DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Amendment filed on 15 August 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-15, 21-22, and 24-26 are now pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 15 August 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant’s argument on Page 7, first paragraph that “Metzger does not disclose "initiating the atomic layer deposition process to tailor a crystal structure orientation of the layer of piezoelectric material,” as recited by claim 1”, and on Page 8 second paragraph, “even if Metzger describes the possible use of ALD to deposit the AlScN layer, Metzger does not expressly disclose any initiation steps of an ALD process to tailor the crystal structure orientation of the AlScN layer. Metzger does not particularly describe an ALD process with an initiating step "to tailor" or control the crystal structure orientation of the AlScN layer according to claim 1. Further, although Metzger describes that the c-axis of the AlScN layer can be "oriented parallel to the first surface of the sapphire substrate," that orientation can be achieved without initiating an ALD process to do so, and Metzger does not expressly disclose initiation of an ALD process to tailor the crystal structure orientation of the AlScN layer. Therefore, Metzger does not disclose the above-quoted elements of claim 1.”, Examiner respectfully submits the following:
Though, claim 1 recites limitation “depositing comprising initiating the atomic layer deposition process to tailor a crystal structure orientation of the layer of piezoelectric material”, there is nothing in the body of the claim, directed to a statutorily recited process, which is apparently defined or further limited by the intended capability “initiating the atomic layer deposition process to tailor a crystal structure orientation”. In other words, the claim fails to recite any of the initiating the process steps such as “the initiation can include annealing the electrode 44 or the top surface of the electrode 44, etching the electrode 44, exposing the electrode 44 to one or more gases, or other steps to remove contaminants from the top surface of the electrode 44” as disclosed in para. [0105] of the specification. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See MPEP 707.07.
As applicant agrees in Page 8 second paragraph, “even if Metzger describes the possible use of ALD to deposit the AlScN layer”, Metzger teaches in para. [0039], an AIScN layer…a deposition technique is selected from…atomic layer deposition (ALD), which reads on the limitation, “depositing a layer of piezoelectric material over the substrate by an atomic layer deposition process” as recited in claim 1. Further, one of ordinary skill in the art would have known that the deposition process as disclosed by Metzger is an initiating deposition process, because the Metzger disclosed a layered deposition process, see para. [0007-0008]; and the piezoelectric thin film is grown by thin film deposition methods, para. [0012].
Therefore, from the teachings of an AIScN layer…a deposition technique is selected from metal- organic CVD (MOCVD), plasma-enhanced CVD (PECVD), molecular beam epitaxy (MBE), atomic layer deposition (ALD) in para. [0039] of Metzger, the recited “depositing a layer of piezoelectric material over the substrate by an atomic layer deposition process, the depositing comprising initiating the atomic layer deposition process to tailor a crystal structure orientation of the layer of piezoelectric material” as currently claimed in claim 1 is insufficient to define over the prior art references Metzger.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6, 10, 13-15 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Metzger (US 20210013862).
[AltContent: textbox (encapsulation layer)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (substrate)][AltContent: textbox (piezoelectric material)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
204
375
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 2 Metzger.
Regarding claim 1, Metzger discloses, a method of manufacturing an acoustic resonator (SAW resonators, Figs. 2 to 5), comprising:
providing a substrate (sapphire substrate, Figs. 1 to 3, para. [0038]);
depositing a layer of piezoelectric material (piezoelectric AlScN layer, Fig. 2) over the substrate by an atomic layer deposition process (an AlScN layer…a deposition technique is selected from metal-organic CVD (MOCVD), plasma-enhanced CVD (PECVD), molecular beam epitaxy (MBE), atomic layer deposition (ALD), para. [0039]), the depositing comprising initiating the atomic layer deposition process to tailor a crystal structure orientation (the c-axis of the grown AlScN layer is oriented parallel to the first surface of the sapphire substrate, para. [0040]) of the layer of piezoelectric material; and
forming an electrode (on top of the AlScN layer interdigital transducers utilizing e.g. Al or Cu based electrodes are realized, see Fig. 4 below, para. [0041]) in contact with the layer of piezoelectric material.
Regarding claim 2, Metzger discloses the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Metzger further discloses, the method of claim 1, wherein: the electrode comprises a first electrode (one of the IDTs, see annotated Fig. 4, Metzger below); and the method further comprises forming a second electrode (the other IDT, Fig. 4) in contact with the layer of piezoelectric material.
Regarding claim 6, Metzger discloses the recited limitations with respect to claim 2. Metzger further discloses, the method of claim 2, wherein, the first electrode and the second electrode are both formed at least in part over the layer of piezoelectric material (see Figs. 4 and 5).
Regarding claim 10, Metzger discloses the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Metzger further discloses, the method of claim 1, further comprising forming a supporting layer (see AIN layer, Fig. 2) over the substrate, between the substrate and the layer of piezoelectric material.
Regarding claim 13, Metzger discloses the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Metzger further discloses, the method of claim 1, further comprising, after depositing the layer of piezoelectric material by atomic layer deposition, trimming the layer of piezoelectric material (further functional layers chosen from the group of passivation layer, trimming layer of SiN, para. [0028]).
Regarding claim 14, Metzger discloses the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Metzger further discloses, the method of claim 1, wherein the piezoelectric material comprises aluminum nitride (piezoelectric layers, typically aluminum nitride AlN or scandium doped aluminum nitride AlScN for BAW devices on a suitable wafer substrate, para. [0007]).
Regarding claim 15, Metzger discloses the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Metzger further discloses, the method of claim 1, further comprising forming an encapsulation layer over the electrode (see annotated Fig. 2 above) by atomic layer deposition.
Regarding claim 21, Metzger discloses the recited limitations with respect to claim 1. Metzger further discloses, the method of claim 1, wherein the crystal structure orientation of the layer of piezoelectric material is oriented to excite a wave in a direction perpendicular to a top surface of the layer of piezoelectric material (highly oriented polycrystalline piezoelectric layers support very well the propagation of longitudinal waves along the crystallographic c-axis of the AlN based piezoelectric layer, see Figs. 2 and 3, para. [0007]).
Claim(s) 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huang (WO 2021196750).
[AltContent: textbox (second electrode)][AltContent: ][AltContent: textbox (first electrode)][AltContent: ]
PNG
media_image2.png
172
552
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 1, Huang.
Regarding claim 26, Huang discloses, a method of manufacturing an acoustic resonator (Figs. 1 to 7), comprising:
forming a first electrode (first electrode layer 102, Fig. 1) over a substrate (substrate 200, Fig. 1) by a process technique other than atomic layer deposition (first electrode 102 may be formed by physical vapor deposition, para. [0051], see the Note 1, below);
depositing a layer of piezoelectric material (piezoelectric layer 103, Fig. 1, the piezoelectric stack
structure includes a first electrode 102, a piezoelectric layer 103, and a second electrode 104
sequentially formed on the first substrate 200, para. [0049]) over the first electrode by atomic layer deposition (piezoelectric layer 103 may be formed using…atomic layer deposition, para. [0051]); and
forming a second electrode (second electrode 104, Fig. 1) over the layer of piezoelectric material by atomic layer deposition of metal (second electrode 104…may be formed by…atomic layer deposition, para. 0051]).
Note 1. physical vapor deposition process is not an atomic layer deposition process (Kurt Lesker “Atomic Layer Deposition (ALD) – General, Technical, & Process Information”, 2006).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 3-5, 7-9, 11, 22 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Metzger in view of Grannen (US 20120096697).
Regarding claim 22, Metzger discloses, a method of manufacturing an acoustic resonator (SAW resonators, Figs. 2 to 5), comprising:
[AltContent: textbox (second electrode)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (first electrode)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image3.png
320
330
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 4 Metzger.
initiating an atomic layer deposition process (atomic layer deposition (ALD), para. [0039]) to tailor a crystal structure orientation of a layer of piezoelectric material (piezoelectric AlScN layer, Fig. 2);
depositing the layer of piezoelectric material (an AlScN layer… a deposition technique is selected from metal-organic CVD (MOCVD), plasma-enhanced CVD (PECVD), molecular beam epitaxy (MBE), atomic layer deposition (ALD), para. [0039]) over a substrate by the atomic layer deposition process;
forming a first electrode (one of the IDT electrodes, see annotated Fig. 4 Metzger above) in contact with the layer of piezoelectric material; and
forming a second electrode (other IDT electrode, see Fig. 4) in contact with the layer of piezoelectric material.
Metzger does not teach the first electrode is formed by atomic layer deposition of metal; and the second electrode is formed by sputtering metal. However, Grannen teaches, a method of manufacturing an acoustic resonator (transducer device 800 in Figs. 7 to 8G),comprising: providing a substrate (step S711, Fig. 7, substate 810); depositing a layer of piezoelectric material (step S717, Fig. 7) over the substrate by an atomic layer deposition process (using a vacuum technique, such as a sputtering, atomic layer deposition, molecular beam epitaxy (MBE) or evaporation technique, or a non-vacuum technique, para. [0027]…processes and materials for forming these layers in steps S714-S718 of FIG. 7 are substantially the same as discussed above, para. [0048]), the depositing comprising initiating the atomic layer deposition process to tailor a crystal structure orientation (see piezoelectric layer 834, Fig. 8G, arrows in the piezoelectric layer 234 correspond to the c-axis directions of the crystals in the piezoelectric material, para. [0022]) of the layer of piezoelectric material; and forming an electrode (second electrode layer 835, Fig. 8G) in contact with the layer of piezoelectric material, in which,
the first electrode is formed by atomic layer deposition of metal (first electrode layer 232…as shown in FIG. 4C, using a…CVD technique, para. [0028], see the Note 2 below); and the second electrode is formed by sputtering metal (second electrode layer 235 is applied to the piezoelectric layer 234…, as shown in FIG. 4F, using a spin-on, sputtering, para. [0033]). Therefore, in view of the teachings of Grannen, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of manufacturing an acoustic resonator of Metzger and replace the method of forming the first electrode by atomic layer deposition method and forming second electrode by sputtering as taught by Grannen so that it enables forming a material layer, including a metal, a non-metal, ceramic or polymer, an alloy, a compound or element that promotes the crystal orientation in the piezoelectric material as Grannen taught in para. [0029]. Moreover, there is no indication in the instant invention that any surprising results were derived, or that any special steps were devised in order to use the old technique of Metzger with the well-known method of Grannen. Such a combination would have been done by one of ordinary skill in the art without any need for experimentation and with reasonable expectations of success.
Note 2: Atomic layer deposition (ALD) is a sub-set of chemical vapor deposition (CVD), that enables a controlled film deposition. If Applicant disagrees, see, Hausmann “Tech Brief: A Look at Atomic Layer Deposition (ALD), May 15, 2017”; also, Kurt Lesker, “Atomic Layer Deposition (ALD) – General, Technical, & Process Information”. In instant case, the claim fails to further define the claimed atomic layer deposition of metal or specify any atomic layer deposition process steps. Accordingly, the claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification, Grannen teaches the recited limitation “first electrode is formed by atomic layer deposition of metal and the second electrode is formed by sputtering metal” as recited in claim 22.
Regarding claim 3, Metzger does not disclose, the first electrode and the second electrode are formed by sputtering metal. However, Grannen further teaches,
the method of claim 2, wherein the first electrode and the second electrode are formed by sputtering metal (first electrode layer 232…as shown in FIG. 4C, using…sputtering, para. [0028]; second electrode layer 235 is applied to the piezoelectric layer 234…, as shown in FIG. 4F, using a spin-on, sputtering, para. [0033]). Therefore, in view of the teachings of Grannen, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of manufacturing an acoustic resonator of Metzger and to form the first by atomic layer deposition and the second electrode formed by sputtering as taught by Grannen so that it enables forming electrodes having a desired thickness.
Regarding claim 4, Metzger does not disclose, the first electrode is formed by atomic layer deposition of metal; and the second electrode is formed by sputtering metal. However, Grannen teaches,
the method of claim 2, wherein: the first electrode is formed by atomic layer deposition of metal (first electrode layer 232…as shown in FIG. 4C, using a…CVD technique, para. [0028], see the Note 2 above); and the second electrode is formed by sputtering metal (second electrode layer 235 is applied to the piezoelectric layer 234…, as shown in FIG. 4F, using a spin-on, sputtering, para. [0033]). Please also refer to the rationale for combination regarding claim 22, as it is applicable to claim 4 in the same manner.
Regarding claim 5, Metzger does not disclose, the first electrode and the second electrode are formed by atomic layer deposition of metal. However, Grannen further teaches,
the method of claim 2, wherein the first electrode and the second electrode are formed by atomic layer deposition of metal (first electrode layer 232…as shown in FIG. 4C, using a…CVD technique, para. [0028]; second electrode layer 235 is applied to the piezoelectric layer 234…, as shown in FIG. 4F, using…CVD technique, para. [0033]). Please also refer to the rationale for combination regarding claim 22, as it is applicable to claim 5 in the same manner.
Regarding claims 7 and 24, Metzger further discloses, wherein, the second electrode is formed at least in part over the layer of piezoelectric material (see IDT in Figs. 2 to 5). Grannen further teaches, the first electrode (first electrode layer 232, Fig. 4F) is formed at least in part under the layer of piezoelectric material. Therefore, in view of the teachings of Grannen, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of manufacturing an acoustic resonator of Metzger and to include a first electrodes under the layer of piezoelectric material as taught by Grannen so that it enables forming a bulk acoustic resonator.
Regarding claims 8 and 25, Metzger does not teach, forming an acoustic reflector. However, Grannen further teaches, the method of claim 1, further comprising forming an acoustic reflector (Bragg reflector 220, see Fig. 4F below, para. [0027]) over the substrate, between the substrate and the layer of piezoelectric material. Therefore, in view of the teachings of Grannen, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of manufacturing an acoustic resonator of Metzger and to include an acoustic reflector 220 as taught by Grannen in Fig. 4F so that it enables providing high reflectivity with respect to acoustic waves in a predetermined band around the center frequency of the transducer device as Grannen taught in para. [0024].
[AltContent: textbox (acoustic reflector)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image4.png
697
487
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 4F, Grannen.
Regarding claim 9, Metzger does not disclose, a plurality of layers of material. However, Grannen further teaches, the method of claim 8, wherein the reflector comprises a plurality of layers of material, the plurality of layers comprising alternating layers of material having varying refractive indexes (see Bragg reflector 220, Fig. 4F). Please also refer to the rationale for combination regarding claim 8, as it is applicable to claim 9 in the same manner.
Note 3: Bragg reflector comprises multilayer dielectric structure consists of alternating high and low refractive index dielectric layers. If applicant disagrees, see Zhmakin “Enhancement of light extraction from light emitting diodes”, Physics Reports, 498 (2011), 189–241.
Regarding claim 11, Metzger does not disclose, forming an isolation cavity in the substrate. However, Grannen further teaches, the method of claim 10, further comprising forming an isolation cavity (recess 811, Fig. 8G) in the substrate in a region below the layer of piezoelectric material. Therefore, in view of the teachings of Grannen, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of manufacturing an acoustic resonator of Metzger and to include a recess 811 as taught by Grannen in Fig. 8G so that it enables forming the piezoelectric membrane compatible with semiconductor fabrication processes.
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Metzger in view of Grannen as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Luo (WO 2021012379, see US 20220231651 for English Translation).
Regarding claim 12, modified Metzger does not disclose, the isolation cavity with a plurality of supporting pillars in the isolation cavity to support the supporting layer over the substrate. However, Luo teaches a film bulk acoustic resonator including providing a substrate 200 and forming a cavity, in which, the method of claim 11, wherein forming the isolation cavity comprises forming the isolation cavity with a plurality of supporting pillars (support pillars 133, see Fig. 5 below) in the isolation cavity to support the supporting layer over the substrate.
PNG
media_image5.png
182
378
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 5, Luo
Therefore, in view of the teachings of Luo, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of manufacturing an acoustic resonator of Metzger and to include a plurality of supporting pillars 133 inside the recess 811 of Grannen as taught by Luo in Fig. 5 so that it enables contributing effective supports while performing the additional processes during the manufacturing of an acoustic resonator, as Luo taught in para. [0008].
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOSE K. ABRAHAM whose telephone number is (571)270-1087. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-4:30 EST.
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.
/JOSE K ABRAHAM/Examiner, Art Unit 3729
/JEFFREY T CARLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729