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 1-9 are presented for examination.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d).
Inventorship
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1,2 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) and U.S.C 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Dezhang (WIPO PCT WO 2022143038A1 hereinafter “Dezhang”).
Re-claim 1, Dezhang discloses a vibration motor (fig.2), comprising: a stator (3) comprising: a housing (1) having a receiving room (inside 1); and at least one winding assembly (3 is assembly) received in the receiving room (inside 1), the winding assembly (3 fig.2 ) arranged around a first direction (up and side direction) and fixed to the housing (1); at least one elastic member (71,72); and a vibrator (annotated fig.2), an end portion of the vibrator in the first direction (annotated fig.2) connected to the housing through the elastic member (72), the vibrator (annotated fig.2) suspended in the receiving room, the vibrator at least partially surrounded (see fig.2) within the winding assembly (3), the vibrator comprising: a first pole plate (51); a second pole plate (52) spaced apart from the first pole plate along the first direction (annotated fig.2); at least two magnets (61,62) located between the first pole plate and the second pole plate (51,52) along the first direction (annotated fig.2), each magnet (61,62) magnetized along the first direction (annotated fig.2), and magnetization directions (se fig.2, arrows of magnets) of the two magnets (annotated fig.2) being opposite (SN, then NS in Fig.2 of magnets 61,62); and at least one third pole plate (4) arranged between the two magnets (61,62).
PNG
media_image1.png
645
709
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re-claim 2, Dezhang discloses the vibration motor as described in claim 1, wherein the vibration motor comprises two elastic members (71,72) with a first elastic member (71) and a second elastic member (72), the first elastic member (71) fixed to one end of the housing (1) along the first direction (annotated fig.2) and connected to one end of the vibrator (annotated fig.2), and the second elastic member (72) fixed to the other end of the housing (1) along the first direction (annotated fig.2) and connected to the other end of the vibrator (see fig.2).
Re-claim 9, Dezhang discloses the vibration motor as described in claim 1, wherein the housing is an integrated structure, or the housing is assembled from at least two housing parts (1, is made as integrated structure of at least 2 parts, at top and bottom).
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 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dezhang in view of Cao (US PG Pub 20240275251A1 hereinafter “Cao”).
Re-claim 3, Dezhang discloses the vibration motor as described in claim 2.
Dezhang fails to explicitly teach wherein the stator comprises a plurality of winding assemblies arranged insequence along the first direction, the winding assemblies arranged coaxially, current directions of the adjacent winding assemblies being opposite.
However, Cao teaches wherein the stator comprises a plurality of winding assemblies arranged insequence (2, see fig.1) along the first direction (up down direction), the winding assemblies arranged coaxially (see fig.1), current directions (see fig.15, showing directions of current input opposite) opposite directions of coil)of the adjacent winding assemblies being opposite (see fig.15).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the inventio to modify the stator of Dezhang wherein the stator comprises a plurality of winding assemblies arranged insequence along the first direction, the winding assemblies arranged coaxially, current directions of the adjacent winding assemblies being opposite as shown by Cao to control of direction of the magnetic field generated by winding direction and flow of current, providing vibration and reset capabilities and improve magnetization saturation and better magnet magnetization (Cao, P[0122-0123]).
PNG
media_image2.png
402
381
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
363
715
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Re-claim 4, Dezhang discloses the vibration motor as described in claim 3.
Dezhang fails to explicitly teach wherein a number of third pole plates is the same as the number of winding assemblies, and each winding assembly is wound around the corresponding third pole plate.
However, Cao teaches wherein a number of third pole plates (39) is the same as the number of winding assemblies (2, see fig.21), and each winding assembly (2) is wound around the corresponding third pole plate (see fig.21, 2 is around 39).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the inventio to modify the stator of Dezhang wherein a number of third pole plates is the same as the number of winding assemblies, and each winding assembly is wound around the corresponding third pole plate as shown by Cao to control of direction of the magnetic field generated by winding direction and flow of current, providing vibration and reset capabilities and improve magnetization saturation and better magnet magnetization (Cao, P[0122-0123]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Re-claim 5, recites “inter alia” “ vibration motor as described in claim 2, wherein the housing is a hollow structure with a first opening and a second opening, the first opening and the second opening arranged opposite to each other in the first direction, a hollow part of the housing designed as the receiving room; the first elastic member is set corresponding to the first opening, both ends of the first elastic member fixed to the housing, and a middle of the first elastic member fixed to the first pole plate; the second elastic member is set corresponding to the second opening, both ends of the second elastic member fixed to the housing, and the middle of the second elastic member fixed to the second pole plate.”
The claimed structure with claim 2 and 1 combined is not taught or suggested by any of the prior art of record, ip.com search, ai search or any search, therefore is allowable.
Claims 6-8 are rejected based on dependency from claim 5.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure in PTO892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAGED M ALMAWRI whose telephone number is (313)446-6565. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Thursday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christopher M. Koehler can be reached on 5712723560. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MAGED M ALMAWRI/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
Prosecution Insights