3The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claims 3 and 4 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 3 is indefinite on lines 2-3 because it is not understood what one means by “a reflecting part configured to reflect a sound after passing through the sound absorbing part to direct the sound in a desired direction.” As disclosed in reference to figure 3, the sound does not appear to pass through the sound absorbing part 202 before being reflected by the reflecting part 130 as claimed. Further it is not understood how sound can pass through the sound absorbing part 202 and then be reflected by the reflecting part 130 when the sound absorbing part 202 serves to absorb a sound emitted from the speaker as claimed in claim 2 and as disclosed by the applicant in the specification in reference to figures 2 and 3. Does one actually mean that the “reflecting part [is] configured to reflect a sound after passing by
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hatano et al. (US 2005/0163335).
Regarding claim 1, Hatano discloses a sound reproducing device (see figure 20, for example), comprising: a speaker 23a; and a sound-absorbing part 242 arranged in front of the speaker 23a and configured to control an emission angle of a sound emitted from the speaker 23a. See para. 0137, regarding “as shown by shading in FIG. 20, in order to form a path through which a sound from the vibrating surface 23a is emitted, it is possible to provide a sound absorber 242 shaped to surround the emission path. Further, the surface area and volume of the sound absorber 242 may be increased to allow the more effective absorption and attenuation of, for example, a reflected sound which may occur inside the hood and which may reduce the directivity.”
Regarding claim 2, the sound-absorbing part 242 includes a sound-absorbing material (e.g., glass wool; see para. 0136) and absorbs a sound emitted from the speaker 23a in an unnecessary direction. See para. 0137.
Regarding claim 3, a reflecting part G (e.g., glass) is configured to reflect a sound after passing through or by the sound-absorbing part 242 to direct the sound in a desired direction (e.g., in a direction toward a person P). See figure 24, for example.
Regarding claim 4, the reflecting part G includes a reflecting plate with a glass-shape. See fig. 24 and para. 149. The sound reproducing device forms a sound field that allows the sound from the speaker 23a to be perceived as a sound coming from a virtual speaker arranged outside (behind) the reflecting glass G. Note that although Hatano recites that “the person P thus feels that the sound comes from the reflector G (for example, the surface of the glass)”, this is a misleading description of what actually occurs in the physical world as depicted in figure 24. Although the sound waves bounce off the glass, the glass acts as a mirror, placing the virtual source behind the glass surface. For example, if the real speaker is 2 feet in front of the glass, the virtual speaker is 2 feet behind the glass.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oyaba et al. (US 5,117,463).
Regarding claim 1, Obyaba discloses a sound reproducing device (see figure 3, for example), comprising: a speaker 1; and a sound-absorbing part 5 arranged in front of the speaker 1 and configured to control an emission angle of a sound emitted from the speaker 1. See col. 3, lines 38-47, regarding “the arrangement of the present invention is advantageous in terms of implementing directivity in that, the attenuation of the sound pressure of the sound wave is greater in the direction of the arrow c than in the direction of the arrow b since the sound wave is absorbed by the panel more often and/or a greater number of times in the former direction than the latter direction. In other words, the attenuation increases with increasing angles ϴ relative to the reference axis, thus resulting in a very narrow directivity of the loudspeaker”.
Regarding claim 2, the sound-absorbing part 5 includes a sound-absorbing material (e.g., felt; see col. 4, lines 45-51) and absorbs a sound emitted from the speaker 1 in an unnecessary direction.
Claims 1 and 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Morikawa et al. (US 5,115,883)
Regarding claim 1, Morikawa discloses a sound reproducing device (see figure 1, for example), comprising: a speaker 10; and a sound-absorbing part 14 arranged in front of the speaker 10 and configured to control an emission angle of a sound emitted from the speaker 10. See col. 4, lines 6-9, regarding “only the sound waves which propagate along the axis of the speaker is generated from the speaker so that a narrow directivity of the sound waves is enhanced.”
Regarding claim 2, the sound-absorbing part 14 includes a sound-absorbing material (e.g., glass wool; see col. 3, lines 16-17) and absorbs a sound emitted from the speaker 10 in an unnecessary direction.
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.
Claims 5-7, 9, 10, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thigpen (US 7,343,020) considered with Hatano et al. (US 2005/0163335).
Thigpen discloses an acoustic system or a mobile device (see figure 4, for example), comprising: a plurality of sound producing units 40, 140 provided for each seat in an interior of the mobile device (e.g., vehicle), wherein each sound producing unit 40, 140 includes a speaker. Thigpen discloses the invention as claimed, but fails to specifically teach that each sound reproducing unit 40, 140 further includes a sound-absorbing part that is arranged in front of the speaker and absorbs an emission sound in an unnecessary direction.
Hatano discloses a sound reproducing device (see figure 20, for example), comprising a speaker 23a, and a sound-absorbing part 242 arranged in front of the speaker 23a and configured to control an emission angle of a sound emitted from the speaker 23a, in the analogous art of directional transducers, for the purpose of enhancing the directivity of the emitted sound produced by the sound reproducing device which is in the form of a cone-type dynamic loudspeaker (see para. 0137).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Thigpen, in view of Hatano, such that each sound producing unit 40, 140 of Thigpen (fig. 4) is replaced with the sound reproducing device of Hatano (fig. 20), wherein each sound reproducing unit includes a speaker 23a and a sound-absorbing part 242 that is arranged in front of the speaker 23a and absorbs an emission sound in an unnecessary direction. A practitioner in the art would have been motivated to do this for the purpose of using a cone-type dynamic loudspeaker, as taught by Hatano, as the sound reproducing units 40, 140 in the vehicle of Thigpen, wherein the cone-type dynamic loudspeakers are able to enhance the directivity of the emitted sound as desired by the invention of Thigpen.
Regarding claims 6 and 13, at least some of the plurality of sound producing units are arranged such that emission sounds are reflected by a windshield 20, 80 to be directed to a head section of an occupant sitting in a seat. See Thigpen, figure 1, for example. See also, Thigpen, fig. 4, and col. 6, lines 5-13.
Regarding claim 7, the plurality of sound producing units provided for each seat includes two left and right sound reproducing units provided for each seat. See Thigpen, figs. 1 and 4, for example. The left and right sound reproducing units are arranged such that an emission direction is inclined to be directed toward an occupant sitting in a corresponding seat.
Regarding claim 9, each of the plurality of sound reproducing units provided for each seat includes at least one of a full-frequency range speaker, a high-frequency range speaker, and a mid-frequency range speaker.
Regarding claim 10, at least some of the plurality of sound reproducing units are incorporated in a dashboard 30. See Thigpen, figures 1 and 4, for example.
Claims 8, 11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thigpen (US 7,343,020) considered with Hatano et al. (US 2005/0163335), as applied to claim 5 and claim 12 above, in further view of Subat et al. (US 2017/0267138).
Thigpen, as modified and applied to claim 5 and claim 12 above, discloses the invention as claimed, but fails to specifically teach either that each of the plurality of sound reproducing units is used as an assist speaker for a stereo speaker incorporated in a shoulder section or a headrest of a seat, or that at least some of the plurality of sound reproducing units are incorporated in a door or a pillar. Subat discloses a vehicle including a plurality of sound reproducing units (e.g., speakers) which are incorporated in headrest of seats and which are further incorporated in doors of the vehicle, in the same field of endeavor, for the purpose of providing near-field acoustic output through the speakers in the headrest of the seats which can be mixed in accordance with acoustic outputs radiated from the speakers disposed in the doors to produce high quality acoustic experience for passengers of the vehicle (see para. 0047-0048).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify Thigpen, in view of Subat, such that each of the plurality of sound reproducing units is used as an assist speaker for a stereo speaker incorporated in a shoulder section or a headrest of a seat, or that at least some of the plurality of sound reproducing units are incorporated in a door or a pillar. A practitioner in the art would have been motivated to do this for the purpose of providing near-field acoustic output through the speakers having high directivity in the headrest of the seats which can be mixed in accordance with acoustic outputs radiated from the speakers having high directivity disposed in the doors to produce a high quality acoustic experience for passengers of the vehicle.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references cited on the PTO-892 each disclose a sound reproducing device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL W HUBER whose telephone number is (571)272-7588.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Duc Nguyen, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-7503. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/PAUL W HUBER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2691
pwh
August 1, 2026
Prosecution Insights