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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/15/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to the claims are sufficient to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 112 (b) of claims 1, 3-9, 14-21 and 23-24. Accordingly, the rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 01/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive specifically the applicant presented argument of ““Murakami is related to "ferroelectric memory device," rather than a transducer; the cited WL1, WL2, WL3 in Murakami are word lines, rather than capacitors”. For illustrative purposes examiner is pointing to “WL1, WL2, WL3” because these elements show that the capacitors 170 are in a first, second and third groups. Thus, when looking at Fig.7 of Murakami, the interpretation is that the groups of capacitors 170 are broken up into “WL1, WL2, WL3” and henceforth read on the limitation of a first, second and third group of capacitors. Furthermore, examiner relies upon the Khan reference to teach the “transducer which includes an array of capacitors” limitation and it should noted that the Khan reference teachings is in view and combined with the teachings of Murakami as detailed below.
Applicants arguments with respect to the newly added limitations of claim(s) 1 and all subsequent dependent claims have been considered but are moot in view of the references cited in the most current rejection.
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.
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) 1, 3-9, 15-16, 21 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khan (US 20170243875 A1) in view of Murakami (JP 2007227548 A, all citations provided from machine translation attached) and Stein (US 20110319755 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Khan teaches an integrated circuit (IC) comprising: a substrate (104) and a transducer on the substrate, in which and the transducer includes an array of capacitors (100). (Paragraphs 18, 56, 72-73, Figs.1, 8-9)
Khan also teaches circuitry on the substrate coupled to the transducer and configurable to provide the signal (control circuit). (Paragraphs 18, 24,74-75, Fig.5)
Khan does not explicitly teach a first group of capacitors, a second group of capacitors, and a third group of capacitors, the first group of capacitors is between the second and third groups of capacitors along a first axis and is configured to provide a wave that is guided to propagate along the first axis in response to a signal.
Murakami teaches a first group of capacitors, a second group of capacitors, and a third group of capacitors, the first group of capacitors (WL1) is between the second (WL2) and third groups (WL3) of capacitors along a first axis. (Abstract, Page.2, Paragraphs 6-9, Page.13, Paragraphs 5-6, Fig.7)
Stein teaches a transducer (5) configured to provide a wave that is guided (pulsed energy waves 2 through waveguide 3) to propagate along the first axis in response to a signal (The mode of the propagation of the pulsed energy waves 2 through waveguide 3 is controlled by mode control circuitry 12). (Paragraph 153, Figs.8-9)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filled to modify Khan to incorporate a first group of capacitors, a second group of capacitors, and a third group of capacitors, the first group of capacitors is between the second and third groups of capacitors along a first axis as taught by Murakami in order to improve writing and reading characteristics and further modify Khan to incorporate a transducer configured to provide a wave that is guided to propagate along the first axis in response to a signal as taught by Stein in order to rapidly measure changes in the frequency of oscillation of the propagation with high resolution.
Regarding claim 3, Khan teaches mold compound on the substrate, in which the mold compound has an opening to a portion of at least one of the first, second, or third groups of capacitors. (Paragraphs 23, 54)
Regarding claim 4, Khan does not explicitly teach wherein a first capacitor in the second group of capacitor adjacent to the first group of capacitor has a first width along the first axis, and the respective widths of the first group of capacitor along the first axis progressively reduce from the first width to a second width.
Murakami teaches wherein a first capacitor in the second group of capacitor adjacent to the first group of capacitor has a first width along the first axis, and the respective widths of the first group of capacitor along the first axis progressively reduce from the first width to a second width. (Page.2, Paragraphs 6-9, Fig.7)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filled to modify Khan to incorporate wherein a first capacitor in the second group of capacitor adjacent to the first group of capacitor has a first width along the first axis, and the respective widths of the first group of capacitor along the first axis progressively reduce from the first width to a second width in order to improve writing and reading characteristics.
Regarding claim 5, Khan teaches wherein each capacitor of the first, second, and third groups of capacitors has a respective first conductive plate, a respective second conductive plate, and a respective ferroelectric material between the respective first and second conductive plates. (Paragraph 9-10)
Regarding claim 6, Khan does not explicitly teach wherein the first conductive plate of a first capacitor in the second group of capacitors is connected to at least first and second contact pads, the first conductive plate of a second capacitor in the second group of capacitors is connected to a third contact pad, and the first conductive plate of a third capacitor in the second group of capacitors is disconnected from all contact pads not connected to a contact pad.
Murakami teaches wherein the first conductive plate of a first capacitor in the second group of capacitors is connected to at least first and second contact pads, the first conductive plate of a second capacitor in the second group of capacitors is connected to a third contact pad, and the first conductive plate of a third capacitor in the second group of capacitors is disconnected from all contact pads not connected to a contact pad. (Embodiment 2, Page.4)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filled to modify Khan to incorporate wherein the first conductive plate of a first capacitor in the second group of capacitors is connected to at least first and second contact pads, the first conductive plate of a second capacitor in the second group of capacitors is connected to a third contact pad, and the first conductive plate of a third capacitor in the second group of capacitors is disconnected from all contact pads not connected to a contact pad in order to shorten the plate line and reduce the load on the plate line.
Regarding claim 7, Khan teaches wherein: at least a first capacitor in the second group of capacitors has a first conductive plate, a second conductive plate, and ferroelectric material between the first and second conductive plates; and at least a second capacitor in the second group of capacitors has no conductive plate or only one conductive plate. (Paragraph 9-10)
Regarding claim 8, Khan does not explicitly teach wherein a respective pitch or a respective width of each capacitor of the third group of capacitors along the first axis is 10% to 50% larger than a respective pitch or width widths of capacitor of the first group of capacitors.
Murakami teaches wherein a respective pitch or a respective width of each capacitor of the third group of capacitors along the first axis is a percentage larger than a respective pitch or width of capacitor of the first group of capacitors. (Page.2, Paragraphs 6-9, Fig.7)
Khan in view of Murakami discloses the claimed invention except for pitch or width of capacitors that are 10% to 50% larger. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to incorporate pitch or width of capacitors that are 10% to 50% larger, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filled to modify Khan to incorporate wherein a respective pitch or a respective width of each capacitor of the third group of capacitors along the first axis is 10% to 50% larger than a respective pitch or width widths of capacitor of the first group of capacitors in order to shorten the plate line and reduce the load on the plate line.
Regarding claim 9, Khan does not explicitly teach wherein a respective pitch or width of each capacitor of the second or third groups of capacitors progressively increase towards the first group of capacitors.
Murakami teaches wherein a respective pitch or width of each capacitor of the second or third groups of capacitors progressively increase towards the first group of capacitors. (Page.13, Paragraphs 5-6, Page.2, Paragraphs 6-9, Fig.7)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filled to modify Khan to incorporate wherein a respective pitch or width of each capacitor of the second or third groups of capacitors progressively increase towards the first group of capacitors in order to shorten the plate line and reduce the load on the plate line.
Regarding claim 15, Khan does not explicitly teach wherein each capacitor of the first group of capacitors has a larger respective width than each capacitor of the second group of capacitors along the first axis, and each capacitor of the first group of capacitors has a smaller respective width along the first axis than each capacitor of the third group of capacitors.
Murakami teaches wherein each capacitor of the first group of capacitors has a respective width than each capacitor of the second group of capacitors along the first axis, and each capacitor of the first group of capacitors has a respective width along the first axis than each capacitor of the third group of capacitors. (Abstract, Page.2, Paragraphs 6-9, Fig.7)
Khan in view of Murakami discloses the claimed invention except for a larger and smaller width of groups of capacitors. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to incorporate larger and smaller width of groups of capacitors, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filled to modify Khan to incorporate wherein each capacitor of the first group of capacitors has a larger respective width than each capacitor of the second group of capacitors along the first axis, and each capacitor of the first group of capacitors has a smaller respective width along the first axis than each capacitor of the third group of capacitors in order to improve writing and reading characteristics.
Regarding claim 16, Khan does not explicitly teach wherein the first group of capacitors has a larger pitch along the first axis than the second group of capacitors, and the first group of capacitors has a smaller pitch along the first axis than the third group of capacitors.
Andresen teaches wherein the first group of capacitors has a larger pitch along the first axis than the second group of capacitors, and the first group of capacitors has a smaller pitch along the first axis than the third group of capacitors. (Fig.1, Claims 7-9) Andresen teaches a range of pitch between capacitors (pitch within the range 0.9-1.1 millimeters) and one of ordinary skill in the art would be able to adjust the pitch as desired since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filled to modify Khan to incorporate wherein the first group of capacitors has a larger pitch along the first axis than the second group of capacitors, and the first group of capacitors has a smaller pitch along the first axis than the third group of capacitors as taught by Andresen in order to separate the capacitors at a desired distance.
Regarding claim 21, Khan teaches at least one metal interconnect layer overlaying and coupled between the transducer and the circuitry. (Paragraphs 11, 16, 22)
Regarding claim 24, Khan teaches wherein the wave is an acoustic wave. (Paragraph 66)
Claim(s) 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Khan in view of Murakami, Stein and Evans (CA 1340340 C, all citations provided from machine translation attached).
Regarding claim 23, Khan does not explicitly teach wherein capacitors of the first group of capacitors are coupled to drive terminals, and the capacitors of the second and third group of capacitors are coupled to at least one of a bias terminal or a ground terminal.
Evans teaches wherein capacitors of the first group of capacitors are coupled to drive terminals, and the capacitors of the second and third group of capacitors are coupled to at least one of a bias terminal or a ground terminal. (Figs.8-9)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filled to modify Khan to incorporate wherein capacitors of the first group of capacitors are coupled to drive terminals, and the capacitors of the second and third group of capacitors are coupled to at least one of a bias terminal or a ground terminal as taught by Evans in order to supply pulses to the capacitors
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-13 and 25 are allowed over prior art.
Claims 14 and 17-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDALLAH ABULABAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4755. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00am-3:00pm 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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at 571-272-6970. 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.
/ABDALLAH ABULABAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645