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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on June 11, 2025 has been entered and considered; however, the application is not in condition for allowance because of the followings.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-2, 6 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application 2015/0123744 to Nishimura et al.
Regarding claim 1, Nishimura et al disclose a method of manufacturing a packaged acoustic wave component, the method comprising: providing a first acoustic wave device (30) including a multi-layer piezoelectric substrate structure including a first piezoelectric layer disposed over a first support layer (31) and an interdigital transducer electrode (32); and stacking the first acoustic wave device relative to a second acoustic wave device (20) such that a thermally conductive frame (25+35) extends vertically between and interconnects the first acoustic wave device and the second acoustic wave device, the thermally conductive frame extending along a periphery of the first and second acoustic wave devices (see Figs. 3A/B), the thermally conductive frame providing a thermal path for heat dissipation from the first acoustic wave device to the second acoustic wave device (see Fig. 2A).
Regarding claims 2 and 9, Nishimura et al disclose the thermally conductive frame (25+35) contacts the first support layer and seals a cavity between the first and second acoustic wave devices (31, see Fig. 2A).
Regarding claims 6 and 10, Nishimura et al disclose the first support layer is made of a material chosen from a group consisting of silicon, aluminum nitride, sapphire and quartz and the thermally conductive frame is made of metal (see Par. 60).
Regarding claim 11, Nishimura et al disclose the second acoustic wave device (20) includes one or more vias (24) and heat generated by the second acoustic wave device and received from the first acoustic wave device is removed by way of the one or more vias (see Fig. 2A).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 7 and 26-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nishimura et al in view of U.S. Patent 11,133,789 to Maki et al.
Regarding claims 26 and 34, Nishimura et al disclose all the limitations of claims 26 and 34 (see rejection of claim 1 above) except for a first functional layer interposed between the first support layer and the first piezoelectric layer (claim 26); a second piezoelectric layer disposed over a second support layer claim 34. Maki et al teach a multilayer piezoelectric substrate having a first functional layer (22) interposed between the first support layer (12”) and the first piezoelectric layer (12, see Figs. 8-9) for increasing the rate and efficiency of heat transfer out of the multilayer piezoelectric substrate (see Col. 5, lines 7-10). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention Niahimura et al by utilizing forming one or more vias and heat generated by the second acoustic wave device and received from the first acoustic wave device is removed by way of the one or more vias as well as the first and second functional layer interposed between the first and second support layer and the first and second piezoelectric layer, respectively as taught by Maki et al for increasing the rate and efficiency of heat transfer out of the multilayer piezoelectric substrate.
Regarding claims 28-31 and 36-39, see the rejections of claims 6-10 above.
Regarding claims 7, 12-13, 27, 33, 35 and 41, it would have been obvious matter of designed choice to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose any configuration to interconnect the first and second acoustic wave devices such as etching the first piezoelectric layer so that the thermally conductive frame contacts the first support layer and a temperature of the first acoustic wave device increases to no more than approximately 30 degrees Celsius during operation of the second acoustic wave device, since it has been held that where the general condition (structure elements) of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges (operation temperature) involves only routine skill in the art.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-2, 6-13 and 26-41 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 DONGHAI D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4566. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:30.
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, Sunil K. Singh can be reached at 571-272-3460. 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.
/DN/ /DONGHAI D NGUYEN/September 20, 2025 Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729