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 § 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.
Claims 1-4 and 8-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kando (US 2015/0028720) in view of Geshi et al. (US 2021/0104999).
With respect to claim 1, Kando discloses a multilayer piezoelectric substrate (Fig 1A) for a surface acoustic wave resonator (Paragraph 7), the multilayer piezoelectric substrate comprising: a carrier substrate (item 2) having an upper surface; a high acoustic velocity dielectric layer (item 3) having a lower surface disposed on the upper surface of the carrier substrate and an upper surface to reflect acoustic energy generated by the surface acoustic wave resonator away from the carrier substrate (Fig 1A); a low acoustic velocity dielectric layer (item 4) having a lower surface disposed on the upper surface of the high acoustic velocity dielectric layer and an upper surface (Fig 1A), the low acoustic velocity dielectric layer exhibiting a lower acoustic velocity than an acoustic velocity of the high acoustic velocity dielectric layer (Paragraph 53); and a layer of piezoelectric material (item 5) having a lower surface disposed on the upper surface of the low acoustic velocity dielectric layer (Fig 1A).
Kando does not disclose that the layer of piezoelectric material is made of lithium tantalate.
Geshi et al. teaches a piezoelectric surface acoustic wave device in which the layer of piezoelectric material is made of lithium tantalate (Paragraph 24).
Before the effective filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the lithium tantalate of Geshi et al. with the surface acoustic wave device of Kando as it has been held that the selection of a material based on an art-recognized suitability for an intended purpose is obvious (In re Leshin 125 USPQ 416). As lithium tantalate is among the most commonly used piezoelectric materials in surface acoustic wave device, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select that material for use in the device of Kando.
With respect to claim 2, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the multilayer piezoelectric substrate of claim 1.
Kando does not disclose that the carrier substrate comprises a polycrystalline material.
Geshi et al. teaches a piezoelectric acoustic wave device in which the carrier substrate comprises a polycrystalline material (Paragraphs 4 and 22).
Before the effective filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the spinel substrate material of Geshi et al. with the piezoelectric acoustic wave device of Kando as it has been held that the selection of a material based on an art-recognized suitability for an intended purpose is obvious (In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416).
With respect to claim 3, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the multilayer piezoelectric substrate of claim 2. Geshi et al. discloses that the carrier substrate comprises Mg2AlO4 (Paragraph 22).
With respect to claim 4, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the multilayer piezoelectric substrate of claim 3. Kando discloses that the high acoustic velocity dielectric layer comprises silicon nitride (Paragraph 55).
With respect to claim 8, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. disclose the multilayer piezoelectric substrate of claim 3. Kando discloses that the high acoustic velocity dielectric layer comprises one of AIN or Al2O3 (Paragraph 55).
With respect to claim 9, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the multilayer piezoelectric substrate of claim 1. Kando discloses that the high acoustic velocity dielectric layer is thicker than the low acoustic velocity dielectric layer (Paragraphs 56 and 66).
With respect to claim 10, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the multilayer piezoelectric substrate of claim 1. Kando discloses that the high acoustic velocity dielectric layer is thicker than the layer of piezoelectric material. (Paragraphs 56 and 66).
With respect to claim 11, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the multilayer piezoelectric substrate of claim 10. Kando discloses that the high acoustic velocity dielectric layer has a thickness of at least 0.3 λ, wherein λ is a wavelength of a main acoustic wave generated by the surface acoustic wave resonator (Paragraph 56).
With respect to claim 12, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the multilayer piezoelectric substrate of claim 1. Kando discloses that the high acoustic velocity dielectric layer is thicker than a combined thickness of the low acoustic velocity dielectric layer and the layer of piezoelectric material (Paragraphs 56 and 66).
With respect to claim 13, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the multilayer piezoelectric substrate of claim 1. Kando discloses that the high acoustic velocity dielectric layer comprises on of silicon nitride, silicon oxynitride, aluminum nitride, alumina, quartz, or sapphire (Paragraph 55).
With respect to claim 14, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the multilayer piezoelectric substrate of claim 13. Kando discloses that the carrier substrate comprises a same material as the high acoustic velocity dielectric layer (Paragraphs 54-55, wherein alumina and aluminum oxide are the same material).
With respect to claim 15, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the multilayer piezoelectric substrate of claim 14. Kando discloses that the carrier substrate consists of the same material as the high acoustic velocity dielectric layer (Paragraphs 54-55, wherein alumina and aluminum oxide are the same material).
With respect to claim 16, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the multilayer piezoelectric substrate of claim 1. Kando discloses a surface acoustic wave resonator including the multilayer piezoelectric substrate (Paragraph 7).
With respect to claim 17, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the surface acoustic wave resonator of 16. Kando discloses a filter including the surface acoustic wave resonator (Paragraph 64).
With respect to claim 18, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the filter of claim 17. Kando discloses a radio frequency device module including the filter (Paragraph 64).
With respect to claim 19, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the radio frequency device module of claim 18. Kando discloses a radio frequency device including the radio frequency device module (Paragraph 64).
With respect to claim 20, Kando discloses a method of forming a surface acoustic wave resonator (Fig 1A, Paragraph 7), the method comprising: providing a carrier substrate (item 2) having an upper surface (Fig 1A); forming a high acoustic velocity dielectric layer (item 3) having a lower surface on the upper surface of the carrier substrate (Fig 1A); forming a low acoustic velocity dielectric layer (item 4) having on an upper surface of the high acoustic velocity dielectric layer (Fig 1A), the low acoustic velocity dielectric layer exhibiting a lower acoustic velocity than an acoustic velocity of the high acoustic velocity dielectric layer (Paragraph 53); forming a layer of piezoelectric material (item 5) on an upper surface of the low acoustic velocity dielectric layer (Fig 1A); and forming interdigital transducer electrodes (item 6) on an upper surface of the layer of piezoelectric material (Fig 1A).
Kando does not disclose that the layer of piezoelectric material is made of lithium tantalate.
Geshi et al. teaches a piezoelectric surface acoustic wave device in which the layer of piezoelectric material is made of lithium tantalate (Paragraph 24).
Before the effective filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the lithium tantalate of Geshi et al. with the surface acoustic wave device of Kando as it has been held that the selection of a material based on an art-recognized suitability for an intended purpose is obvious (In re Leshin 125 USPQ 416). As lithium tantalate is among the most commonly used piezoelectric materials in surface acoustic wave device, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to select that material for use in the device of Kando.
With respect to claim 21, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the method of claim 19. Kando discloses a radio frequency filter including the surface acoustic wave resonator (Paragraph 64).
With respect to claim 22, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the method of claim 21. Kando discloses forming a radio frequency device module including the radio frequency filter (Paragraph 64).
With respect to claim 23, the combination of Kando and Geshi et al. discloses the method of claim 22. Kando discloses forming a radio frequency electronic device including the radio frequency device module (Paragraph 64).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 Derek John Rosenau whose telephone number is (571)272-8932. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7 am to 5:30 pm Central Time.
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 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.
/DEREK J ROSENAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837