Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 16/669,251

METHOD OF MANUFACTURING PIEZOELECTRIC MICROACTUATORS HAVING WRAP-AROUND ELECTRODES

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Oct 30, 2019
Priority
Oct 04, 2012 — provisional 61/709,573 +6 more
Examiner
CAZAN, LIVIUS RADU
Art Unit
3729
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Magnecomp Corporation
OA Round
11 (Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
12-13
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allowance Rate
596 granted / 949 resolved
-7.2% vs TC avg
Strong +26% interview lift
Without
With
+25.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
38 currently pending
Career history
993
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
63.3%
+23.3% vs TC avg
§102
12.9%
-27.1% vs TC avg
§112
20.8%
-19.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 949 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 3/13/2026 has been entered. 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. Claims 19-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hirano (US2006/0044699A1). Hirano discloses the claimed invention as follows (refer to Fig. 4): Claim 19. An actuated suspension (see “head-suspension assembly” in [0024]), comprising: a piezoelectric microactuator (180) affixed to the suspension, the piezoelectric microactuator comprising a bottom electrode (186) disposed solely on a first side of the piezoelectric microactuator and directed toward the suspension (the substrate 102 is attached to the suspension; see [0024]) and extending along less than an entirety of the first side (bottom side) of the piezoelectric microactuator, the first side of the piezoelectric microactuator comprising a side disposed adjacent to a first portion (above 120) of adhesive (“electrically conductive epoxy” in last sentence of [0026]) and a second portion (above 122) of adhesive (“electrically conductive epoxy” in last sentence of [0026]), and a wrap-around electrode (184) extending along an entirety of a second side (upper side) of the piezoelectric microactuator facing away from the suspension and disposed opposite to the first side and wrapping around a first end (above 120) of the piezoelectric microactuator via a conductive side surface (see annotate figure below) at the first end of the piezoelectric microactuator such that a portion of the wrap-around electrode is also disposed on the first side, wherein the bottom electrode and a first end of the wrap-around electrode each are disposed on the first side of the piezoelectric microactuator, and wherein a first end of the bottom electrode and a second end of the wrap-around electrode terminate at opposing sides of a second end (above 122) of the piezoelectric microactuator, thereby exposing the second end of the piezoelectric microactuator via a cut made at the second end of the piezoelectric microactuator to separate the piezoelectric microactuator from another piezoelectric microactuator (the language in italics is a product-by-process limitation not limiting the structure of the microactuator); the first portion of adhesive disposed at the first end of the first side of the piezoelectric microactuator between the wrap around electrode and a first contact pad (120) or a second contact pad (see [0026]); the second portion of adhesive disposed at the second end of the first side of the piezoelectric microactuator between the bottom electrode and the other of the first contact pad and the second contact pad (122; see [0026]). PNG media_image1.png 351 638 media_image1.png Greyscale Claim 20. The actuated suspension of claim 19, wherein the first portion of adhesive and the second portion of adhesive are partially cured. Specifically, the adhesive is electrically conductive adhesive. Clearly, at some point prior to being fully cured, the epoxy adhesive is in a partly-cured state Claim 21. The actuated suspension of claim 19, wherein the first portion of adhesive and the second portion of adhesive are disposed on at least two ends of the microactuator (see [0026]). Claim 22. The actuated suspension of claim 19, wherein a third portion of adhesive is disposed on a side of the microactuator between the first portion of adhesive and the second portion of adhesive. For example, the adhesive disposed on pad 120 can be considered as comprising a more distal portion of adhesive, farther from pad 122 and being the claimed first portion of adhesive, and a more proximal portion of adhesive disposed closer to the pad 122, this proximal portion of adhesive being the claimed third portion of adhesive. Claim 23. The actuated suspension of claim 19, wherein the microactuator includes multiple layers of PZT wafer material. See “multilayer PZT actuator” in [0025]. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 19-23 have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues “in the rejection of claim 19, the Office asserted that the first electrode 184 of Hirano corresponds to the claimed ‘wrap-around electrode.’ Final Office Action at 2. Without acquiescing to the Office's assertion, Applicant respectfully submits that Hirano merely describes the first electrode 184 as ‘electrically conductive layer’ (see Hirano, paragraph [0025]) but is silent about the first electrode 184 includes a conductive side surface through which the wrap-around electrode wraps around.” The examiner respectfully disagrees. Please see the above annotated figure. Referring to Fig. 16G, 1650 corresponds to the claimed conductive side surface. It is readily apparent the electrically conductive layer defining electrode 184 also includes a conductive side surface, as identified in the above annotated image. Conclusion All claims are identical to or patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with claims in the application prior to the entry of the submission under 37 CFR 1.114 (that is, restriction (including a lack of unity of invention) would not be proper) and all claims could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the application prior to entry under 37 CFR 1.114. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LIVIUS R CAZAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8032. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday noon-8:30 pm ET. 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, Thomas Hong can be reached at 571-272-0993. 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. /LIVIUS R. CAZAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 23 earlier events
Apr 25, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 28, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102
Aug 06, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 18, 2025
Final Rejection mailed — §102
Mar 13, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 25, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 27, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12641766
IC CHIP-MOUNTING DEVICE AND IC CHIP-MOUNTING METHOD
3y 11m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12628271
ELECTRONIC COMPONENT
3y 2m to grant Granted May 12, 2026
Patent 12620526
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING MULTILAYER COIL COMPONENT
4y 2m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12620878
METHOD FOR STATOR ALIGNMENT TO THE MOTOR HOUSING
3y 8m to grant Granted May 05, 2026
Patent 12614958
STATOR ASSEMBLY APPARATUS AND STATOR ASSEMBLY METHOD
3y 5m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

12-13
Expected OA Rounds
63%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+25.5%)
3y 5m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 949 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month