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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/5/2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 9-11, 13-18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmid et al. (US 2020/0384503 A1) in view of Liu et al. (US 2022/0280972 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Schmid discloses a transducer device (Fig. 2-9) comprising:
a bottom electrode (104) over a substrate (100);
a first dielectric layer (106) over the bottom electrode;
a second dielectric layer (110) over the first dielectric layer;
a third dielectric layer (200) disposed between the first dielectric layer and the second dielectric layer, wherein sidewalls of the third dielectric layer define a cavity (118);
a top electrode (112) over the second dielectric layer, wherein the top electrode is disposed above a topmost surface of the third dielectric layer; and
a passivation layer (114 in Fig. 2-9) over the top electrode and the bottom electrode, wherein a first portion of the passivation layer (left side) is in physical contact with first outermost sidewalls of the first dielectric layer and the third dielectric layer (the passivation layer is in indirect physical contact with first outermost sidewalls of the first dielectric layer and third dielectric layer, as seen in Fig. 2-9), wherein a second portion of the passivation layer (right side) is in physical contact with the second outermost sidewalls of the first dielectric layer (the passivation layer is in indirect physical contact with second outermost sidewalls of the first dielectric layer and the third dielectric layer, as seen in Fig. 2-9), and wherein the cavity is disposed between the first portion of the passivation layer and the second portion of the passivation layer (see Fig. 2-9).
Schmid does not disclose wherein the second dielectric layer comprises first protrusions and second protrusions, wherein in a bottom-up view a first area of each of the first protrusions is larger than a second area of each of the second protrusions.
Liu discloses a second dielectric layer (1336 in Fig. 13) wherein the second dielectric layer comprises first protrusions (1317a) and second protrusions (1317b), wherein in a bottom-up view a first area of each of the first protrusions is larger than a second area of each of the second protrusions (although not shown in Fig. 13, Liu discloses forming the first protrusions to have a larger surface area, ¶ 0069).
There was a benefit to forming the protrusions in that it reduces stiction of the membrane (¶ 0041 of Liu.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to form the second dielectric layer of Schmid with first protrusions and second protrusions, wherein in a bottom-up view a first area of each of the first protrusions is larger than a second area of each of the second protrusions as taught by Liu for this benefit. The resulting protrusions would be disposed in the cavity.
Schmid does not disclose wherein a portion of the top electrode overlaps the third dielectric layer.
Liu discloses forming electrode layers (508 in Fig. 5J, ¶ 0087) to be coextensive with the width of the transducer device such that the overlap third dielectric layers (524 in Fig. 5J; these are interpreted as corresponding to the third dielectric layers as they act as spacers the sidewalls of which defining the cavity). One having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed would have understood a benefit in increasing the width of the electrode layers in that it increasing the sensitivity of the device. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to form the bottom electrode and top electrode of Schmid to extend to the left edge of the transducer for this benefit. In such a configuration, a portion of the top electrode overlaps the third dielectric layer.
Regarding claim 10, Schmid further discloses wherein the first dielectric layer comprises silicon oxide (¶ 0019).
Regarding claim 11, Liu further discloses wherein the first protrusions are disposed in a central region of the second dielectric layer (see Fig. 13) and the second protrusions are disposed in an outer region of the second dielectric layer (see Fig. 13) wherein the outer region surrounds the central region (see Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 13, Liu discloses that the ratio between the first area of each of the first protrusions and the second area of each of the second protrusions is greater than 1 (¶ 0069) and thus teaches the general conditions of the claim, but Liu does not explicitly disclose it falling within the claimed range. However, Liu discloses that the surfaces areas can vary (¶ 0067) and, therefore, varying the surface areas such that the ratio falls within the claimed range amounts to routine experimentation. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05(II)(A)).
Regarding claim 14, Liu discloses forming diameters of the protrusions within the claimed range (¶¶ 0066-0067).
Regarding claim 16, Schmid discloses a transducer device (Fig. 2-9) comprising:
a bottom electrode (104) over a substrate (100);
a first dielectric layer (106) over the bottom electrode;
a second dielectric layer (110) over the first dielectric layer;
a third dielectric layer (200) disposed between the first dielectric layer and the second dielectric layer, wherein sidewalls of the third dielectric layer define a cavity (118), wherein the cavity and the third dielectric layer completely isolate the first dielectric layer and the second dielectric layer;
a top electrode (112) over the second dielectric layer; and
a passivation layer (114 in Fig. 2-9) over the top electrode and the bottom electrode, wherein the passivation layer is in physical contact with a top surface and a first sidewall of the bottom electrode (indirect contact, as seen in Fig. 2-9), and wherein the passivation layer is in physical contact with a first sidewall of the top electrode (indirect contact, as seen in Fig. 2-9).
Schmid does not disclose wherein the second dielectric layer comprises first protrusions and second protrusions, wherein a diameter of each of the first protrusions is larger than a diameter of each of the second protrusions.
Liu discloses a second dielectric layer (1336 in Fig. 13) wherein the second dielectric layer comprises first protrusions (1317a) and second protrusions (1317b), wherein a diameter of each of the first protrusions is larger than a diameter of each of the second protrusions (although not shown in Fig. 13, Liu discloses forming the first protrusions to have a larger surface area, ¶ 0069).
There was a benefit to forming the protrusions in that it reduces stiction of the membrane (¶ 0041 of Liu.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to form the second dielectric layer of Schmid with first protrusions and second protrusions, wherein a diameter of each of the first protrusions is larger than a diameter of each of the second protrusions as taught by Liu for this benefit. The resulting protrusions would be disposed in the cavity.
Regarding claim 17, Liu further discloses wherein the first protrusions and the second protrusions comprise pillars, wherein each of the first protrusions and the second protrusions has a circular shape in a top-down view (see Fig. 4B).
Regarding claim 18, Liu further discloses wherein the first protrusions are disposed in a central region of the second dielectric layer (see Fig. 13) and the second protrusions are disposed in an outer region of the second dielectric layer (see Fig. 13) wherein the outer region surrounds the central region (see Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 20, Liu discloses forming diameters of the protrusions within the claimed range (¶¶ 0066-0067).
Claim(s) 21-24, and 26-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmid et al. (US 2020/0384503 A1) in view of Liu et al. (US 2022/0280972 A1) and Huang (US 2008/0194053 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Schmid discloses a transducer device (Fig. 2-9) comprising:
a first electrode (104) over a substrate (100);
a first dielectric layer (106) over the first electrode;
a second dielectric layer (portion 110 above 118) over the first dielectric layer;
a third dielectric layer (combination of 120 and 200) disposed between the first dielectric layer and the second dielectric layer, wherein sidewalls of the third dielectric layer define a cavity (118); and
a second electrode (112) over the second dielectric layer.
Schmid does not disclose wherein the second dielectric layer comprises first protrusions in a central region and second protrusions in an outer region, wherein width of each of the first protrusions is larger than a width of each of the second protrusions.
Liu discloses a second dielectric layer (1336 in Fig. 13) wherein the second dielectric layer comprises first protrusions (1317a) in a central region and second protrusions (1317b) in an outer region, wherein a width of each of the first protrusions is larger than a width of each of the second protrusions (although not shown in Fig. 13, Liu discloses forming the first protrusions to have a width, ¶ 0069).
There was a benefit to forming the protrusions in that it reduces stiction of the membrane (¶ 0041 of Liu.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to form the second dielectric layer of Schmid with first protrusions in a central region and second protrusions in an outer region, wherein a width of each of the first protrusions is larger than a width of each of the second protrusions as taught by Liu for this benefit. The resulting protrusions would be disposed in the cavity.
Schmid does not disclose wherein the second electrode overlaps a first portion of the third dielectric layer and a second portion of the third dielectric layer, wherein the cavity is disposed between the first portion of the third dielectric layer and the second portion of the third dielectric layer.
Liu discloses forming electrode layers (508 in Fig. 5J, ¶ 0087) to be coextensive with the width of the transducer device such that the overlap third dielectric layers (524 in Fig. 5J; these are interpreted as corresponding to the third dielectric layers as they act as spacers the sidewalls of which defining the cavity). One having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed would have understood a benefit in increasing the width of the electrode layers in that it increasing the sensitivity of the device. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to form the bottom electrode and top electrode of Schmid to extend to the left edge of the transducer for this benefit. In such a configuration, the second electrode overlaps a first portion of the third dielectric layer (left portion of 200 of Schmid) and a second portion (L shaped portion of 120 of Schmid) of the third dielectric layer, wherein the cavity is disposed between the first portion of the third dielectric layer and the second portion of the third dielectric layer.
Schmid differs from the claimed invention by the substitution of a carbide based first dielectric layer with a non-carbide based first dielectric layer. However, dielectric layers comprising carbide and the corresponding function was known in the art (¶ 0092 of Huang). As such, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to have substituted the known composition of carbide for a dielectric layer as taught by Huang for the material of the first dielectric layer of Schmid and the results of the substitution would have been predictable. (see MPEP § 2143(I)(B)).
Regarding claim 22, Schmid further discloses a passivation layer (114 in Fig. 2-9) over and in physical contact with both the first electrode and the second electrode (see Fig. 2-9).
Regarding claim 23, Schmid further discloses wherein a width of the first electrode is larger than a width of the second dielectric layer (see Fig. 2-9).
Regarding claim 24, Schmid further discloses wherein the second dielectric layer comprises silicon oxide (¶¶ 0019-0020).
Regarding claim 26, Liu further discloses wherein the central region has a circular outer perimeter (see Fig. 4B), and the outer region has a circular outer perimeter and is annular in shape (see Fig. 4B).
Regarding claim 27, Liu discloses that the ratio between the first area of each of the first protrusions and the second area of each of the second protrusions is greater than 1 (¶ 0069) and thus teaches the general conditions of the claim, but Liu does not explicitly disclose it falling within the claimed range. However, Liu discloses that the surfaces areas can vary (¶ 0067) and, therefore, varying the surface areas such that the ratio falls within the claimed range amounts to routine experimentation. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation (MPEP 2144.05(II)(A)).
Regarding claim 28, Liu discloses forming diameters of the protrusions within the claimed range (¶¶ 0066-0067).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmid et al. (US 2020/0384503 A1) in view of Liu et al. (US 2022/0280972 A1) as applied to claim 11, above, and further in view of Hsu et al. (US 9,249,008 B2).
Regarding claim 12, Schmid does not disclose a first conductive layer over the passivation layer and electrically connected to the bottom electrode; a second conductive layer over the passivation layer and electrically connected to the top electrode; and first and second conductive connectors coupled to the first conductive layer and the second conductive layer, respectively.
Hsu discloses a first conductive layer (351 in Fig. 10) electrically connected to a bottom electrode;
a second conductive layer (352) electrically connected to a top electrode; and
first and second conductive connectors (354 and 355) coupled to the first conductive layer and the second conductive layer, respectively.
There was a benefit to forming conductive layers and conductive connectors as taught by Hsu in that it provides an electrical connection to the electrodes.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to form a first conductive layer over the passivation layer in the device of the combination and electrically connected to the bottom electrode; a second conductive layer over the passivation layer and electrically connected to the top electrode; and first and second conductive connectors coupled to the first conductive layer and the second conductive layer, respectively, for this benefit.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmid et al. (US 2020/0384503 A1) in view of Liu et al. (US 2022/0280972 A1) as applied to claim 18, above, and further in view of Hsu et al. (US 9,249,008 B2).
Regarding claim 19, Schmid does not disclose a first conductive connector electrically coupled to the bottom electrode through a first conductive layer; and a second conductive connector electrically coupled to the top electrode through a second conductive layer.
Hsu discloses a first conductive connector (351 in Fig. 10) electrically coupled to a bottom electrode through a first conductive layer (354); and a second conductive connector (352) electrically coupled to a top electrode through a second conductive layer (355).
There was a benefit to forming conductive connectors and conductive layers as taught by Hsu in that it provides an electrical connection to the electrodes.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to form a first conductive connector electrically coupled to the bottom electrode through a first conductive layer; and a second conductive connector electrically coupled to the top electrode through a second conductive layer for this benefit.
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schmid et al. (US 2020/0384503 A1) in view of Liu et al. (US 2022/0280972 A1) and Huang (US 2008/0194053 A1) as applied to claim 21, above, and further in view of Stehle et al. (US 2019/0016592 A1).
Regarding claim 25, Liu does not disclose wherein surfaces of the first protrusions have a greater surface roughness than surfaces of the second protrusions.
Stehle discloses reducing surface roughness (¶ 0071).
There was a benefit to reducing surface roughness in that it reduces stiction (¶ 0071).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the Application's effective filing date to smooth the top surfaces of the protrusions in the device of the combination to have a reduced surface roughness for this benefit. In the resulting configuration, surfaces of the first protrusions (side surfaces) will have a greater surface roughness than surfaces of the second protrusions (top surfaces).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/5/2026 with respect to the newly added limitations concerning physical contact of the passivation layer have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant’s Specification sets forth the terminology of “direct contact” but the newly added limitations only required physical contact, which allows for intervening materials. The passivation layer of Schmid satisfies the newly added physical contact limitations via indirect contact through intervening materials (including the bulk material of the dielectric layers themselves). Were Applicant to amend the claims to require direct physical contact, the rejections would be overcome.
Regarding the limitation of claim 21 concerning the first dielectric material comprising a carbide, this argument is moot in view of newly cited reference Huang.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER A CULBERT whose telephone number is (571)272-4893. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Joshua Benitez can be reached at (571) 270-1435. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER A CULBERT/ Examiner, Art Unit 2815
Prosecution Insights