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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 20, the limitation “the seal having a seal surface having a solidification path where the secondary laser pulse region applies heat to a molten zone formed by the primary laser pulse region, thereby moving molten material from a center of the membrane vent hole outward therefrom” is lacking written description in the specification. The specification does not disclose the solidification path can move molten material outward from the center of the hole.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 20, the limitation “the seal having a seal surface having a solidification path where the secondary laser pulse region applies heat to a molten zone formed by the primary laser pulse region, thereby moving molten material from a center of the membrane vent hole outward therefrom is indefinite. It is unclear how the solidification path can move molten material outward from the center of the hole.
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.
Claims 1, 3-9, and 11-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ametowobla (DE 102015224488A1) (cited in IDS).
PNG
media_image1.png
704
458
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
362
532
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Ametowobla teaches a method for controlling surface asperity during laser sealing of a membrane vent hole, the method comprising:
applying a laser pulse (laser pulses 905, 925, 933 and 935) having a laser intensity spatial distribution to the membrane vent hole (opening 11) to form a seal (material region 13) over the membrane vent hole (opening 11) (See fig.2 and para.[0044] “For example, it is also provided that the introduction of energy or heat is controlled by means of the time-shaped laser pulse 905 in such a way that the further laser pulse duration 907 is at least partially preceded in time by a first transition of the material region 13 from the solid to the liquid state. In addition, it is provided, for example, that the introduction of energy or heat is controlled by means of the time-shaped laser pulse 905 such that the third laser pulse duration 911 at least partially follows a second transition of the material region 13 from the liquid to the solid state.”), the laser pulse (laser pulses 905, 925, 933 and 935) including a primary laser pulse region (the region of laser pulses 905, 925) and a secondary laser pulse region (the region of laser pulses 933, 935) later in time than the primary laser pulse region (see fig.8), and a time gap between the primary laser pulse region and the secondary laser pulse region (see fig.8, there is a time gap between the region of laser pulses 905, 925 and the region of laser pulses 933, 935), the primary laser pulse region (the region of laser pulses 905, 925) includes first and second discontinuous laser pulses (laser pulses 905, 925) having a first time gap therebetween (see fig.8, there is a time gap between laser pulse laser pulses 905 and 925), the primary laser pulse region (the region of laser pulses 905, 925) include first and second discontinuous laser pulses (laser pulses 905, 925), the primary laser pulse region having a primary pulse duration (the duration of laser pulses 905, 925) and the first time gap having a first time gap duration (see fig.8, the duration of the time gap between laser pulse laser pulses 905 and 925), the seal having a surface having a surface asperity characteristic [Examiner’s note: It is inherent that every surface have a certain asperity characteristic.], but does not teach the first time gap duration is 1% to 2% of the primary pulse duration.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date the claimed invention was made to modify the first time gap to be 1% to 2% of the primary pulse duration, in order to provide desired laser processing time, since applicant does not disclose that the first time gap duration is 1% to 2% of the primary pulse duration solved any stated problem or is for any particular purpose, and therefore that relationship between the first time gap and the primary pulse duration is an obvious design choice (MPEP 2144).
Regarding claim 3, Ametowobla teaches the first discontinuous pulse (laser pulse 905) having a first discontinuous pulse laser power (laser pulse intensity 903) and the second discontinuous pulse (laser pulse 925) having a second discontinuous pulse laser power (laser pulse intensity 923), the first and second discontinuous pulse powers are not equal (see fig.8, laser pulse intensity 903 and laser pulse intensity 923 are not equal.).
Regarding claim 4, Ametowobla teaches the secondary laser pulse region (the region of laser pulses 933, 935) includes third and fourth discontinuous laser pulses (the region of laser pulses 933, 935), the secondary laser pulse having a secondary pulse duration (the duration of laser pulses 933, 935) and the second time gap having a second time gap duration (see fig.8, there is a time gap between the region of laser pulses 933, 935), but does not teach the second time gap duration is 1% to 2% of the primary pulse duration.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date the claimed invention was made to modify the second time gap to be 1% to 2% of the secondary pulse duration, in order to provide desired laser processing time, since applicant does not disclose that the first time gap duration is 1% to 2% of the primary pulse duration solved any stated problem or is for any particular purpose, and therefore that relationship between the second time gap and the secondary pulse duration is an obvious design choice (MPEP 2144).
Regarding claim 5, Ametowobla teaches the secondary laser pulse region (the region of laser pulses 933, 935) includes third and fourth discontinuous laser pulses (laser pulses 933, 935), the third discontinuous pulse (laser pulse 933) having a third discontinuous pulse laser power (intensity of laser pulse 933) and the fourth discontinuous pulse (laser pulse 935) having a fourth discontinuous pulse laser power (intensity of laser pulse 935), the third and fourth discontinuous pulse powers are not equal (see fig.8, laser pulse intensity 933 and laser pulse intensity 935 are not equal.).
Regarding claim 6, Ametowobla teaches the primary laser pulse region (the region of laser pulses 905, 925) has a primary laser power (the power intensity of laser pulses 905, 925) and the secondary laser pulse region (the region of laser pulses 933, 935) has a secondary laser power (the power intensity of laser pulses 933, 935), the secondary laser power is less than the primary laser power (see fig.8, the power intensity of laser pulses 933, 935 is less than the power intensity of laser pulses 905, 925.).
Regarding claims 7 and 13, Ametowobla does not explicitly teach the secondary laser power is less than the primary laser power by 10% to 60%
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date the claimed invention was made to modify the power of the primary laser pulse and the secondary laser pulse to have the secondary laser power is less than the primary laser power by 10% to 60%, in order to provide desired power relationship between the primary laser power and the secondary laser power, since applicant does not disclose that relationship between the primary laser power and the secondary laser power solved any stated problem or is for any particular purpose, and therefore that relationship between the primary power and the secondary power is an obvious design choice (MPEP 2144).
Regarding claims 8 and 14, Ametowobla teaches the surface asperity characteristic is a reduced surface asperity height [Examiner’s note: It is inherent that every surface have a certain asperity height.].
Regarding claim 9, Ametowobla teaches a method for controlling surface asperity during laser sealing of a membrane vent hole, the method comprising:
applying a laser pulse (laser pulses 905, 925, 933 and 935) having a laser intensity spatial distribution to the membrane vent hole (opening 11) to form a seal (material region 13) over the membrane vent hole (opening 11) (See fig.2 and para.[0044] “For example, it is also provided that the introduction of energy or heat is controlled by means of the time-shaped laser pulse 905 in such a way that the further laser pulse duration 907 is at least partially preceded in time by a first transition of the material region 13 from the solid to the liquid state. In addition, it is provided, for example, that the introduction of energy or heat is controlled by means of the time-shaped laser pulse 905 such that the third laser pulse duration 911 at least partially follows a second transition of the material region 13 from the liquid to the solid state.”), the laser pulse (laser pulses 905, 925, 933 and 935) including a primary laser pulse region (the region of laser pulses 905, 925) and a secondary laser pulse region (the region of laser pulses 933, 935) later in time than the primary laser pulse region (see fig.8), and a time gap between the primary laser pulse region and the secondary laser pulse region (see fig.8, there is a time gap between the region of laser pulses 905, 925 and the region of laser pulses 933, 935), the primary laser pulse region (the region of laser pulses 905, 925) has a primary laser power (the power intensity of laser pulses 905, 925) and the secondary laser pulse region (the region of laser pulses 933, 935) has a secondary laser power (the power intensity of laser pulses 933, 935) less than the primary laser power (see fig.8, the power intensity of laser pulses 933, 935 is less than the power intensity of laser pulses 905, 925.), the primary laser pulse region has a primary pulse duration and the time gap has a time gap duration (see fig.8), the seal having a seal surface having a surface asperity characteristic [Examiner’s note: It is inherent that every surface have a certain asperity characteristic.], but does not teach a ratio of the time gap duration to the primary pulse duration is 0.0.1:1 to 0.6:1.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date the claimed invention was made to modify the primary laser pulse and the secondary laser pulse to have a ratio of the time gap duration to the primary pulse duration is 0.01:1 to 0.6:1, in order to provide desired processing time of the primary pulse, since applicant does not disclose that ratio of the time gap duration to the primary pulse duration solved any stated problem or is for any particular purpose, and therefore that ratio of the time gap duration to the primary pulse duration is an obvious design choice (MPEP 2144).
Regarding claim 11, Ametowobla does not teach a ratio of the time gap duration to the primary pulse duration is 0.2:1 to 0.6:1.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date the claimed invention was made to modify the primary laser pulse and the secondary laser pulse to have a ratio of the time gap duration to the primary pulse duration is 0.2:1 to 0.6:1, in order to provide desired processing time of the primary pulse, since applicant does not disclose that ratio of the time gap duration to the primary pulse duration solved any stated problem or is for any particular purpose, and therefore that ratio of the time gap duration to the primary pulse duration is an obvious design choice (MPEP 2144).
Regarding claim 12, Ametowobla teaches the primary laser pulse region (the region of laser pulses 905, 925) has a primary pulse duration (duration of laser pulses 905, 925) and the secondary laser pulse region (the region of laser pulses 933, 935) has a secondary pulse duration (the duration of laser pulses 933, 935), but does not teach a ratio of the secondary pulse duration to the primary pulse duration is 8:1 to 2:1.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date the claimed invention was made to modify the secondary pulse duration to the primary pulse duration to have a ratio of the secondary pulse duration to the primary pulse duration is 8:1 to 2:1, in order to provide desired laser processing time of the primary and secondary pulse durations, since applicant does not disclose that relationship between primary and secondary pulse durations solved any stated problem or is for any particular purpose, and therefore that relationship between the primary and secondary pulse durations is an obvious design choice (MPEP 2144).
Claims 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ametowobla in view of Ilin (US 20170157710).
Regarding claims 15-18, Ametowobla does not explicitly teach the laser intensity spatial distribution is a donut shaped laser intensity distribution, an oval shaped laser intensity distribution, or a polygon shaped laser intensity distribution, the laser intensity spatial distribution has spaced apart discontinuities, and the laser intensity spatial distribution includes peripheral discontinuities and/or radial discontinuities.
However, Ilin teaches in the same field of endeavor of a laser processing method, comprising a laser intensity spatial distribution (spatial laser pulse expansion 1001) is a donut shaped laser intensity distribution (see fig.7, spatial laser pulse expansion 1001 is a donut shaped laser intensity distribution.), the laser intensity spatial distribution within a laser irradiation zone formed between first and second circles (see fig.7), the laser intensity spatial distribution has spaced apart discontinuities and the laser intensity spatial distribution includes peripheral discontinuities and/or radial discontinuities (See fig.7, spatial laser pulse expansion 1001 has radial spaced discontinuities.)
PNG
media_image3.png
308
592
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date the claimed invention was made to modify the shaped of laser intensity spatial distribution of Ametowobla with a donut shaped laser intensity distribution has radial spaced discontinuities as taught by Ilin, in order to generate local compressive stresses, which counteract the formation of tensile stresses in the sealing area or in the immediate area of access opening (para.[0061] of Ilin)
Regarding claim 19, Ametowobla does not explicitly teach the membrane vent hole is a silicon membrane vent hole.
However, Ilin teaches in the same field of endeavor of a laser processing method, comprising the membrane vent hole (opening 11) is a silicon membrane (substrate 7) vent hole (opening 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date the claimed invention was made to modify the material of the hole of the substrate of Ametowobla with a silicon membrane vent hole as taught by Ilin, in order to enable the micromechanical component to be manufactured using standard methods of semiconductor laser technology (See para.[0035] of Ilin).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 10 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.
Response to Arguments
With respect to claim objection, applicant amended claims 1 and 18 filed on 12/09/2025, which overcome the claim objection. Therefore the claim objection is withdrawn.
With respect to the claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 112(b), applicant
amended claims 1-5, 8, 14-15, and 20 which overcomes the claim rejections. Therefore the claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 112(b) are withdrawn. However, new 112 rejection are raised due to the claim amendments.
Applicant's arguments filed on 12/09/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In the remark, the citation of the specification does not provide the support of why the certain number of ratio is critical. Therefore the claim rejection is respectfully maintained.
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 CHRIS Q LIU whose telephone number is (571)272-8241. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9:00-6:00.
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at (571) 270-5569. 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.
/CHRIS Q LIU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761