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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-3, 7, 9-11, 15-16, 25-26 and 28 are rejected
Claims 4-6, 8, 12-14 and 27 are objected to
Claims 17-24 are allowed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 7, 9-11, 15-16, 26 and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zeltzer et al (US PUB 20220312105, hereinafter Zeltzer)
Regarding Claim 1, Zeltzer discloses an apparatus (see at least the abstract) comprising: an audio transducer (e.g. an acoustic device 10), comprising: a first electrically conductive element (e.g. a first electrode 11), a second electrically conductive element (e.g. a second electrode 11), and a dielectric element (e.g. a dielectric membrane 15) disposed between the first electrically conductive element and the second electrically conductive element (see figure 1A); and a control system (e.g. a control circuit 20) configured to generate a voltage that is modulated in accordance with an audio signal (e.g. audio input signal vi) and apply the voltage to the audio transducer to cause an electric field to be generated between the first electrically conductive element and the second electrically conductive element (see figure 2), wherein the electric field causes acoustic sound pressure to be generated which reproduces sound corresponding to the audio signal (see Zeltzer, [0008], [0025]-[0027], and [0036]-[0037], also figures 1A, 2 and 3A).
Regarding Claim 7, Zeltzer discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first electrically conductive element and the second electrically conductive element are spaced apart from respective first and second surfaces of the dielectric element (see Zeltzer, figure 3A).
Regarding Claim 9, Zeltzer discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein at least one of the first electrically conductive element and the second electrically conductive element comprises a metallic material (e.g. the conductive layer may be essentially metallic including: titanium, palladium, platinum, gold, silver, aluminum, copper, iron, tin, bronze, brass and steel), (see Zeltzer, [0026]).
Regarding Claim 10, Zeltzer discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein at least one of the first electrically conductive element and the second electrically conductive element comprises a perforated conductive sheet (e.g. electrodes 11 as may be perforated with apertures 12), (see Zeltzer, [0026]).
Regarding Claim 11, Zeltzer discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the first electrically conductive element and the second electrically conductive element each comprise a planar element (see Zeltzer, figures 1A and 3A).
Regarding Claim 15, Zeltzer discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the control system is configured to increase a voltage range of the voltage that is applied to the audio transducer to increase a peak sound pressure level (see Zeltzer, [0051], and figure 3).
Regarding Claim 16, Zeltzer discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the control system is configured to increase a voltage range of the voltage that is applied to the audio transducer to increase a root mean square sound pressure level (see Zeltzer, [0051], and figure 3).
Regarding Claim 25, Zeltzer discloses an apparatus (see at least the abstract) comprising: an audio transducer (e.g. an acoustic device 10), comprising: a first electrically conductive element, and a second electrically conductive element (e.g. a pair of first and second electrodes 11) disposed adjacent to each other (see figures 1A-1D); and a control system (e.g. a control circuit 20) configured to generate a voltage that is modulated in accordance with an audio signal (e.g. audio input signal vi) and apply the voltage to the audio transducer to cause an electric field to be generated between the first electrically conductive element and the second electrically conductive element, wherein the electric field causes acoustic sound pressure to be generated which reproduces sound corresponding to the audio signal (see Zeltzer, [0008], [0025]-[0026], and [0036]-[0037], also figures 1A-1D and 3-3A).
Regarding Claim 28, Zeltzer discloses apparatus of claim 25, wherein at least one of the first electrically conductive element and the second electrically conductive element comprises an electrically conductive surface (see Zeltzer, [0008]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeltzer as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Arevalo et al (US PUB 20180098139, hereinafter Arevalo).
Regarding Claim 2, Zeltzer discloses the apparatus of claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the dielectric element comprises a polyimide film.
However, Arevalo in the same field of endeavor teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a dielectric element in an audio apparatus, wherein the dielectric element comprises a polyimide film as set forth in [0052], and [0104]-[0105], also figures 3A-3B. Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate a dielectric comprising polyimide film as taught by Arevalo in the teachings of Zelter in order to achieve a dielectric with a low coefficient of thermal expansion, low film stress, and lower cost, and thereby further improving the overall efficiency of the apparatus.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeltzer as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dehe et al (US PAT 9031266, hereinafter Dehe).
Regarding Claim 3, Zeltzer discloses the apparatus of claim 1, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the first electrically conductive element and the second electrically conductive element comprises an electrically conductive grid.
However, Dehe in the same field of endeavor teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a first and second electrically conductive elements comprising an electrically conductive grid as set forth in column 1 lines 20-27. Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate a first and second electrically conductive elements comprising an electrically conductive grid as taught by Dehe in the teachings of Zelter so as to achieve a uniform sound generation by the apparatus.
Regarding Claim 26, Zeltzer discloses the apparatus of claim 25, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the first electrically conductive element and the second electrically conductive element comprises an electrically conductive grid.
However, Dehe in the same field of endeavor teaches that it is well known in the art to provide a first and second electrically conductive elements comprising an electrically conductive grid as set forth in column 1 lines 20-27. Therefore, it would have been obvious to any person having an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to incorporate a first and second electrically conductive elements comprising an electrically conductive grid as taught by Dehe in the teachings of Zelter so as to achieve a uniform sound generation by the apparatus.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-6, 8, 12-14 and 27 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 17-24 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claim 17 is allowed over the prior arts of record, because none of the prior arts whether taken singly or in combination with the others teaches all the limitations of claim 17. For instance, the closest prior art, Zeltzer et al (US PUB 20220312105) directed to similar subject matter of the claimed invention teaches: an apparatus, comprising: a pair of earphones including a left earphone and right earphone; the left earphone comprising an audio transducer; the right earphone comprising a second audio transducer; and a control system configured to operate the pair of earphones; wherein the audio transducer of the first and second audio transducer each comprise: a first electrically conductive element; a second electrically conductive element; and a dielectric element disposed between the first electrically conductive element and the second electrically conductive element.
However, Zeltzer in its entirety or in combination with the other said prior arts fails to explicitly teach or suggest the following limitations of claim 17 in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim: the left earphone comprising a first array of audio transducer cells; the right earphone comprising a second array of audio transducer cells; wherein the audio transducer cells of the first array and second array of audio transducer cells each comprise: a first electrically conductive element; a second electrically conductive element; and wherein the control system is configured to receive or acquire an audio signal, decode the audio signal into separate audio channels for driving the respective audio transducer cells of the first array and second array of audio transducer cells, generate voltages that are modulated in accordance with the separate audio channels, and apply the voltages to respective first and second electrically conductive elements of the audio transducer cells of the first array and second array of audio transducers cells to reproduce three-dimensional sound based on the audio signal.
Claims 18-24 are allowed based on their respective dependence from Claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OYESOLA C OJO whose telephone number is (571)272-0848. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8:00am to 4:00pm Central Time.
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, Vivian Chin can be reached at 571-272-7840. 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.
/OYESOLA C OJO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695.
Prosecution Insights