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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicants election without traverse of the invention of Group I, Claims 1 through 20, in the reply filed on January 21, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 21 through 24 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on January 21, 2026.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the content appears to be directed to the product of a piezoelectric film and not the process, as recited in the steps of at least Claim 1. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1 through 20 are 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.
In Claim 1, it is unclear what is meant by the phrase of “compound layer comprising a graded section…binary compound” (lines 3-5). The recitation of “compound layer” implies one, single layer that can include more than one composition as the compound. However, the above phrase implies that there is more than one layer. This is supported by the applicants’ specification (page 8) in Figure 2 where layer 204 is referred to as an upper section and layer 200 is referred to as a lower section. These sections are shown as separate layers, yet the above phrase implies a single layer with more than one composition. For purposes of examination, the claimed “compound layer” and “graded section” will be interpreted as at least two layers.
In Claim 9, “the flux of (J)” (line 2) lacks positive antecedent basis.
In Claim 17, “the total thickness” (line 1) lacks positive antecedent basis.
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, 2, 9 through 16 and 18 through 20, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication 2018/0296529 to Akiyama et al (hereinafter “Akiyama”) in view of the teachings of U.S. Publication 2019/0326880 to Figueredo et al (hereinafter “Figueredo”) and U.S. Publication 2018/034299 to Gibb et al (hereinafter “Gibb”).
Claim 1: Akiyama discloses a method for forming a piezoelectric film (e.g. Fig. 5e) on a substrate comprising:
forming, on the substrate (e.g. 2, or Si substrate, Fig. 5e), an aluminum nitride (AIN) layer (e.g. Sc 0.40Al0.60N); and
forming, on the AlN layer, an Al1-x(J)xN compound layer comprising a graded section with a lower (J) composition, x, adjacent to the AlN layer (x = 0.42, Sc 0.42Al0.58N layer) and a higher (J) composition, x, located further away from the AlN layer (x = 0.47, Sc 0.47Al0.53N layer), (J) being a singular element (e.g. Sc, ¶ [0103]).
Claim 2: Akiyama discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the AIN layer is deposited by a first deposition technique (e.g. sputtering, ¶ [0106]) and the Al1-x(J)xN compound layer is deposited by a second different deposition technique (e.g. ion plating, CVD, etc., ¶ [0123]).
Claim 9: Akiyama discloses the method of claim 2 wherein the grading of the (J) composition, X, is achieved by controlling a flux of (J) (e.g. Sc) used when performing the second deposition technique (e.g. ion plating, CVD, plating, etc., ¶ [0123]).
Claim 10: Akiyama discloses the method of claim 2 wherein the second deposition technique is one of sputtering, and metal organic chemical vapor deposition (MOCVD) (e.g. ¶ [0123]).
Claim 11: Akiyama discloses the method of claim 2 wherein the second deposition technique is reactive co-sputtering (e.g. of two elements of Al, Sc, or N, ¶ [0123]).
Claim 13: Akiyama discloses the method of claim 1 wherein (J) is Sc.
Claim 14: Akiyama discloses the method of claim 1 wherein a portion of the Al1-x(J)xN compound layer located adjacent to the AIN layer has a first constant composition of (J), xi (e.g. x I = 0.42, ¶ [0103]).
Claim 15: Akiyama discloses the method of claim 14 wherein the first constant composition, Xi, is Xi ≤ 10 at.% (e.g. as low as 1 at.%, ¶ [0071]).
Claim 16: Akiyama discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the Al1-x(J)xN compound layer comprises a section (e.g. Sc 0.45Al0.55N layer) deposited after the graded section having a second constant composition of (J), xf (e.g. xf = 0.45, ¶ [0103]).
Claim 18: Akiyama discloses the method of claim 16 wherein the second constant composition, xf, is 20 at.% ≤ xf ≤ 45 at.% (e.g. as low as 40 at.%, ¶ [0077]).
Claim 20: Akiyama discloses the method of claim 19 wherein the reactive co-sputtering is performed using N₂ as a reactive gas, an Al target, and a target containing Sc (e.g. ¶ [0042]).
The purpose of the piezoelectric film in Akiyama is for such applications in resonators (e.g. ¶ [0003]). Because of the open ended transitional phrase of “comprising” (line 1 of Claim 1), the Sc0.40Al0.60N layer can be read as a AlN layer, although this includes Sc.
However, if the idea is for the AlN layer to solely have just the elements of Al and N, then this is well-known and disclosed in each of Figueredo and Gibb. Akiyama, Figueredo and Gibb are all analogous in forming a piezoelectric film for the application of a resonator.
Figueredo teaches a process of making a piezoelectric film (e.g. 107, Fig. 1B) in the same application as a resonator (e.g. ¶ [0001]). The piezoelectric film can include an AlN layer where Sc is excluded (e.g. ¶ [0036]), or alternatively where the AlN layer includes Sc, i.e. AlScN, (e.g. ¶ [0034]).
Gibb teaches a similar idea in a process of making a piezoelectric film (e.g. 1904, Fig. 19A) for the same application as a resonator (e.g. ¶ [0002]). The piezoelectric film can include an AlN layer or alternatively an AlScN layer, (e.g. ¶ [0092]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the Sc0.40Al0.60N layer of Akiyama for the AlN layer in each of Figueredo and Gibb, to form an art-recognized equivalent piezoelectric film having the same purpose of an application as a piezoelectric resonator.
Regarding Claims 12 and 19, Gibb further teaches that a total thickness, TAIN, of the AlN layer can be 10 nm (e.g. ¶ [0092]), or a total thickness of a graded section, TG, of multiple layers can be 10 nm or greater (e.g. ¶ [0079]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the total thickness of each of the AlN layer and graded section of Akiyama, to the total thicknesses, respectively, taught by Gibb, to achieve forming an art-recognized equivalent piezoelectric film having the same purpose (i.e. resonator).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akiyama in view of Figueredo and Gibb, as applied to Claims 1 and 16 above, and further in view of U.S. Publication 2019/0253038 to Houlden et al (hereinafter “Houlden”).
Akiyama, as modified by Figueredo and Gibb, disclose the claimed manufacturing method as relied upon above in Claims 1 and 16. The modified Akiyama method does not teach a thickness, TF, of the section deposited after the graded section is in a range recited in Claim 17.
Houlden discloses a process of making a piezoelectric film (e.g. 120, Fig. 2) for a resonator (e.g. ¶ [0052]), where a section can have a total thickness, TF, of 1000 nm (e.g. 1 µm, ¶ [0080]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have formed the section deposited after the graded section of Akiyama to a thickness TF, of 1000 nm, as taught by Houlden, to form an art-recognized equivalent piezoelectric film having the same purpose (i.e. resonator).
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
The prior art does not teach any precursors that are introduced in a sequential manner (as recited in Claim 3), a seed layer (as recited in Claim 4) and a first deposition technique that includes the compositions for at least one precursor supplying Al and at least one precursor supplying N (as recited in Claim 8).
Accordingly, Claims 3 through 8 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a) Japanese Patent Publication, JP 2013-077646 discloses a process of making a piezoelectric film (e.g. 14, Fig. 1) that includes AlN (see SOLUTION).
b) Non-Patent Literature IEEE Publication to Lanz et al, entitled "P1J-9 Aluminum-Nitride Manufacturing Solution for BAW and other MEMS Applications Using a Novel, High-Uniformity PVD Source", discloses a process of forming a piezoelectric with AlN by deposition (see entire document).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to A. DEXTER TUGBANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4570. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
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, JESSICA HAN can be reached at (571) 272-2078. 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.
/A. DEXTER TUGBANG/Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2896
Prosecution Insights