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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 133, 153, 154, 155 and 156. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 21-25 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 04 November 2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 15 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Caraveo (PG Pub 20170155038).
Considering claim 15, Caraveo (Figure 1A) teaches a movable piezo element, comprising: a structured substrate in which an intermediate layer (110 + paragraph 0049) is arranged between a first substrate layer (105) and a second substrate layer (120 + paragraph 0049); a first electrode layer (125 + paragraph 0049) of an electrically conductive, non-ferroelectric material arranged on the second substrate layer; a ferroelectric, piezoelectric (130 + paragraph 0049), and/or flexoelectric layer arranged on the first electrode layer; a second electrode layer (135 + paragraph 0049) of an electrically conductive, non-ferroelectric material arranged on the ferroelectric, piezoelectric, and/or flexoelectric layer, the second substrate layer (120 + paragraph 0049) is structured such that at least one bar of the second substrate layer mounted on one side is formed that is spatially spaced apart from the first substrate layer (105 + paragraph 0049) and a surface of the bar remote from the first substrate layer (105 + paragraph 0049) and/or a side surface of the bar is/are at least partially covered by a layer stack of the first electrode layer, the ferroelectric, piezoelectric (130 + paragraph 0049) and/or flexoelectric layer and the second electrode layer.
Considering claim 20, Caraveo teaches wherein the movable piezo element is used as a MEMS switch, as a MEMS filter, as a MEMS phase shifter, as cantilever (abstract) for atomic force microscopy, as a microfluid switch, as a microfluid valve, as a micromirror, as a micropositioner, as an ultrasound transducer, as an ultrasound sensor, as a loudspeaker, as a microphone, as a seismograph, as a microspectrometer, as a micromechanical latching mechanism, as a micromechanical step motor, as a Fabry-Perot interferometer, or as a flagelliform driver for a micromechanical application.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caraveo (PG Pub 20170155038) and in view of Yan-qing (CN 107511318).
Considering claim 16, Caraveo teaches the movable piezo element wherein the first electrode layer, the ferroelectric, piezoelectric (130 + paragraph 0049), and/or flexoelectic layer and/or the second electrode layer.
However, Caraveo does not teach wherein a thickness variation at the side surface of below 10% or of a maximum of 5 nm.
Yan-qing teaches a thickness variation at the side surface of below 10% or of a maximum of 5 nm (page 5 + third-fourth paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include a thickness variation at the side surface of below 10% or of a maximum of 5 nm into Caraveo’s device for the benefit of increasing the output of the device.
Considering claim 17, Yan-qing teaches wherein the bar is connected with material continuity along its longitudinal axis at least one end to the further second substrate layer (page 4 + third paragraph).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caraveo (PG Pub 20170155038) and in view of Naono (PG Pub 20170352796).
Considering claim 18, Caraveo teaches the movable piezo element as described above.
However, Caraveo does not teach wherein the bar is meandering or spiral.
Naono teaches wherein the bar is meandering (30 + paragraph 0077) or spiral.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to include wherein the bar is meandering or spiral into Caraveo’s device for the benefit of providing a large amount of displacement.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caraveo (PG Pub 20170155038) and in view of Ohashi (PG Pub 20140267508).
Considering claim 19, Caraveo teaches the movable piezo element as described above.
However, Caraveo does not teach wherein the ferroelectric, piezoelectric, and/or flexoelectric layer has undoped or doped hafnium oxide, undoped or doped zirconium oxide, or an alloy therefrom, with the doped hafnium oxide or the doped zirconium oxide is doped with silicon, aluminum, germanium, gallium, iron, cobalt, chromium, magnesium, calcium, strontium, barium, titanium, zirconium, uttrium, nitrogen, carbon, lanthanum, gadolinium, and/or an element of the rare earths.
Ohashi teaches wherein the ferroelectric, piezoelectric, and/or flexoelectric layer has undoped or doped hafnium oxide, undoped or doped zirconium oxide (paragraph 0005), or an alloy therefrom, with the doped hafnium oxide or the doped zirconium oxide is doped with silicon, aluminum, germanium, gallium, iron, cobalt, chromium, magnesium, calcium, strontium, barium, titanium, zirconium, uttrium, nitrogen, carbon, lanthanum, gadolinium, and/or an element of the rare earths.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to include the ferroelectric, piezoelectric, and/or flexoelectric layer has undoped or doped hafnium oxide, undoped or doped zirconium oxide, or an alloy therefrom, with the doped hafnium oxide or the doped zirconium oxide is doped with silicon, aluminum, germanium, gallium, iron, cobalt, chromium, magnesium, calcium, strontium, barium, titanium, zirconium, uttrium, nitrogen, carbon, lanthanum, gadolinium, and/or an element of the rare earths into Caraveo’s device for the benefit of using a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Claim(s) 26-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caraveo (PG Pub 20170155038) and in view of Frescas (PG Pub 20180120938).
Considering claim 26, Caraveo teaches a component have the movable piezo element (130 + paragraph 0049).
However, Caraveo does not teach a transistor or a circuit, wherein the movable piezo element and the transistor or the circuit are electrically contacted by an electric contact having a distance of less than 50 microns.
Frescas (Figure 2) teaches a transistor (210 + paragraph 0033) or a circuit, wherein the movable piezo element and the transistor or the circuit are electrically contacted by an electric contact.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include a transistor or a circuit, wherein the movable piezo element and the transistor or the circuit are electrically contacted by an electric contact into Caraveo’s device for the benefit of making it easier to integrate into electronic devices.
Furthermore, Caraveo in view Frescas discloses the claimed invention except for the transistor or the circuit are electrically contacted by an electric contact having a distance of less than 50 microns. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have for the transistor or the circuit are electrically contacted by an electric contact having a distance of less than 50 microns, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art.
Considering claim 27, Frescas (Figure 2) teaches wherein the movable piezo element and the transistor (210 + paragraph 0033) or the circuit are formed as an integrated circuit on a single substrate.
Considering claim 28, Frescas (Figure 2) teaches wherein the movable piezo element and the transistor or the circuit are formed in a single wiring plane of a CMOS process (paragraph 0057).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN P GORDON whose telephone number is (571)272-5394. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 a.m. - 4:30 p.m..
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, Dedei K Hammond can be reached at 571-270-7938. 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.
/BRYAN P GORDON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837