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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 December 8th, 2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on December 8th, 2025. Claims 4 and 10-16 have been canceled as such claims 1-3, 5-9, and 17-20 are pending consideration in this Office Action.
Response to Amendments
The objections to the disclosure are withdrawn in light of the amendments.
The rejections pursuant to 112(b) with respect to claims 17-20 are withdrawn in light of the amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-3 and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Amended claim 1 recites “wherein the fluid barrier comprises an elastomer having an acoustic impedance in the range of 0.7 to 2.0 MRayl”. While the drawings of the disclosure do show an acoustic impedance of materials such as polyurethane, PDMS, and silicone with a MRayl of 0.76, 1.03834, and 1.782 respectively (see Fig. 10 of Applicant’s drawings), these measurements do not cover and fully encompass the range of 0.7 to 2.0 MRayl. Additionally, there is no further mention in the specification or the drawings to support the range of 0.7 to 2.0 MRayl. Claims 2, 3, and 5-9 are also rejected due to being dependent on claim 1.
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 1-3, 5-9, and 17-20 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 1 recites the limitation "the acoustic mismatch" in line 21. While the claim does state an acoustic impedance that is highly mismatched, the claim does not provide antecedence for the term acoustic mismatch. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is recommended to change “the acoustic mismatch” to “an acoustic mismatch”.
Claims 2, 3, and 5-9 are also rejected due to being dependent on claim 1.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the acoustic mismatch" in lines 17-18. While the claim does state an acoustic impedance that is highly mismatched, the claim does not provide antecedence for the term acoustic mismatch. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is recommended to change “the acoustic mismatch” to “an acoustic mismatch”.
Claims 18-20 are also rejected due to being dependent on claim 17.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-10 of the remarks under IV. Rejection of Claims under 102 and 103, filed 12/08/2025, with respect to the 103 rejections of claims 1-3, 5-9, and 17-20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 103 rejections of claims 1-3, 5-9, and 17-20 have been withdrawn.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5-9, and 17-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Regarding claim 1, the closest prior art of record is Yeo (US 20220401662) in view of Minami (CA 3097177) and further in view of Muramatsu (US 11097544), Huang (US 8573060), Nuno (WO 2009013951) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Nuno), and Huang Q (Article: Influence of Waterproof Films on the Atomization Behavior of Surface Acoustic Waves)
In particular Yeo discloses
A surface acoustic wave atomizer system (Fig. 1A; nebulizer: Paragraph 0115, Lines 1-2) for use in atomizing a medicament for patient delivery (Paragraph 0130, Lines 1-9 and Paragraph 0164, Lines16-28; art includes atomizing medication that needs to be inhaled), the system comprising:
An atomizer engine (see modified Fig. 11 below) comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
306
584
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a piezoelectric substrate (Fig. 1A and 11; piezoelectric substrate 2; Paragraph 0115, Lines 2-4; Paragraph 0175, Lines 1-4);
at least one set of interdigitated transducers (IDTs) (Fig. 11; electroacoustic transducers 48,50; Paragraph 0137, Lines 13-19 and 53-55) positioned on a first side of the substrate (Fig. 1A; transducer surface 2a; Paragraph 0115, Lines 4-6);
an atomization region (Figs. 11; atomisation zone 45; Paragraph 0138, Lines 5-8) positioned on the first side of the substrate (Fig. 1A and 11; transducer surface 2a; Paragraph 0115, Lines 4-6; Paragraph 0175, Lines 1-4) adjacent to the at least one set of IDTs (Figs. 11; electroacoustic transducers 48,50; Paragraph 0138, Lines 5-10);
a fluid barrier (Fig. 11; barrier structure 46; Paragraph 140, Lines 1-3) surrounding (Paragraph 0140, Lines 13-17) the atomization region (Fig. 11; atomisation zone 45; Paragraph 0140, Lines 13-17) on the substrate (Figs. 1A and 11; transducer surface 2a; Paragraph 0140, Lines 3-6) and forming a seal (Fig. 11; barrier structure 46; Paragraph 140, Lines 6-13) against the substrate (Fig. 11; transducer surface 2a; Paragraph 0140, Lines 9-13)
wherein the fluid barrier (Fig. 11; barrier structure 46; Paragraph 140, Lines 1-3) is positioned to prevent liquid (Paragraph 140, Lines 3-6) in the atomization region (Fig. 11; atomisation zone 45; Paragraph 140, Lines 13-20) from coming into contact with the IDTs (Fig. 11; electroacoustic transducers 48, 50; Paragraph 140, Lines 13-17) on the first side of the substrate (Figs. 1A and 11; transducer surface 2a; Paragraph 0140, Lines 9-13).
Yeo does not disclose a top plate positioned over the first side of the substrate and enclosing a portion of the substrate other than the atomization region, such that the at least one set of IDTs are enclosed under the top plate, the top plate comprising a rigid material and being spaced from the first side of the piezoelectric substrate to define an air gap above the IDTs; the fluid barrier forming a seal against the top plate; and wherein the fluid barrier comprises an elastomer having an acoustic impedance in the range of 0.7 to 2.0 MRayl and a Shore A durometer between 30 and 70, and is comprised of a material having an acoustic impedance that is highly mismatched to both the piezoelectric substrate and to the top plate, the acoustic mismatch between the fluid barrier and each of the piezoelectric substrate and the top plate being greater than 50%.
Minami discloses an inhaler with a surface acoustic wave-atomizer that has
a top plate (Fig. 8; separation wall 37; Paragraph 0131, Lines 1-3) positioned over the first side of the substrate (Fig. 8; front surface 31F of piezoelectric element substrate; Paragraph 0131, Lines 1-4) and enclosing a portion of the substrate other than the atomization region (Fig. 8; atomization zone relative to the penetrated aperture 34: Paragraph 0132, Lines 1-5), such that the at least one set of IDTs (Fig. 8; pairs of interlocking comb-shaped metallic electrodes 33; Paragraph 0131, Lines 4-9) are enclosed under the top plate (Fig. 8; separation wall 37; Paragraph 0131, Lines 1-4), the top plate being spaced from the first side of the piezoelectric substrate to define an air gap above the IDTS (see Fig. 8; separation wall 37 is spaced aways from the front surface 31F of piezoelectric element substrate creating a gap above the IDTS; Paragraph 0131);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the nebulizer of Yeo with the separation wall of Minami to suppress the deterioration of the pairs of interlocking comb shaped metallic electrodes caused by adherence of liquid by separating the liquid exposed by the penetrated aperture from the disposition portion while avoiding a situation where propagation of the SAW is blocked by the separation wall (Minami: Paragraph 0131, Lines 3-8). Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have part of the barrier structure be attached under the separation wall of Minami since there is a gap between the separation wall and the front surface of the piezoelectric element substrate.
It directly follows that the resultant nebulizer of Yeo combined with the top plate of Minami would meet the claimed structural limitations since:
Yeo combined with Minami discloses
a fluid barrier (Yeo: Fig. 11; barrier structure 46; Paragraph 140, Lines 1-3; Minami: see modified Fig. 8) forming a seal (Yeo: Paragraph 0140, Lines 13-17) against the substrate (Yeo: Fig. 11; transducer surface 2a; Paragraph 0140, Lines 9-13; Minami: see modified Fig. 8) and the top plate (Minami: see modified Fig. 8; separation wall 37; Paragraph 0131, Lines 1-4),
PNG
media_image2.png
266
440
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The modified device of Yeo does not disclose the top plate comprising a rigid material; and wherein the fluid barrier comprises an elastomer having an acoustic impedance in the range of 0.7 to 2.0 MRayl and a Shore A durometer between 30 and 70, and is comprised of a material having an acoustic impedance that is highly mismatched to both the piezoelectric substrate and to the top plate, the acoustic mismatch between the fluid barrier and each of the piezoelectric substrate and the top plate being greater than 50%.
Huang discloses a microfluidic device with a surface acoustic wave generator
wherein the fluid barrier (Fig. 8A; channel 302; Col. 4, Lines 40-48) comprises an elastomer having an acoustic impedance in the range of 0.7-2.0 MRayl and a Shore A durometer between 30 and 70 (PDMS; Col. 14, Lines 32-42; according to applicants table and specification PDMS has properties of 1.0384 MRayl and a durometer that is in between 30-70 Shore A; see Fig. 10 and [0046]) and is comprised of a material (PDMS; Col. 14, Lines 32-42) having an acoustic impedance that is highly mismatched (Col. 13, Lines 34-36; PDMS has a low acoustic impedance similar to water while lithium niobate has a high acoustic impedance; therefore, a high mismatch in acoustic impedance as shown by (Huang Q: highlighted paragraph; page 1 and 2) to the substrate (see modified Fig. 8A below; piezoelectric substrate; Col. 4, Lines 32-39)
PNG
media_image3.png
370
489
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the barrier structure of Yeo to be PDMS like in Huang in order to have a high mismatch of acoustic impedance in order to generate acoustic flow that will allow the fluid to vibrate and atomize (as evidence by Huang Q: highlighted paragraph, Pages 1 and 2).
It directly follows that the resultant fluid barrier of the modified device of Yeo combined with the PDMS material of Huang would meet the claimed structural limitations since:
the acoustic mismatch between the fluid barrier (Yeo: fluid barrier; Huang: PDMS; Col. 14, Lines 32-42) and the piezoelectric substrate (Yeo: the piezoelectric substrate is formed of lithium niobate; see Paragraph 0051) and being greater than 50% (see applicants Fig. 10 which shows the mismatch between lithium niobate and PDMS being 79.8221%).
Huang does not disclose the top plate comprising a rigid material; wherein the fluid is comprised of a material having an acoustic impedance that is highly mismatched to the top plate, the acoustic mismatch between the fluid barrier and the top plate being greater than 50%.
Nuno discloses an ultrasonic mist generator that has
the top plate comprising a rigid material (a metal film 7 that covers the ultrasonic transducer 5 (Fig. 1; Page 2, Paragraph 9, Lines 1-5 and Page 3, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-3)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the separation wall of the modified device of Yeo to be made of a metal like the metal film in Nuno in order to resonate with high efficiency at a desired frequency of the ultrasonic vibration block (Nuno: Page 2, Paragraph 9, Lines 1-5).
It directly follows that the resultant separation wall of the modified device of Yeo modified with the metal film of Nuno would meet the claimed structural limitations since:
wherein the fluid barrier (Yeo: Fig. 8A; channel 302; Col. 4, Lines 40-48) is comprised of a material (Yeo: PDMS; Col. 14, Lines 32-42) having an acoustic impedance that is highly mismatched (Yeo: Col. 13, Lines 34-36; PDMS has a low acoustic impedance similar to water while metal has a high acoustic impedance; therefore, a high mismatch in acoustic impedance as shown by (Huang Q: highlighted paragraph; page 1 and 2) to the top plate (Nuno: Fig. 1; metal film 7; Page 2, Paragraph 9, Lines 1-5 and Page 3, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-3).
However, Yeo, Minami, Huang, Huang Q, and Nuno fails to teach disclose or render obvious “the acoustic mismatch between the fluid barrier and the top plate being greater than 50%”, in addition to other limitations.
Claims 2, 3, and 5-9 are allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 112(b).
Regarding claim 17, the closest prior art of record is Yeo (US 20220401662) in view of Minami (CA 3097177) and further in view of Huang (US 8573060), Nuno (WO 2009013951) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Nuno), and Huang Q (Article: Influence of Waterproof Films on the Atomization Behavior of Surface Acoustic Waves).
In particular, Yeo discloses
A surface acoustic wave atomizer system (Fig. 1A; nebulizer: Paragraph 0115, Lines 1-2) for atomizing a liquid medicament for patient delivery (Paragraph 0130, Lines 1-9; art is atomizing medication that needs to be inhaled), the system (Fig. 1A; nebulizer: Paragraph 0115, Lines 1-2) comprising:
a piezoelectric substrate (Fig. 1A and 11; piezoelectric substrate 2; Paragraph 0115, Lines 2-4; Paragraph 0175, Lines 1-4) having a side (Fig. 1A and 11; transducer surface 2a; Paragraph 0115, Lines 4-6; Paragraph 0175, Lines 1-4) with at least one interdigitated transducer (Fig. 11; electroacoustic transducers 48,50; Paragraph 0137, Lines 13-19 and 53-55) and an atomization region (Figs. 11; atomisation zone 45; Paragraph 0138, Lines 5-8) separate from the at least one interdigitated transducer (Figs. 11; electroacoustic transducers 48,50; Paragraph 0138, Lines 5-10);
a fluid barrier (Fig. 11; barrier structure 46; Paragraph 140, Lines 1-3) surrounding the atomization region (Fig. 11; atomisation zone 45; Paragraph 0140, Lines 13-17) on the substrate (Figs. 1A and 11; transducer surface 2a; Paragraph 0140, Lines 3-6),
the fluid barrier (Fig. 11; barrier structure 46; Paragraph 140, Lines 1-3) separating the at least one interdigitated transducer (Figs. 11; electroacoustic transducers 48,50; Paragraph 0138, Lines 13-17) from the atomization region (Fig. 11; atomisation zone 45; Paragraph 140, Lines 13-20);
Yeo does not disclose a top plate spaced away from the side of the substrate and enclosing the side of the substrate other than the atomization region, wherein the substrate is captured between the top plate and a base; the fluid barrier attached to the top plate, the fluid barrier defining an atomization path from the atomization region through the top plate, a fluid supply channel extending through a wall of the fluid barrier from a first fluid channel opening in a portion of the fluid barrier outside of the top plate to a fluid orifice in the fluid barrier oriented toward the atomizing region and between an outside of the top plate and the side of the substrate; and wherein the fluid barrier is comprised of a material having an acoustic impedance that is highly mismatched to both the substrate and to the top plate, the acoustic mismatch between the fluid barrier and each of the piezoelectric substrate and the top plate being greater than 50%, and that is highly matched to the liquid medicament.
Minami discloses inhaler with a surface acoustic wave-atomizer that has
a top plate (Fig. 8; separation wall 37; Paragraph 0131, Lines 1-3) spaced away (Fig. 8; gap; Paragraph 0131, Lines 1-3 and Lines 7-9) from the side of the substrate (Fig. 8; front surface 31F; Paragraph 0131, Lines 1-3) and enclosing the side of the substrate (Fig. 8; front surface 31F; Paragraph 0131, Lines 1-3) other than the atomization region (Fig. 8; atomization zone relative to the penetrated aperture 34; Paragraph 0132, Lines 1-5),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the nebulizer of Yeo with the separation wall of Minami to have a suppress the deterioration of the pairs of interlocking comb shaped metallic electrodes caused by adherence of liquid while avoiding a situation where propagation of the SAW is blocked by the separation wall (Minami: Paragraph 0131, Lines 3-6). Additionally, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have part of the fluid barrier attached under the separation wall of Minami since there is a gap between the separation wall and the front surface of the piezoelectric element substrate.
It directly follows that the resultant nebulizer of Yeo combined with the separation wall of Minami would meet the claimed structural limitations since:
Yeo combined with Minami discloses
wherein the substrate (Yeo: Figs. 1A and 11; transducer surface 2a; Paragraph 0140, Lines 9-13; Paragraph 0175, Lines 1-4; Minami: see modified Fig. 8 below) is captured between the top plate (Minami: Fig. 8; separation wall 37; Paragraph 0131, Lines 1-3) and a base (Figs. 1 and 2; mount 1; Paragraph 0141, Lines 1-5; Paragraph 0175, Lines 1-4);
the fluid barrier (Yeo: Fig. 11; barrier structure 46; Paragraph 0140, Lines 1-3; Minami see modified Fig. 8 below) attached (see modified Fig. 8 below) to the top plate (Minami: see modified Fig. 8 below Fig. 8; separation wall 37; Paragraph 0131, Lines 1-3),
PNG
media_image2.png
266
440
media_image2.png
Greyscale
the fluid barrier (Yeo: Fig. 11; barrier structure 46; Paragraph 0140, Lines 1-3) defining an atomization path (area above the atomisation zone 45) from the atomization region (Yeo: Fig. 11; atomisation zone 45; Paragraph 0140, Lines 13-17) through (Yeo: see modified Fig. 11 below; atomization goes through the space between the separation wall) the top plate (Yeo: see modified Fig. 11 below; Minami: Fig. 8; separation wall 37; Paragraph 0132, Lines 1-5; covers the electrodes/transducers).
PNG
media_image4.png
231
470
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The modified device of Yeo does not disclose a fluid supply channel extending through a wall of the fluid barrier from a first fluid channel opening in a portion of the fluid barrier outside of the top plate to a fluid orifice in the fluid barrier oriented toward the atomizing region and between an outside of the top plate and the side of the substrate; and wherein the fluid barrier is comprised of a material having an acoustic impedance that is highly mismatched to both the substrate and to the top plate, the acoustic mismatch between the fluid barrier and each of the piezoelectric substrate and the top plate being greater than 50%, and that is highly matched to the liquid medicament.
Muramatsu discloses a liquid discharging apparatus with piezoelectric elements with a fluid supply channel (see modified Fig. 20 below)
PNG
media_image5.png
356
420
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the barrier structure of Yeo to have a channel in the liquid containing chamber like Muramatsu in order to connect the first liquid delivering unit directly to the atomizing region in the liquid containing chamber while being able prevent liquid from contacting the electrodes (Col. 19, Line 67 and Col. 20, Lines 1-4).
It directly follows that the resultant modified device of Yeo combined with the channel of Muramatsu would meet the claimed structural limitations since:
The combined result of the modified device of Yeo and Muramatsu discloses
a fluid supply channel (see modified Fig. 20 below) extending through a wall of the fluid barrier (Fig. 20; liquid containing chamber 3140; Col. 52, Lines 42-47; Col. 19, Lines 59-67 and Col. 20, Lines 1-4) from a first fluid channel opening (see modified Fig. 20 below) in a portion of the fluid barrier (Fig. 20; liquid containing chamber 3140; Col. 52, Lines 42-47; Col. 19, Lines 59-67 and Col. 20, Lines 1-4) outside of the top plate (see modified Fig. 20 below; Minami: separation wall 37; Paragraph 0131, Lines 1-3) to a fluid orifice (see modified Fig. 20 below) in the fluid barrier (Fig. 20; liquid containing chamber 3140; Col. 52, Lines 42-47; Col. 19, Lines 59-67 and Col. 20, Lines 1-4) oriented toward the atomizing region (see modified Fig. 20 below; Col. 53, Lines 15-21) and between an outside of the top plate (see modified Fig. 20 below; Minami: separation wall 37; Paragraph 0131, Lines 1-3) and the side of the substrate (see modified Fig. 20 below; first side of piezoelectric material 3130; Col. 53, Lines 48-50);
PNG
media_image6.png
404
546
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Muramatsu does not disclose wherein the fluid barrier is comprised of a material having an acoustic impedance that is highly mismatched to both the substrate and to the top plate, the acoustic mismatch between the fluid barrier and each of the piezoelectric substrate and the top plate being greater than 50%, and that is highly matched to the liquid medicament.
Huang discloses a microfluidic device with a surface acoustic wave generator
wherein the fluid barrier (Fig. 8A; channel 302; Col. 4, Lines 40-48) is comprised of a material (PDMS; Col. 14, Lines 32-42) having an acoustic impedance that is highly mismatched (Col. 13, Lines 34-36; PDMS is acoustically transparent and has a low acoustic impedance similar to water while lithium niobate has a high acoustic impedance; therefore, a high mismatch in acoustic impedance as shown by (Huang Q: highlighted paragraph; page 1 and 2) to the substrate (see modified Fig. 8A below; piezoelectric substrate; Col. 4, Lines 32-39), and that is highly matched to fluid (PDMS is acoustically transparent and has a low acoustic impedance similar to water; therefore, being highly matched) in the atomizing region (see modified Fig. 8A below).
PNG
media_image3.png
370
489
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the barrier structure of Yeo to be PDMS like in Huang in order to have a high mismatch of acoustic impedance in order to generate acoustic flow that will allow the fluid to vibrate and atomize (as evidence by Huang Q: highlighted paragraph, Pages 1 and 2).
It directly follows that the resultant fluid barrier of the modified device of Yeo combined with the PDMS material of Huang would meet the claimed structural limitations since:
the acoustic mismatch between the fluid barrier (Yeo: fluid barrier; Huang: PDMS; Col. 14, Lines 32-42) and the piezoelectric substrate (Yeo: the piezoelectric substrate is formed of lithium niobate; see Paragraph 0051) and being greater than 50% (see applicants Fig. 10 which shows the mismatch between lithium niobate and PDMS being 79.8221%).
Huang does not disclose the top plate comprising a rigid material; wherein the fluid is comprised of a material having an acoustic impedance that is highly mismatched to the top plate, the acoustic mismatch between the fluid barrier and the top plate being greater than 50%.
Nuno discloses an ultrasonic mist generator that has
the top plate comprising a rigid material (a metal film 7 that covers the ultrasonic transducer 5 (Fig. 1; Page 2, Paragraph 9, Lines 1-5 and Page 3, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-3)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the separation wall of the modified device of Yeo to be made of a metal like the metal film in Nuno in order to resonate with high efficiency at a desired frequency of the ultrasonic vibration block (Nuno: Page 2, Paragraph 9, Lines 1-5).
It directly follows that the resultant separation wall of the modified device of Yeo modified with the metal film of Nuno would meet the claimed structural limitations since:
wherein the fluid barrier (Yeo: Fig. 8A; channel 302; Col. 4, Lines 40-48) is comprised of a material (Yeo: PDMS; Col. 14, Lines 32-42) having an acoustic impedance that is highly mismatched (Yeo: Col. 13, Lines 34-36; PDMS has a low acoustic impedance similar to water while metal has a high acoustic impedance; therefore, a high mismatch in acoustic impedance as shown by (Huang Q: highlighted paragraph; page 1 and 2) to the top plate (Nuno: Fig. 1; metal film 7; Page 2, Paragraph 9, Lines 1-5 and Page 3, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-3).
However, Yeo, Minami, Muramatsu, Huang, Huang Q, and Nuno fails to teach disclose or render obvious “the acoustic mismatch between the fluid barrier and the top plate being greater than 50%”, in addition to other limitations.
Claims 18-20 are allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tan (WO 2016179664) – An acoustic surface wave device for increased acoustic wave energy utilization
Sakuma (US 20200360957) – An atomizing device with a nozzle that has metal materials that has a sufficiently large difference between the acoustic impedance of the metal (such as stainless steel, aluminum, brass, iron, copper, etc.) and the liquid to increase the reflectance of the ultrasonic wave on the inner surface to reduce the loss of ultrasonic wave reduction and increase atomization efficiency [0100].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SYDNEY REYES RUSSELL whose telephone number is (703)756-4567. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 730am -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, Brandy Lee can be reached at (571) 270-7410. 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.
/S.R.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/VICTORIA MURPHY/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785