Alexander Voishvillo

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Sep 3, 2019

14308457 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Sep. 3, 2019)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
14/308,457 06/18/2014 Alexander Voishvillo P140018US 2537
116844 7590 09/03/2019
MCCOY RUSSELL LLP
806 SW Broadway
Suite 600
Portland, OR 97205
EXAMINER
NGUYEN, DUC MINH
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2651
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
09/03/2019 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
usptomail@mccrus.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
____________

Ex parte ALEXANDER VOISHVILLO
____________

Appeal 2017-009175
Application 14/308,457
Technology Center 2600
____________

Before MAHSHID D. SAADAT, CARL L. SILVERMAN, and LILAN
REN, Administrative Patent Judges.

SAADAT, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL1

Appellant2 appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Final Rejection
of claims 1–20. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We reverse.

1 An oral hearing was held for this appeal on August 15, 2019.
2 According to Appellant, the real party in interest is Harman International
Industries, Incorporated. App. Br. 3.

Appeal 2017-009175
Application 14/308,457

2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Introduction
Appellant’s disclosure is directed to phasing plugs for electroacoustic
transducers, which comprise “an inlet side, and outlet side, and a plurality of
portions having an anfractuous perimeter and forming apertures
therebetween, the plurality of portions and apertures arranged along a central
axis and extending from the inlet side to the outlet side.” See Spec. ¶ 4.
Claim 1, which is illustrative of the invention, reads as follows:
1. A phasing plug for an electroacoustic transducer,
comprising:
an inlet side;
an outlet side;
a front surface on an outer surf ace of the inlet side; and
a plurality of portions having an anfractuous perimeter
along the front surface and forming apertures therebetween, the
plurality of portions and apertures arranged along a central axis
and extending from the inlet side to the outlet side.

The Examiner’s Rejection
Claims 1–20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable
over Avera (US 6,064,745; iss. May 16, 2000), Wendell (US 2010/0329495
A1; pub. Dec. 30, 2010), and Sterling (US 2011/0168480 A1; pub. July 14,
2011. See Final Act. 3–11.

ANALYSIS
In rejecting claim 1, the Examiner finds Avera discloses all the recited
elements of the claim including a phasing plug having inlet and outlet sides,
a plurality of portions forming apertures extending from the inlet side to the
Appeal 2017-009175
Application 14/308,457

3
outlet side. Final Act. 3 (citing Avera Fig. 1). The Examiner relies on
Figure 4 of Wendell as disclosing “the portion having circular perimeter
along the front surface,” but not an anfractuous perimeter, for which the
Examiner relies on Sterling. See id. The Examiner specifically relies on
Figures 1–6 of Sterling which shows a star like opening as the recited
portions having an anfractuous perimeter. See id. The Examiner presents
the following reasoning:
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill of the
art at the time the invention was made to modify to include
such star like orifices of Sterling with the circular phase plug of
Wendell and the phase plug of Avera for the purpose of
providing a smooth output response at high efficiency levels
across the entire operating range of the compression driver (see
paragraph 8 of Wendell), and to reduce distortion and insertion
loss (see paragraph 10 of Sterling).
See Final Act. 3–4.
Appellant contends the Examiner’s rejection is in error because
Wendell’s circular-shaped aperture does not disclose an anfractuous shape,
as recited in the claim and disclosed in the Specification as not being the
same as “circular.” See App. Br. 12–15. Appellant also argues a person of
ordinary skill in the art would not combine Sterling with the horn driver of
Avera and Wendell because Sterling is directed to an acoustic lens to be
disposed across a conventional loudspeaker instead of a “compression
driver.” App. Br. 15. According to Appellant,
Sterling’s acoustic lens, for example, is disposed across a front
face of a conventional loudspeaker to modify its coverage
pattern (see at least Sterling’s Fig. 19 and associated text),
whereas the phasing plugs of Avera and Wendell are disposed
between a diaphragm and a horn (Avera, Fig. 7; Wendell, Fig.
7). While the acoustic lens modifies the coverage pattern (i.e.,
Appeal 2017-009175
Application 14/308,457

4
directivity) of the loudspeaker in Sterling, in Avera, the horn
(not the phase plug) of the compression driver controls
coverage pattern (i.e., directivity) (see Avera paragraph [0002]).
Thus, a phase plug in a compression driver serves a different
purpose and is included for a different motivation that an
acoustic lens in a loudspeaker.
App. Br. 16.3
The Examiner responds by pointing out that Wendell discloses an
alternative phasing plug including a plurality of portions having an
anfractuous perimeter as slots 104 and 106 in Figure 3B which include lines
revolving around centerline 100a of a phase plug. Ans. 4. With respect to
the combination of the references, the Examiner explains Sterling was relied
on “to show evidence of the sinuous pattern apertures of a phase plug” and
“[i]t would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to
contemplate such modification since all 3 references are about phase plug.”
Ans. 5–6.
Appellant contends the Examiner’s restated characterization of the
circular apertures of Wendell as the recited “plurality of portions having an
anfractuous perimeter” in the Answer is still unreasonable in view of the
Specification. Reply Br. 2. Additionally, Appellant argues the Examiner’s
proposed combination would not be reasonable because there are “structural
differences between a phasing plug as taught by Avera or Wendell and an
acoustic lens as taught by Sterling.” Reply Br. 4.
Based on a review of Sterling, we are persuaded by Appellant’s
contention that the Examiner has not explained how a specific aperture
pattern of an acoustic lens, which is used for changing the directivity of

3 We do not address Appellant’s other contentions because this contention is
dispositive of the issue on appeal.
Appeal 2017-009175
Application 14/308,457

5
sound radiation of loudspeakers, suggests the recited apertures on a phase
plug that extend from the inlet side to the outlet side. Similarly, the
Examiner’s explanation with respect to modifying Avera and Wendell with
Sterling does not address the deficiencies pointed out by Appellant with
respect to the “structural differences” between Sterling and the other two
references. Ans. 5–6. The disclosure of Sterling in Paragraphs 105 and 115,
at best, discloses an acoustic lens placed in front of the diaphragm of a
speaker, which is unrelated to “the plurality of portions and apertures
arranged along a central axis and extending from the inlet side to the outlet
side,” as required by claim 1.
Therefore, based on the record before us, Appellant’s arguments have
persuaded us of error in the Examiner’s position with respect to the rejection
of independent claim 1 and independent claims 15 and 18, which recite
similar limitations. We therefore do not sustain the rejection of claims 1, 15,
and 18, as well as claims 2–14, 16, 17, 19, and 20, dependent therefrom.

DECISION
We reverse the Examiner’s decision to reject claims 1–20.

REVERSED