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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 2/28/25, 9/5/25, 3/13/26, 5/27/26 and 6/23/26 have been considered.
Drawings
The drawings filed 1/16/25 are acceptable to the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: A LOUDSPEAKER MODULE AND VEHICLE FOR MOUNTING THE MODULE THAT REDUCES VIBRATIONS GENERATED AT THE MOUNTING POSITION.
Examiner’s Comments
The language ranges from -30 degrees to 30 degrees as set forth in claim 1 is interpreted as meaning at any degree within the range of -30 degrees to 30 degrees. Therefore, for example the angle between the output direction of a cavity and a plane of the mounting surface and the angle between the axial direction of the loudspeaker and the main plane of the mounting surface each could satisfied by an single angle between the claimed range, such as an angle of 0 degrees. Also, the claimed sound output direction of a cavity and the claimed axial direction of the loudspeaker can be interpreted as the same direction.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 13-14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the second cavity" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Also, those features to used to form the second cavity are not defined. Claim 13 recites the limitation "the opening part" in lines 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Also, those features to used to form the opening part are not defined. Claim 14 inherits those features of claim 13 without clarification of the noted limitations. Claim 16 recites the limitation "the second cavity" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Also, those features to used to form the second cavity are not defined.
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, 12, 16 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sprinkle (US 2008/0247593 A1), cited by applicant.
Re claim 1: Sprinkle teaches a loudspeaker module (figures 1-2), comprising a loudspeaker unit (104) and a frame body (120), wherein the loudspeaker unit is disposed in the frame body, the loudspeaker unit comprises a first mounting surface (142), the first mounting surface is located at an end with a larger radial size of the loudspeaker unit, and the loudspeaker unit is fastened to the frame body through the first mounting surface (see figure 2); the loudspeaker unit further comprises a diaphragm (234), the diaphragm is disposed around the inside of the loudspeaker unit, the frame body and a side that is of the diaphragm and that is close to the first mounting surface form a first cavity (area directly in front of the diaphragm), and an included angle between a sound output direction of the first cavity and a plane on which the first mounting surface is located ranges from -30° to 30° (see for example figure 9 that would satisfy the claimed angle depending upon the tilt angle adjustment made to the speaker in relation to mounting surface (142); and an outer circumference of the frame body comprises a second mounting surface (120) i.e. a structural member of a vehicle, paragraph [0024]; the second mounting surface is configured to fasten the loudspeaker module to a preset mounting position (flush with the mounting surface), a main plane of the second mounting surface is parallel to a main plane of the preset mounting position, and an included angle between an axial direction (a direction that extends from one side of the diaphragm to an opposite side of the diaphragm) of the loudspeaker unit and the main plane of the second mounting surface ranges from -30° to 30° (see for example figure 6 wherein this angle would be 0 degrees).
Re claim 12: the claimed vehicle including those features of claim 1 and also a vehicle door used to locate the preset mounting position is satisfied by the structural member of a vehicle (paragraph [0024] including a structural door member that are present on vehicles)
Re claims 7 and 20: see figure 2 teaching a sub-cavity (area located behind speaker frame (23) that communicates with the first cavity
Re claim 8: the claimed shock absorption pad is satisfied by the use of spacer material (614)
Re claim 9: the claimed at least three mount holes as set forth are satisfied by the holes formed in each of the four posts (134) as depicted in figure 1
Re claim 16: spacer material (614) provides for a sealed surface as set forth isolated cavities as best as can be determined from the claimed arrangement
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6, 10-11, 15, 17-19 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 13-14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The claimed module including in combination those features of claim 1 wherein the frame body and a side that is of the diaphragm and that faces away from the first mounting surface may form a second cavity; the second cavity and the first cavity are respectively disposed on two sides of the second mounting surface in a direction perpendicular to the main plane of the second mounting surface; the frame body comprises an opening part, so that the second cavity is an open cavity; and an opening direction of the opening part is perpendicular to the main plane of the second mounting surface as set forth in claim 2 is neither taught by or an obvious variation of the art of record. The limitations of claim 3 depend on those features of claim 2/1. Claim 15 sets forth similar features as that provided by claim 2. The claimed module includes in combination those features of claim 1, wherein a ratio of a maximum distance from a frame-body part corresponding to the first cavity to the main plane of the second mounting surface to a size of the loudspeaker module in the direction perpendicular to the main plane of the second mounting surface ranges from 1/4 to ¾ as set forth in claim 4 is neither taught by or an obvious variation of the art of record. Claimed features similar to those of claim 4 are present in claim 17. The loudspeaker module according to claim 1 wherein a volume of the first cavity is greater than or equal to 0.1 liters as set forth in claim 5 is neither taught by or an obvious variation of the art of record. Claimed features similar to those of claim 5 are present in claim 18. The limitations of claim 19 depend upon those features of claim 18/12/1 The limitations of claim 6 depend on those features of claim 5/1. The loudspeaker module according to claim 1, wherein there are a plurality of loudspeaker units, the plurality of loudspeaker units form a symmetric structure, and first mounting surfaces of the plurality of loudspeaker units are close to each other as set forth in claim 10 is neither taught by or an obvious variation of the art of record. The limitations of claim 11 depend on those features of claim 10/1. The claimed module includes in combination those features of claims 12/1 wherein the vehicle further comprises an outer wall, and the outer wall and the preset mounting position form an accommodation space; and when the loudspeaker module is fastened to the preset mounting position, the frame- body part corresponding to the first cavity is located in the accommodation space, the opening part communicates with the accommodation space, and the second cavity and the accommodation space form a closed cavity as set forth in claim 13 is neither taught by or an obvious variation of the art of record. The limitations of claim 14 depend on those features of claim 13/12/1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hsu teaches to provide an angle-adjustable speaker mount.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW SNIEZEK whose telephone number is (571)272-7563. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00 AM-3:30 PM EST.
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.
/ANDREW SNIEZEK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
/A.S./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693 9/14/26
Prosecution Insights