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 .
Claims filed 11-25-2024
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7-16-2025 was filed after the mailing date of the application filed on 11-25-2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kotanino Kiyoshi JPS5851691A
Regarding claim 1, Kotanino Kiyoshi JPS5851691A discloses the speaker (Fig 2), comprising:
a shell (Fig 2, frame 7, enclosure 8, para [0001] including a cavity);
a diaphragm (Fig 2, diaphragm 1) accommodated within the cavity, the diaphragm separating the cavity to form at least two sub-cavities, wherein the diaphragm is driven by an electrical signal (Fig 2, voice coil 3 and magnetic system 5, 6) to vibrate with respect to the shell to generate sound; and
a sliding connection portion (Fig 2, elements 7, 11, 12) configured to connect an edge of the diaphragm to an inner wall of the cavity), wherein the sliding connection portion (Fig 2, elements 7, 11, 12) allows the edge of the diaphragm (Fig 2, diaphragm 1) to slide relative to an inner wall of the shell (Fig 2 shows, para [0001] discloses diaphragm 1 is freely supported by the magnetic fluid 12, and support frame 7).
Regarding claim 2, Kotanino Kiyoshi JPS5851691A discloses the speaker of claim 1, wherein the shell (Fig 2, frame 7, enclosure 8, para [0001]) includes a magnet (Fig 2, magnet 5, yoke 6, para [0001]), the sliding connection portion is a magnetic fluid (Fig 2, magnetic fluid 12, para [0001]), a surface of the magnet forms at least a portion of the inner wall of the cavity (Fig 2 shows), and the diaphragm (Fig 2, diaphragm 1 drives the magnetic fluid to slide on the surface of the magnet, para [0001]).
Regarding claim 3, Kotanino Kiyoshi JPS5851691A discloses the speaker of claim 1, wherein the sliding connection portion includes a magnet and a magnetic fluid (Fig 2, magnetic fluid 12, para [0001]),
wherein the magnet is connected to the diaphragm, and the magnetic fluid is configured to connect the magnet to the inner wall of the cavity (Fig 2 shows magnetic fluid 12 connected to diaphragm 1 and connect to the inner wall of the cavity),
wherein the magnetic fluid (Fig 2, magnetic fluid 12, para [0001] slides with the magnet relative to the inner wall of the shell by a magnetic force between the magnetic fluid and the magnet).
Regarding claim 20, Kotanino Kiyoshi JPS5851691A discloses the speaker of claim 2, wherein the edge of the diaphragm (Fig 2, diaphragm 1) is disposed with a magnetic fluid (fluid magnetic 12) fixing member for connecting the magnetic fluid to the diaphragm (para [0001] discloses diaphragm 1 is firmly fixed around its periphery to a support frame 7, 11, 12).
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 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kotanino Kiyoshi JPS5851691A in view of Satoh 5073946
Regarding claim 17, Kotanino Kiyoshi does not explicitly disclose the speaker of claim 1, wherein the diaphragm is a rigid vibration plate. However, provided diaphragm is a rigid vibration plate is well known in the art.
Satoh teaches the diaphragm is a rigid vibration plate (Fig 3, 7, 9-10 teaches rigid diaphragm, col 4 lines 54-60, col 5 line 10-16, line 44-50, rigid diaphragm, an edge suspension member joins the rigid diaphragm to the housing). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to implement the wells known rigid diaphragm as taught by Satoh in Kotanino Kiyoshi’s invention, thereby realizing a speaker improved in reliability and having good acoustic characteristics.
Claim(s) 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kotanino Kiyoshi JPS5851691A in view of Kuribayashi 2016/0205477
Regarding claim 18, 19 Kotanino Kiyoshi JPS5851691A does not explicitly disclose the claimed limitation as recited in claims 18 and 19.
Kuribayashi 2016/0205477 teaches in para [0049] elastic modulus of diaphragm 14 can be increased. Kuribayashi teaches the claimed invention except for claim 18, the speaker of claim 1, wherein an elastic modulus of a material of the diaphragm is greater than 2x 10⁶ Pa.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the application to have made wherein an elastic modulus of a material of the diaphragm is greater than 2x 10⁶ Pa. 2E6 and wherein an elastic modulus of a material of the diaphragm is greater than 4x 10⁶ Pa. is just a matter of design choice since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine in the art. The motivation for this would have yielded a predictable result.
claim 19, the speaker of claim 1, wherein an elastic modulus of a material of the diaphragm is greater than 4x 10⁶ Pa.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the application to have made wherein an elastic modulus of a material of the diaphragm is greater than 2x 10⁶ Pa. 2E6 and wherein an elastic modulus of a material of the diaphragm is greater than 4x 10⁶ Pa. is just a matter of design choice since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine in the art. The motivation for this would have yielded a predictable result.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 4 objected because the prior art Kotanino Kiyoshi JPS5851691A in view of Satoh 5073946 further in view of Kuribayashi 2016/0205477 fails to teach the claimed limitation, “ the speaker of claim 3, wherein a carrier liquid of the magnetic fluid is an aqueous liquid or an oily liquid, a material of the inner wall of the cavity within a sliding range of the magnetic fluid is a first surface material, and a material of the inner wall of the cavity outside the sliding range of the magnetic fluid is a second surface material,
wherein a property of the carrier liquid is the same as a hydrophilic or lipophilic
property of the first surface material, and the first surface material and the second surface
material have opposite hydrophilic or lipophilic properties.”
Claim 5 objected because the prior art Kotanino Kiyoshi JPS5851691A in view of Satoh 5073946 further in view of Kuribayashi 2016/0205477 fails to teach the claimed limitation, “the speaker of claim 1, wherein the shell includes a first magnet, and the sliding connection portion includes a second magnet and a magnetic fluid, wherein a surface of the first magnet forms at least a portion of the inner wall of the cavity, the second magnet is connected to the diaphragm, and the magnetic fluid is configured to connect the first magnet to the second magnet, and the diaphragm drives, through the second magnet, the magnetic fluid to slide on the surface of the first magnet.”
Claim 7 objected because the prior art Kotanino Kiyoshi JPS5851691A in view of Satoh 5073946 further in view of Kuribayashi 2016/0205477 fails to teach the claimed limitation, “the speaker of claim 2, wherein the speaker further includes: a magnetic fluid constraint structure configured to constrain a position of the magnetic fluid.”
Claim 8 objected because the prior art Kotanino Kiyoshi JPS5851691A in view of Satoh 5073946 further in view of Kuribayashi 2016/0205477 fails to teach the claimed limitation, “the speaker of claim 7, wherein the magnetic fluid constraint structure includes a first magnetic fluid constraint element and a second magnetic fluid restraint element that are disposed on the diaphragm, the first magnetic fluid restraint element and the second magnetic fluid constraint element being provided to be located on opposite sides of the magnetic fluid along a vibration direction of the diaphragm, respectively.”
Claim 11 objected because the prior art Kotanino Kiyoshi JPS5851691A in view of Satoh 5073946 further in view of Kuribayashi 2016/0205477 fails to teach the claimed limitation, “the speaker of claim 7, wherein the magnetic fluid constraint structure includes
a third magnetic fluid restraint element and a fourth magnetic fluid restraint element that are disposed on the inner wall of the cavity and located outside a sliding range of the magnetic fluid,
wherein a distance between the third magnetic fluid constraint element and an edge of the sliding range is within a first distance threshold range, and a distance between the fourth magnetic fluid constraint element and the edge of the sliding range is within a second distance threshold range.”
Claim 13 objected because the prior art Kotanino Kiyoshi JPS5851691A in view of Satoh 5073946 further in view of Kuribayashi 2016/0205477 fails to teach the claimed limitation, “the speaker of claim 1, wherein the sliding connection portion is fluid, wherein a material of the inner wall of the cavity within a sliding range of the fluid is a first surface material, and a material of the inner wall of the cavity outside the sliding range of the fluid is a second surface material, wherein hydrophilic or lipophilic properties of the fluid and the first surface material are the same, and hydrophilic or lipophilic properties of the fluid and the second surface material of a contact region between the diaphragm and the fluid are opposite.”
Claims 6, 9-10, 12, 14, 15, 16 are objected because they are dependent on objected claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIE X DANG whose telephone number is (571)272-0040. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5.
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 R Edwards can be reached at 571-270-7136. 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.
/JULIE X DANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2692
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692
Prosecution Insights