Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/714,763

RESONANCE DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SAME

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Apr 06, 2022
Examiner
WONG, ALAN
Art Unit
2843
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Murata Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
OA Round
4 (Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
494 granted / 594 resolved
+15.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
611
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
45.4%
+5.4% vs TC avg
§102
28.1%
-11.9% vs TC avg
§112
17.2%
-22.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 594 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 Arguments Applicant’s amendments/arguments on “an edge on a side of the distal end of the vibration arm comprises an arc shape when viewed in a plan view” have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in addition with Matsuo US 9,793,876. The other references remain relevant and relied on for their respective disclosures in the prior art rejections. 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 1, 4-7, 9-12, 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umeda US 2018/0226937 of record, in view of Yamada US 2014/0375178 of record, Takizawa US 8,416,027 of record, and Matsuo US 9,793,876. 1. Umeda discloses a resonance device (Figs. 1-5, 6H, etc.) comprising: a lower cover (20); an upper cover (30) connected to the lower cover; and a resonator (10) that has a vibration arm (135A) configured to vibrate outside a plane ([0080]: “out-of-plane bending vibration mode”) in an interior space provided between the lower cover and the upper cover, wherein the vibration arm has a distal end (136A) with a metal film (E2) on a side that faces the upper cover; and wherein a thickness of a base of the vibrating arm is a same thickness of the vibrating arm (Figs. 2, 6H, etc., similar to Application’s Figs. 2, 10); additionally, the vibration arm may be bent ([0053]). Umeda does not explicitly discloses a first gap between the distal end of the vibration arm and the upper cover is larger than a second gap between the distal end of the vibration arm and the lower cover; wherein the vibration arm is configured so that a distance between the vibration arm and the lower cover decreases as the vibration arm extends towards the distal end; and wherein an edge on a side of the distal end of the vibration arm comprises an arc shape. Yamada discloses a resonance device (Figs. 1A-C, 2A,B, 7A,B, etc.) comprising: a lower cover (51); an upper cover (56) connected to the lower cover; and a resonator (1) that has a vibration arm (21, 22) configured to vibrate in an interior space provided between the lower cover and the upper cover, wherein the vibration arm has a distal end (24, 25) with a metal film (35f, 36d, etc.) on a side that faces the upper cover, and wherein a first gap (H2) between the distal end of the vibration arm and the upper cover is larger than a second gap (H1) between the distal end of the vibration arm and the lower cover ([0106]). Takizawa discloses a resonance device (Figs. 1A-7B, etc.) comprising: a lower cover (54), an upper cover (56) connected to the lower cover; and a resonator (10) that has a vibration arm (16a) configured to vibrate in an interior space provided between the lower cover and the upper cover, and wherein a first gap between the distal end of the vibration arm and the upper cover is larger than a second gap between the distal end of the vibration arm and the lower cover (Figs. 1B, 5, 6, 7A,B; Col. 6 lines 49-63; the arm 16 is made closer to the lower cover); the vibration arm is configured so that a distance between the vibration arm and the lower cover decreases as the vibration arm extends towards the distal end (Takizawa: Figs. 1B, 5, 6, 7A,B). At the time of the filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have made the resonance device of Umeda to have the first gap larger than the second gap as in Yamada and Takizawa, and the vibration arm is configured so that a distance between the vibration arm and the lower cover decreases as the vibration arm extends towards the distal end as in Takizawa. The modification would have been obvious because the vibration arm may be bent thus the inequal gap distance as supported by Ueda ([0053]), improvement in impact resistance and lower height may be provided as taught by Yamada ([0106]) and reliably eliminate the possibility that the distal end making contact with the upper cover during the excitation as taught by Takizawa (Col. 7 lines 37-47). Matsuo discloses a resonance device (Figs. 1, 5, etc.) comprising: a resonator (3) that has a vibration arm (5) configured to vibrate in an interior space (911); an edge (374) on a side of a distal end of the vibration arm comprises an arc shape (curved as shown in Figs. 1, 5) when viewed in a plan view (which is Fig. 1). Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have made an edge on a side of the distal end of the vibration arm to have an arc shape (curved) when viewed in a plan view. The modification would have been obvious because the curved surfaces (no sharp corners) can suppress stress concentration resulting in durability improvement, Q values, and desired resonation characteristic as taught by Matsuo (Col. 8 lines 34-48, 59-64). 12. Umeda discloses a resonance device (Figs. 1-5, 6H, etc.) comprising: a first/lower cover (20); a second/upper cover (30) connected to the lower cover to define an interior space; a resonator (10) having a base (130) and a vibration arm (135A) extending thereform with a distal end (136A) configured to vibrate outside a plane ([0080]: “out-of-plane bending vibration mode”) in the interior space; and a metal film (E2) disposed on an upper surface of the distal end of the vibration arm that faces the upper cover; and wherein a thickness of the base of the vibrating arm is a same thickness of the vibrating arm (Figs. 2, 6H, etc., similar to Application’s Figs. 2, 10); additionally, the vibration arm may be bent ([0053]). Umeda does not explicit disclose a distance from the upper surface of the distal end of the vibration arm to the upper cover is larger than a distance from the lower cover to a lower surface of the distal end of the vibration arm that is opposite the upper surface; wherein the vibration arm is configured so that a distance between the vibration arm and the lower cover decreases as the vibration arm extends towards the distal end; and wherein an edge on a side of the distal end of the vibration arm comprises an arc shape. Yamada a resonance device (Figs. 1A-C, 2A,B, 7A,B, etc.) comprising: a first/lower cover (51); a second/upper cover (56) connected to the lower cover to define an interior space; a resonator (1) having a base (12) and a vibration arm (21, 22) extending thereform with a distal end (24, 25) configured to vibrate in the interior space; and a metal film (35f, 36d, etc.) on an upper surface of the distal end of the vibration arm that faces the upper cover, wherein a distance (H2) from upper surface of the distal end of the vibration arm to the cover is larger than a distance (H1) from the lower cover to a lower surface of the distal end of the vibration arm that is opposite the upper surface ([0106]). Takizawa discloses a resonance device (Figs. 1A-7B, etc.) comprising: a first/lower cover (54); a second/upper cover (56) connected to the lower cover to define an interior space; a resonator (10) having a base (14) and a vibration arm (16a) extending thereform with a distal end configured to vibrate in the interior space; wherein a distance from upper surface of the distal end of the vibration arm to the cover is larger than a distance from the lower cover to a lower surface of the distal end of the vibration arm that is opposite the upper surface (Figs. 1B, 5, 6, 7A,B; Col. 6 lines 49-63; the arm 16 is made closer to the lower cover thus smaller distance); the vibration arm is configured so that a distance between the vibration arm and the lower cover decreases as the vibration arm extends towards the distal end (Takizawa: Figs. 1B, 5, 6, 7A,B). At the time of the filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have made the resonance device of Umeda to have the a distance from upper surface of the distal end of the vibration arm to the cover is larger than the distance from the lower cover to a lower surface of the distal end of the vibration arm that is opposite the upper surface as in Yamada and Takizawa, and the vibration arm is configured so that a distance between the vibration arm and the lower cover decreases as the vibration arm extends towards the distal end as in Takizawa. The modification would have been obvious because the vibration arm may be bent thus the inequal gap distance as supported by Ueda ([0053]), improvement in impact resistance and lower height may be provided as taught by Yamada ([0106]) and reliably eliminate the possibility that the distal end making contact with the upper cover during the excitation as taught by Takizawa (Col. 7 lines 37-47). Matsuo discloses a resonance device (Figs. 1, 5, etc.) comprising: a resonator (3) that has a vibration arm (5) configured to vibrate in an interior space (911); an edge (374) on a side of a distal end of the vibration arm comprises an arc shape (curved as shown in Figs. 1, 5) when viewed in a plan view (which is Fig. 1). Further, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have made an edge on a side of the distal end of the vibration arm to have an arc shape (curved) when viewed in a plan view. The modification would have been obvious because the curved surfaces (no sharp corners) can suppress stress concentration resulting in durability improvement, Q values, and desired resonation characteristic as taught by Matsuo (Col. 8 lines 34-48, 59-64). 4, 15. The combination discloses the vibration arm warps downward towards the lower cover without a voltage being applied thereto (Takizawa: Figs. 1B, 5, 6, 7A,B; the warp is due to pressure of gas in the formation of the device, see Col. 8 lines 9-64). 5. The combination discloses the upper cover and the lower cover each have a cavity defining the interior space (Umeda: items 21, 31). 6, 16. The combination discloses a depth of the cavity of the upper cover is larger than a depth of the cavity of the lower cover (Umeda: items 31, 21; Yamada: H2>H1; due to the gap distance relationship, the corresponding depth of the cavities follow the relationship). 7, 17. The combination discloses the invention as discussed above, including for claim 7: the second gap between the distal end of the vibration arm and the lower cover has a distance G1 and the first gap between the distal end of the vibration arm and the upper cover has a distance G2 (definition; essentially the corresponding gaps/distances at distal end in Umeda, Yamada and/or Takizawa; also Yamada: H1=G1, H2=G2); for claim 17: the distance between the lower surface of the distal end of the vibration arm and the lower cover has a distance G1 and the distance between the upper surface of the distal end of the vibration arm and the upper cover has a distance G2 (definition; and similar to claim 7 as discussed above); but does not explicitly disclose the respective distances satisfy a relationship of 1<G2/G1≤1.5. However, the gaps/distances necessarily influence the range of the vibration (Umeda: Fig. 6H; Yamada: Fig. 7B; [0106]; Takizawa: Fig. 1B, 7A,B; i.e., the space provided for the movement of the vibration arm, thus the corresponding characteristics, e.g., range, strength, amplitude, and/or size, of the vibration/device; hence the gaps/distances are result effective variables; and the gap/distance G2 is larger than gap distance G1 (Yamada: H2>H1; Takizawa: bent shape, Col. 6 lines 49-63; thus 1<G2/G1) as discussed above (see also claims 1, 12). At the time of the filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have made the respective gaps/distances satisfy the relationship 1<G2/G1≤1.5. The modification would have been obvious as optimization of the gaps/distances to achieve desired characteristics (e.g., range, strength, amplitude, and/or size of the vibration/device; see also MPEP 2144.05(II)). 9. The combination discloses the upper cover has a metal film that faces at least the distal end of the vibration arm (Umeda: Figs. 5, 6H, the unlabeled film in the cavity of the upper cover 30). 10. The combination discloses the distal end of the vibration arm has a width in a direction parallel to a surface of the upper cover that is greater than a width of a base of the vibration arm (Umeda: Fig. 3; [0046], wider at 136A than base of 135A that connects to item 130, similar to Applicant’s Fig. 3). 11. The combination discloses a frame (Umeda: Figs. 2, 3 item 140) that at least partially surrounds the resonator; and a holding arm (110) that connects a base (130) of the resonator to the frame, with the vibration arm (135A) extending from the base of the resonator towards the frame. 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 ALAN WONG whose telephone number is (571)272-3238. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 10am - 7:00pm. 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, Andrea Lindgren Baltzell can be reached at 571-272-5918. 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. /A.W/Examiner, Art Unit 2843 /ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2843
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 06, 2022
Application Filed
Nov 08, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 21, 2025
Response Filed
Apr 11, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jul 24, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 18, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 20, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 29, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 26, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12587161
HIGHER ORDER LAMB WAVE ACOUSTIC DEVICES WITH COMPLEMENTARILY-ORIENTED PIEZOELECTRIC LAYERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587171
PASSBAND FILTER COMBINING TWO SETS OF COMPONENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12556159
BULK ACOUSTIC WAVE RESONATOR WITH INTEGRATED CAPACITOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12549154
PACKAGE COMPRISING AN ACOUSTIC DEVICE AND A CAP SUBSTRATE COMPRISING AN INDUCTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12542535
ACOUSTIC WAVE FILTER WITH DIFFERENT TYPES OF RESONATORS IN ACOUSTIC FILTER COMPONENT AND/OR MULTIPLEXER
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+9.5%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 594 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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