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 .
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 and 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Pub No 2008/0308344 A1 to Kane et al. (“Kane”).
As to claim 1, Kane discloses a speaker system, comprising: an enclosure (enclosure 110 portion with edge 150, see figure 1; pg. 2, ¶ 0029); a speaker driver configured to be mounted at a front side of the enclosure, wherein a front side of the speaker driver forms a reference plane located on a coordinate plane defined by a transverse axis and a longitudinal axis (driver 140, see figure 1; pg. 2, ¶ 0029, ¶ 0031); and a housing configured to be mounted at a rear side of the enclosure and having: a slantingly disposed and circularly curved reflection chamber formed at a front side of the housing (rounded surface portion 130/120 coupled to edge 150 portion at an angle with front of speaker used as reference plane, see figure 1; pg. 2, ¶ 0029); having a three-dimensional circularly curved configuration (see figures 1-3), and at least a portion located in paths along which acoustic waves of the speaker driver propagate in the enclosure; and configured to reflect the acoustic waves of the speaker driver (see figure 1; pg. 1, ¶ 0012 - ¶ 0013; pg. 2, ¶ 0022), be tilted with respect to at least one of the transverse axis and the longitudinal axis, and form at least one of a transverse-direction angle and a longitudinal-direction angle between the circularly curved reflection chamber and the reference plane (rear portion coupled at an angle with front of speaker used as reference plane, see figure 1).
As to claim 5, Kane further discloses wherein the circularly curved reflection chamber has a circularly curved cross section, and a central angle of the cross section is less than 180 degrees (curved housing with curved cross section edge surface that couples to speaker enclosure portion, see figures 1-2; pg. 2, ¶ 0022, ¶ 0030).
As to claim 6, Kane further discloses wherein an outer contour of the housing is the same as a shape of the circularly curved reflection chamber (see figure 1; pg. 1, ¶ 0012).
As to claim 7, Kane further discloses further comprising at least one inverter tube corresponding in position to a higher side of the slanting housing, wherein each of two ends of the inverter tube has an opening, and the openings are in communication with each other (port 180, see figures 4-5; pg. 3, ¶ 0033).
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(s) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kane.
As to claim 2, Kane discloses the speaker system according to claim 1.
Kane is silent on specific angles at which the housing is positioned, therefore does not expressly disclose wherein the transverse-direction angle is greater than 0 degree and less than 90 degrees, and the longitudinal-direction angle is zero. However such a configuration is considered obvious given the teachings of Kane, and further as it has been held that changes in shape are generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). In this case, the transverse-direction angle being greater than 0 degree and less than 90 degrees, and the longitudinal-direction angle being zero, is merely a straightforward possibility which a skilled person would select based on the slanted curved housing teachings of Kane, as long as the curved housing can be coupled to the other portion of the enclosure and provides a continuously curved surface forming a closed volume for minimizing standing and diffracted waves (see figures 1-2; pg. 1, ¶ 0012 - ¶ 0013; pg. 2, ¶ 0022).
As to claim 3, Kane does not expressly disclose wherein the longitudinal-direction angle is greater than 0 degree and less than 90 degrees, and the transverse-direction angle is zero. However such a configuration is considered obvious given the teachings of Kane, and further as it has been held that changes in shape are generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). In this case, the longitudinal-direction angle being greater than 0 degree and less than 90 degrees, and the transverse-direction angle being zero, is merely a straightforward possibility which a skilled person would select based on the slanted curved housing teachings of Kane, as long as the curved housing can be coupled to the other portion of the enclosure and provides a continuously curved surface forming a closed volume for minimizing standing and diffracted waves (see figures 1-2; pg. 1, ¶ 0012 - ¶ 0013; pg. 2, ¶ 0022).
As to claim 4, Kane does not expressly disclose wherein the transverse-direction angle is greater than 0 degree and less than 90 degrees, and the longitudinal-direction angle is greater than 0 degree and less than 90 degrees. However such a configuration is considered obvious given the teachings of Kane, and further as it has been held that changes in shape are generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). In this case, the transverse-direction angle being greater than 0 degree and less than 90 degrees, and the longitudinal-direction angle being greater than 0 degree and less than 90 degrees, is merely a straightforward possibility which a skilled person would select based on the slanted curved housing teachings of Kane, as long as the curved housing can be coupled to the other portion of the enclosure and provides a continuously curved surface forming a closed volume for minimizing standing and diffracted waves (see figures 1-2; pg. 1, ¶ 0012 - ¶ 0013; pg. 2, ¶ 0022).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kane in view of US Patent Pub No 2007/0147645 A1 to Kuze et al. (“Kuze”).
As to claim 8, Kane discloses the speaker system according to claim 7.
Kane does not expressly disclose wherein the at least one inverter tube is located at the front side of the enclosure and extends into the enclosure. However such a configuration is known in the art, as taught by Kuze, which discloses a similar speaker system with a low frequency enhancing acoustic port, the port being located at the front side of the enclosure (see figure 2; pg. 4, ¶ 0052, ¶ 0055, ¶ 0057). The proposed modification is therefore considered obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the motivation being as a matter of design, depending on the size and shape of the cabinet, as well as available space in the enclosure, as long as the port provides a channel to the outside and enables phase inversion, which enhances a low frequency sound (Kuze figure 2; pg. 4, ¶ 0052, ¶ 0055, ¶ 0057).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SABRINA DIAZ whose telephone number is (571)272-1621. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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 5712727488. 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.
/SABRINA DIAZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2693
/ANTIM G SHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Prosecution Insights