zhong with the loudspeaker taught by Levy to direct the speaker driver’s rear acoustic wave completely away from the diaphragm preventing internal out-of-phase reflections from bleeding back through the cone. As per Claim 12, the combination of Zhong and Levy teaches wherein a projection of the sound absorption pipe along a vibration direction of the vibration diaphragm includes a loop structure or a folded structure (Levy – Folded/Round or Any other shape: Page 1, Paragraph [0020]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the loudspeaker taught by Zhong with the loudspeaker taught by Levy to direct the speaker driver’s rear acoustic wave completely away from the diaphragm preventing internal out-of-phase reflections from bleeding back through the cone. As per Claim 20, the combination of Zhong and Levy teaches wherein the sound absorption pipe includes a 1/4 wavelength resonance tube (Levy: Page 1, Paragraphs [0018] and [0019]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the loudspeaker taught by Zhong with the loudspeaker taught by Levy to direct the speaker driver’s rear acoustic wave completely away from the diaphragm preventing internal out-of-phase reflections from bleeding back through the cone. Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHONG et al (CN 2019/20945171) in view of Levy (2022/0053261 A1) as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Lippitt et al (2017/0180848 A1). As per Claim 2, the combination of Zhong and Levy teaches the loudspeaker of Claim 1; but does not teach wherein vibration of the vibration diaphragm has an original resonance frequency, and a difference between the original resonance frequency and the target frequency is within 300 Hz. However, Lippitt teaches wherein vibration of the vibration diaphragm has an original resonance frequency, and a difference between the original resonance frequency and the target frequency is within 300 Hz (Page 3, Paragraph [0036]). (Note: In paragraph [0036], Leppitt provides an example where the cutoff frequency for a low frequency driver is around 500 Hz [i.e. original resonance frequency] and discusses designing a loudspeaker so that the cavity resonance frequency is at a value [e.g. 750 Hz] that is higher than the cutoff frequency. Leppitt indicates that the desired value of the cavity resonance frequency is referred to as a target value [i.e. target frequency]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong and Levy with the apparatus taught by Leppitt to prevent physical damage, distortion and unpredictable phase shifts due to the fact that when the speaker is below or right at resonance the speaker loses the ability to accurately copy the audio signal leading to muddy or warped sound. Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHONG et al (CN 2019/20945171) in view of Levy (2022/0053261 A1) as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim et al (2023/0262392 A1). As per Claim 3, the combination of Zhong and Levy teaches the loudspeaker of Claim 1; but does not teach wherein the target frequency is in a range of 3 kHz to 20 kHz. However, Kim teaches teach wherein the target frequency is in a range of 3 kHz to 20 kHz (Page 3, Paragraphs [0052] and [0053]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong and Levy with the apparatus taught by Kim to ensure that human speech is intelligible as the consonant sounds in human speech live in the 3 kHz to 8 kHz region and optimizing a driver in this range ensures that dialog is properly articulated and easier to understand. Claim(s) 5, 10, 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHONG et al (CN 2019/20945171) in view of Levy (2022/0053261 A1) as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Yang et al (2025/0080916 A1) and Sabato et al (5,793,000). As per Claim 5, the combination of Zhong and Levy teaches the loudspeaker of Claim 1; but does not teach wherein the casing includes a front cavity plate, a rear cavity plate, and a side plate. However, Yang teaches wherein the casing includes a front cavity plate, a rear cavity plate, and a side plate (Figure 3 – References 11, 12 and 13; Page 2, Paragraph [0033]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong and Levy with the apparatus taught by Yang to provide structural protection and acoustic control in an effort to allow manage resonance, boost or cut specific frequency bands and improve mid-frequency response while lowering unwanted high-frequency noise. The combination of Zhong, Levy and Yang does not teach an end of the sound absorption pipe includes a sound inlet hole. However, Sabato teaches an end of the sound absorption pipe includes a sound inlet hole (Column 4, Lines 30-36). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong, Levy and Yang with the apparatus taught by Sabato to cancel to absorb unwanted internal standing waves and cabinet resonance frequencies without altering surrounding frequency bands. As per Claim 10, the combination of Zhong, Levy, Yang and Sabato teaches wherein the sound inlet hole is located within a projection of the vibration diaphragm along a vibration direction of the vibration diaphragm. (Note: Aligning the sound inlet hole along the axis of displacement increases the efficiency of acoustic energy transfer as aligning the sound inlet hole along this vector ensures air molecules travel directly into the port or aperture with minimal path resistance. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong, Levy and Yang with the apparatus taught by Sabato to cancel to absorb unwanted internal standing waves and cabinet resonance frequencies without altering surrounding frequency bands As per Claim 11, the combination of Zhong, Levy, Yang and Sabato teaches wherein the vibration diaphragm includes a folded-ring portion and a fixed end, and the sound inlet hole faces the folded-ring portion. (Note: On Page 6, Paragraph [0001], Zhong indicates that the central part of the diaphragm includes a folded ring part and a fixed end) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong, Levy and Yang with the apparatus taught by Sabato to cancel to absorb unwanted internal standing waves and cabinet resonance frequencies without altering surrounding frequency bands. As per Claim 13, the combination of Zhong, Levy, Yang and Sabato teaches a driving unit, wherein on a projection plane along a vibration direction of the driving unit, the loop structure is disposed around the driving unit as described in Claims 1, 10 and 12. (Note: the use of a speaker/transducer is taught by both Zhong and Levy as described in Claim 1) (Note: A projection plane along a vibration direction of the driving unit is described in Claim 10. The incorporation of a loop structure of a sound-absorption pipe forces sound waves to travel a longer path through absorption media ensuring that a high percentage of unwanted rear wave energy is fully attenuated before it can echo back) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong, Levy and Yang with the apparatus taught by Sabato to cancel to absorb unwanted internal standing waves and cabinet resonance frequencies without altering surrounding frequency bands. Claim(s) 6-9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHONG et al (CN 2019/20945171) in view of Levy (2022/0053261 A1), and further in view of Yang et al (2025/0080916 A1) and Sabato et al (5,793,000) as applied to Claim 5 above, and further in view of Liu et al (2016/0261949 A1). As per Claim 6, the combination of Zhong, Levy, Yang and Sabato teaches the loudspeaker of Claim 5. Zhong also teaches a driving unit configured to generate vibration based on an electrical signal and drive the vibration diaphragm to vibrate (Page 6, Paragraph [0001]). (Note: On Page 6, Paragraph [0001], Zhong indicates that the speaker unit includes a vibration system including a diaphragm configured to generate vibration based on an electrical signal and drive the vibration diaphragm to vibrate) The combination of Zhong, Levy, Yang and Sabato does not teach wherein the driving unit is provided in the rear cavity and cooperates with the rear cavity plate to divide the rear cavity into a first rear cavity and a second rear cavity. However, Liu teaches wherein the driving unit is provided in the rear cavity and cooperates with the rear cavity plate to divide the rear cavity into a first rear cavity and a second rear cavity (Abstract). (Note: In the Abstract, Liu describes a speaker unit within a casing. Liu indicates a rear acoustic cavity is formed between the casing and speaker unit wherein at least one baffle wall [i.e. plate] divides the rear acoustic cavity into at least two cavities and wherein at least one slit is formed between the plats so sound generated by the speaker can spread to adjacent cavities) The combination of Zhong, Levy, Yang, Sabato and Liu teaches the second rear cavity being enclosed by the driving unit and the rear cavity plate as described above. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong, Levy, Yang and Sabato with the apparatus taught by Liu to ensure that the intense back-pressure from a large woofer does not forcefully modulate the smaller more sensitive diaphragm of a midrange speaker to avoid muddy sound and severe acoustic distortion As per Claim 7, the combination of Zhong, Levy, Yang, Sabato and Liu teaches wherein the sound absorption pipe is provided in the rear cavity plate and in flow communication with the first rear cavity via the sound inlet hole as described in Claims 1, 5 and 6. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong, Levy, Yang and Sabato with the apparatus taught by Liu to ensure that the intense back-pressure from a large woofer does not forcefully modulate the smaller more sensitive diaphragm of a midrange speaker to avoid muddy sound and severe acoustic distortion. As per Claim 8, the combination of Zhong, Levy, Yang, Sabato and Liu teaches wherein the sound absorption pipe is provided in the front cavity plate and in flow communication with the front cavity via the sound inlet hole. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong, Levy, Yang and Sabato with the apparatus taught by Liu to enable the sound absorption pipe to act as a tuned acoustic absorber or dissipative acoustic transmission line to trap and dampen destructive internal reflections flattening the frequency response. As per Claim 9, the combination of Zhong, Levy, Yang, Sabato and Liu teaches wherein the other end of the sound absorption pipe is closed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong, Levy, Yang and Sabato with the apparatus taught by Liu to form a quarter-wave resonator which create targeted destructive interference to squash highly specific frequency peaks [i.e. mid-bass boominess] that general cabinet dampening sheets might miss. As per Claim 19, the combination of Zhong and Levy teaches wherein the front cavity is in flow communication with the sound outlet hole through a sound guiding channel, and the sound absorption pipe is provided on a side wall of the sound guiding channel and is in flow communication with the sound guiding channel via a sound inlet hole provided at one end of the sound absorption pipe. (Note: As shown in Figure 3 of Levy, flow communication through the loudspeaker is guided to a sound absorption pipe to a sound outlet hole. Placing the sound absorption pipe on the side wall minimizes midrange leakage and “chuffing” – high-velocity air rushing out of a tuned pipe which creates audible turbulence or whistling – A sound inlet hole being provided at one end of the sound absorption pipe is taught as described in Claims 7 and 8 above) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong, Levy, Yang and Sabato with the apparatus taught by Liu to form a quarter-wave resonator which create targeted destructive interference to squash highly specific frequency peaks [i.e. mid-bass boominess] that general cabinet dampening sheets might miss. Claim(s) 14-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHONG et al (CN 2019/20945171) in view of Levy (2022/0053261 A1) as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Nishio et al (2013/0008739 A1). As per Claim 14, the combination of Zhong and Levy teaches the loudspeaker of Claim 1; but does not teach wherein the sound absorption pipe includes sub-sound absorption pipes, and each of the sub-sound absorption pipes is in flow communication with the front cavity or the rear cavity via a sound inlet hole. However, Nishio teaches wherein the sound absorption pipe includes sub-sound absorption pipes, and each of the sub-sound absorption pipes is in flow communication with the front cavity or the rear cavity via a sound inlet hole (Page 4, Paragraphs [0078] – [0081]). (Note: In paragraphs [0078] – [0081], Nishio describes an intake duct [i.e. sound absorption pipe] as a sound absorbing structure including multiple hollow sound absorbers which are assembled into a sound absorbing member) (Note: In paragraphs [0078] – [0081], Nishio indicates each sound absorber is a circular tube and provides an example where each sound absorber may have narrow straight tube with a diameter of 1 mm or less. Nishio also indicates that the sound absorber has at least one open end in its axis direction) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong and Levy with the apparatus taught by Nishio to eliminate internal standing waves and manage rear-cone reflections without adding bulky traditional damping materials. As per Claim 15, the combination of Zhong, Levy and Nishio teaches wherein the sub-sound absorption pipes are symmetrically disposed along a central axis of the loudspeaker. (Note: In paragraph [0084], Nishio indicates that the axes [plural of axis] of the sound absorbers are inclined at a predetermined angle [i.e. symmetrically disposed along a central axis of the loudspeaker]. Having a sound absorption pipe symmetrically disposed along a central axis of a loudspeaker suppresses unwanted internal acoustic resonances while aligning it with the primary path of the rear-firing acoustic energy) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong and Levy with the apparatus taught by Nishio to eliminate internal standing waves and manage rear-cone reflections without adding bulky traditional damping materials. As per Claim 16, the combination of Zhong, Levy and Nishio teaches wherein at least two of the sub-sound absorption pipes absorb sound waves of a same frequency or different frequencies in the air-conducted sound waves (Nishio: Page 3, Paragraph [0052]). (Note: In paragraph [0052], Nishio indicates that the sound absorbing pipe may absorb sound waves over a wide range of frequencies [e.g. 1kHz to 4kHz]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong and Levy with the apparatus taught by Nishio to eliminate internal standing waves and manage rear-cone reflections without adding bulky traditional damping materials. As per Claim 18, the combination of Zhong, Levy and Nishio teaches wherein an equivalent diameter of the sound absorption pipe is not less than 0.05 mm as described in Claim 14. Note: In paragraphs [0078] – [0081], Nishio indicates each sound absorber is a circular tube and provides an example where each sound absorber may have narrow straight tube with a diameter of 1 mm or less) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong and Levy with the apparatus taught by Nishio to eliminate internal standing waves and manage rear-cone reflections without adding bulky traditional damping materials. Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHONG et al (CN 2019/20945171) in view of Levy (2022/0053261 A1) as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of Le Her (5,832,094). As per Claim 17, the combination of Zhong and Levy teaches the loudspeaker of Claim 1; but does not teach wherein an equivalent length of the sound absorption pipe is in a range of 4 mm to 28 mm. However, Le Her teaches wherein an equivalent length of the sound absorption pipe is in a range of 4 mm to 28 mm (Column 2, Lines 30-33). (Note: In Column 2, Lines 30-33; Le Her indicates that depending on the frequency of the sound vibrations to be absorbed, the diameter [of the sound absorption pipe] may vary from 0.1 mm to 2.2 mm and have a length from 10 mm to 25 mm) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus taught by Zhong and Levy with the apparatus taught by Le Her to help promote the elimination of rear reflections through the use of sound absorbing pipes to trap and neutralize high-pitched waves before they can be reflected. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. SHI (CN 2012/80076512), Wilk et al (2016/0345090 A1), Yang et al (2025/0080916 A1), ONG (2009/0190784 A1), Shi (2015/0256922 A1), Tao et al (10,397,693 B1), Pavlov et al (2020/0100021 A1) and Chick (2015/0071473 A1). Each of these describes systems and apparatuses for loudspeaker construction. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHARYE POPE whose telephone number is (571)270-5587. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8AM - 4PM. 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, Ahmad Matar can be reached at 571-272-7488. 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. KHARYE POPE Primary Examiner Art Unit 2693 /KHARYE POPE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693