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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it uses a phrase which can be implied. For instance, line 1 recites “A loudspeaker … are provided.”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williamson et al. (US Patent Application, Pub. No.: US 2020/0331027 A1).
In regards to claims 1 and 10, Williamson discloses a loudspeaker (e.g., haptic transducer 100) and an electronic device, comprising a basket (i.e., frame or basket) and a coil (e.g., coil 116), wherein the coil includes an annular body and a lead wire connected with the annular body, the annular body is located on an inner side of the basket, and the lead wire moves along with the annular body relative to the basket after an excitation signal is input into the loudspeaker (See [0039] – [0040]); wherein a soldering pad (e.g., metal contact pad 102) is disposed on the basket, the lead wire is provided with a first end close to the annular body and a second end away from the annular body, the second end is fixed on the soldering pad (See [0060] – [0061]). Williamson, however, does not specifically disclose a ratio of a length of the lead wire to a maximum amplitude of a movement of the coil relative to the basket is in a range of 8-75. Williamson, however, does disclose the coil 116 can include a length of wire (e.g., copper wire) would around a core to form a traditional electromagnet (See [0050]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to include this feature within the loudspeaker/electronic device as a way of indicating length and flexibility of the coil in regards to its use within the transducer/electronic device.
In regards to claim 2, Williamson does not specifically disclose the loudspeaker, wherein a ratio of a diameter of the lead wire to the length of the lead wire is in a range of 50-1000. Williamson, however, does disclose the coil 116 can include a length of wire (e.g., copper wire) would around a core to form a traditional electromagnet (See [0050]).
In regards to claim 3, Williamson does not specifically disclose the loudspeaker, wherein the lead wire includes a first extension portion connected with the annular body and a second extension portion bent relative to the first extension portion, and a ratio of a length of the second extension portion to a length of the first extension portion is in a range of 2-15. Williamson, however, does disclose the coil 116 can include a length of wire (e.g., copper wire) would around a core to form a traditional electromagnet (See [0050]).
In regards to claim 4, Williamson does not specifically disclose the loudspeaker, wherein a distance between the second extension portion and the annular body in a direction perpendicular to a vibration direction of the loudspeaker is in a range of 1.1 mm-2.1 mm. Williamson, however, does disclose “Second, the haptic transducer includes a “razorback” or winding spider configured to more evenly distribute stresses across the spider, provide a more compact form factor for the transducer, and provide a larger range for safe excursion. Third, the haptic transducer includes a floating motor and a floating coil, which allows for dual modes of operation depending on the amount of pressure applied to the haptic transducer device, for example, by the user's foot when worn within a shoe. Fourth, the haptic transducer can be configured for attachment to a footplate portion of a shoe using one or more mechanical techniques designed to (i) maximize the amount of surface area on the haptic transducer that is in contact with, and imparting vibrations to, the footplate, (ii) provide a secure and simple connection that allows for rotational and axial alignment between the footplate and the transducer, and (iii) define a more resilient impact point for when externally applied mechanical shocks are applied to the transducer” (See [0041] and [0043]).
In regards to claim 5, Williamson discloses the loudspeaker, wherein an angle between the second extension portion and the first extension portion is an obtuse angle (See [0050]).
In regards to claim 6, Williamson discloses the loudspeaker, wherein the lead wire is fixed on the basket at a fixed position between the first end and the second end, and a portion of the lead wire between the first end and the fixed position is suspended relative to the basket (See [0039]).
In regards to claim 7, Williamson discloses the loudspeaker, wherein a support block is disposed on the basket, the support block is located between the first end and the second end and corresponds to the fixed position, the lead wire is fixed on the support block at the fixed position, and when no excitation signal is input into the loudspeaker, the first end and the fixed position are on a same reference plane perpendicular to a vibration direction of the loudspeaker (See [0040] – [0041]).
In regards to claim 8, Williamson discloses the loudspeaker, further comprising: a magnetic shield connected with the basket, a magnet disposed in the magnetic shield, a diaphragm connected with the coil, and a folded ring (e.g., spider 104) connecting the diaphragm and the basket, the coil extending into a magnetic gap formed by the magnet and the magnetic shield (See [0039]; wherein the diaphragm includes a body portion, a first annular connection portion, and a second annular connection portion which are integrally connected, the first annular connection portion is connected with the coil, the second annular connection portion is connected with the folded ring, an orthographic projection of the second annular connection portion in a vibration direction of the loudspeaker covers the lead wire, and the second annular connection portion is bent towards a side away from the coil relative to the first annular connection portion (See [0049] and [0094] – [0095]).
In regards to claim 9, Williamson discloses the loudspeaker, wherein the folded ring includes a third annular connection portion, a pleated portion, and a fourth annular connection portion which are integrally connected, the third annular connection portion is connected with a side of the second annular connection portion away from the coil, the fourth annular connection portion is connected with the basket through a reinforcement member, and the pleated portion protrudes in a direction away from the lead wire (See [0055] – [0056]).
In regards to claim 11, Williamson discloses the loudspeaker, wherein a limiting groove (e.g., groove 508) is provided on a side of the support block that contacts the lead wire (See [0074]).
In regards to claim 12, Williamson discloses the loudspeaker, wherein a first length of the lead wire between the first end and the support block is greater than a second length of the lead wire between the second end and the support block (See [0050]).
In regards to claim 13, Williamson does not specifically disclose the loudspeaker, wherein a ratio of the first length to the second length is in a range of 1-12. Williamson, however, does disclose the coil 116 can include a length of wire (e.g., copper wire) would around a core to form a traditional electromagnet (See [0050]).
In regards to claim 14, Williamson discloses the loudspeaker, wherein an avoidance groove is disposed on the basket, and an orthographic projection of the lead wires along a vibration direction of the loudspeaker at least partially falls within the avoidance groove (See [0070).
In regards to claim 15, Williamson discloses the loudspeaker, wherein a support block (e.g., support structure 746) is disposed on the basket, the support block is located between the first end and the second end, a plurality of through holes spaced around the annular body are provided on the basket, and the support block is located between two adjacent through holes of the plurality of through holes (See [0083] and [0089]).
In regards to claim 16, Williamson discloses the loudspeaker, wherein the lead wire includes a first extension portion connected with the annular body and a second extension portion bent relative to the first extension portion, an orthographic projection of the first extension portion along the vibration direction of the loudspeaker at least partially falls within the avoidance groove (See [0070]).
In regards to claim 17, Williamson discloses the loudspeaker, wherein at least a portion of an orthographic projection of the second extension portion along the vibration direction of the loudspeaker close to the first extension portion falls within the avoidance groove (See [0070]).
In regards to claim 18, Williamson discloses the loudspeaker, wherein a distance between at least a portion of the second extension portion and the basket in the vibration direction gradually decreases in an extension direction away from the first extension portion (See [0070]).
In regards to claim 19, Williamson discloses the loudspeaker, wherein the basket is provided with a plurality of through holes spaced around the annular body, the avoidance groove is connected with the plurality of through holes, and an orthographic projection of the second extension portion along the vibration direction at least partially falls within the through holes (See [0083] and [0089]).
In regards to claim 20, Williamson discloses the loudspeaker, wherein the avoidance groove is close to an end of the lead wire connected with the annular body (See [0047]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Williamson et al. (US Patent 10,835,924) teach a haptic transducer device and insole for receiving the same.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THJUAN KNOWLIN ADDY whose telephone number is (571)272-7486. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM - 5:00PM Mon-Fri.
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.
/THJUAN K ADDY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Prosecution Insights