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 .
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment filed on 07/03/2026, claims 1 & 11 have been amended and claims 1-20 are pending and under examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 07/03/2026, have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Regarding Applicant’s argument with respect to section 35 U.S.C. 112(b), Applicant argues that specifications details “substantially” as within 10%.
Respectfully, the Applicant’s argument is not compelling as independent claim 1 utilizes multiple instances of hedging terms, namely…
“based on” (2x), ll. 5 & 6;
“outer boundary with a shape… substantially, ll. 6-7; and
“corresponding”, ll. 7
These hedging limitations broaden the scope of the claim, making it difficult for a POSITA to recognize how narrow the claimed subject matter actually is. Furthermore, the limitation “based on” does not provide the manner on how the distribution force and outer boundary is drawn upon. For example, it is unclear whether it is drawn upon a force, calculated using the measured force, a desire to avoid/instigate the force, etc. For the reasons explained above, claims 1-20 remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Applicant’s arguments, filed 07/03/2026, with respect to the rejection of section – 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection of claims 1-20 have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Wan et al (U.S. Patent Publication 10999684 B1) hereinafter Wan, in view of Takano et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 20120293043 A1) hereinafter Takano.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 1-9 and 11-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wan et al (U.S. Patent Publication 10999684 B1) hereinafter Wan, and further in view of Takano et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 20120293043 A1) hereinafter Takano.
Regarding claim 1, Wan discloses (Title: MEMS Microphone And Method Of Manufacturing The MEMS Microphone) a method of making a piezoelectric sensor (MEMS transducer 10, col. 5, ll. 47), comprising:
forming or depositing one or more piezoelectric layers (col. 9, ll. 17-24, “the laminated film forming step is formed. In the laminated film forming step, as illustrated in FIG. 7, a laminated film 103 is formed on the silicon thin-film layer 101b of the SOI substrate 102. The laminated film 103 is formed by laminating a first electrode film (lower electrode film) layer 105, a piezoelectric material film layer 106 and a second electrode film (upper electrode film) layer 107 sequentially”) to define a beam (The beam regions 104a, 104b, 104c, 104d , col. 9, ll. 64-67) extending between a proximal portion and a distal end (annotated FIG. 13 below depicts end portions of the beam);
PNG
media_image1.png
321
547
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
321
562
media_image2.png
Greyscale
attaching the electrode to the beam (electrode film layers 105 and 107 in FIG. 13, col. 9, ll. 64-67, “The beam regions 104a, 104b, 104c, 104d have respectively the first electrode film layer 105, the piezoelectric material film layer 106 and the second electrode film layer 107”); and
attaching the beam to a substrate in cantilever form so that the proximal portion of the beam is anchored to the substrate and the distal end of the beam is unsupported (FIG. 2, col. 7, ll. 22-24, “Further, each of the cantilevered beams 21, 22, 23, 24 respectively has base parts 21a, 22a, 23a, 24a, fixed on the element substrate 2, and free beam parts 21b, 22b, 23b, 24b, not fixed on the element substrate 2”).
However, Wan fails to disclose modeling a strain distribution on the beam based on a force applied to the beam; based on the modeled strain distribution, defining an outer boundary with a shape substantially corresponding to a contour line of the modeled strain distribution on the beam; and forming or providing an electrode having said outer boundary shape;
Takano discloses (Title: Transducer for Ultrasonic Motor) a method of making a piezoelectric sensor (piezoelectric transducer element1, ¶Abstract), comprising:
modeling a strain distribution (strain distribution, ¶33) on the beam (transducer 1, ¶33) based on a force applied to the beam (¶33, “FIG. 2(a) is a perspective view schematically illustrating a strain distribution in a second-order bending natural vibration mode when a voltage is applied to the transducer using a stripe-like pattern. FIG. 2(b) is a perspective view schematically illustrating a stretching strain distribution in a first-order stretching natural vibration mode similarly”);
PNG
media_image3.png
396
553
media_image3.png
Greyscale
based on the modeled strain distribution, defining an outer boundary (FIG. 2, Takano provides electrodes [outer boundary mapped as the shape of the electrode] that are based on the modeled strain, as detailed in ¶33-39) with a shape substantially corresponding to a contour line of the modeled strain distribution on the beam (contour lines, ¶33, “contour lines of the strain distribution connecting positions having the same strain value in the longitudinal direction”; ¶37, “ the contour lines of the strain distribution are curved lines in both cases of the bending vibration and the stretching vibration”); and
forming or providing an electrode having said outer boundary shape (¶Abstract, “ the outline curved sections of the electrodes (7, 8) are shaped so as to follow along strain contours (3, 4)”; ¶37, “the electrodes 7, 8, and 9 having the outline shapes being (partially and) substantially along the curve of the contour lines are disposed”);
Wan discloses a method of making a piezoelectric sensor comprising of forming the beam comprising piezoelectric layers and electrodes in a cantilever form. Takano discloses of a method of making a piezoelectric transducer element such that it forms electrodes following the contour shape of the beam’s strain distribution based of bending and stretching vibrations. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement the method of shaping the electrode based on the contour shape of a strain distribution, taught by Takano, and apply it to the method of making a piezoelectric sensor, taught by Wan, to reduce transducer loss through temperature increase and/or heat generations of the transducer (Takano, ¶24). Takano also discloses that pre-shaping the electrode would allow for reduction in fatigue cracking/breakage due to stress concentrations, improving durability and reliability of the transducer (Takano, ¶24). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a POSITA pre-shaping the electrode would reduce excessive use electrode material in regions not needing measurement, reducing costs and waste during manufacturing as well as increased accuracy of the piezoelectric sensor.
Regarding claim 2, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 1, as detailed above, and Wan further discloses wherein the beam is a triangular beam (FIG. 2, col. 7, ll. 20-22, “each of the cantilevered beams 21, 22, 23, 24 is formed in a triangular shape in a plan view”), the unsupported distal end being a distal tip of the triangular beam (annotated FIG. 2 below).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 2 in the manner of pre-shaping an electrode to reduce transducer loss).
PNG
media_image4.png
316
506
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 1, as detailed above, and Wan further discloses wherein at least a portion of two edges of the outer boundary of the electrode are disposed inward of a pair of outer edges of the beam (annotated FIG. 2 below, Inner electrodes 14 have edges that are disposed inward of the beam’s outer edge).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 3 in the manner of pre-shaping an electrode to reduce transducer loss).
PNG
media_image5.png
179
510
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 1, as detailed above, and Wan further discloses wherein two corners of the proximal portion of the beam are not covered by the electrode (annotated FIG. 2 below, electrodes 14 don’t cover the beam’s corner).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 4 in the manner of pre-shaping an electrode to reduce transducer loss).
PNG
media_image6.png
197
512
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 1, as detailed above, and Wan further discloses wherein at least a portion of the outer boundary of the electrode is non-linear. (annotated FIG. 2 below, each electrode 14 covers a boundary where the edges of each electrode are not linear and parallel from one another).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 5 in the manner of pre-shaping an electrode to reduce transducer loss).
PNG
media_image7.png
204
501
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 1, as detailed above, and Takano further discloses wherein the beam has a rectangular shape (rectangular plate-like piezoelectric element 1, ¶33).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 6 in the manner of pre-shaping an electrode to reduce transducer loss).
Regarding claim 7, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 6, as detailed above, and Wan further discloses wherein the electrode has a rectangular shape that covers a proximal portion of the beam (annotated FIG. 2 below depicts rectangular electrodes on the proximal portion).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 7 in the manner of pre-shaping an electrode to reduce transducer loss).
PNG
media_image8.png
252
629
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 6, as detailed above, and Takano further discloses wherein the electrode has a contoured edge (¶37, “the electrodes 7, 8, and 9 having the outline shapes being (partially and) substantially along the curve of the contour lines are disposed”).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 8 in the manner of pre-shaping an electrode to reduce transducer loss).
Regarding claim 9, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 1, as detailed above, and Wan further discloses wherein the force is applied to the distal end of the beam (Wan, weight 25 in FIG. 13, col. 6, ll. 64-66, the weight applied to the distal end of the beam creates a force to propagate vibration of the beam).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 1, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 9 in the manner of pre-shaping an electrode to reduce transducer loss).
Regarding claim 11, Wan discloses (Title: MEMS Microphone And Method Of Manufacturing The MEMS Microphone) a method of making a microphone module (MEMS microphone 100, col. 5, ll. 46-47), comprising:
forming or providing a printed circuit board that includes a substrate layer (PCB: Printed Circuit Board, col. 8, ll. 24-25);
forming or providing one or more piezoelectric microelectromechanical systems microphone microphones (MEMS microphone 100 & MEMS transducer 10, col. 5, ll. 46-47) via a process including forming one or more cantilever piezoelectric sensors (MEMS transducer 10) including:
forming or depositing one or more piezoelectric layers (col. 9, ll. 17-24, “the laminated film forming step is formed. In the laminated film forming step, as illustrated in FIG. 7, a laminated film 103 is formed on the silicon thin-film layer 101b of the SOI substrate 102. The laminated film 103 is formed by laminating a first electrode film (lower electrode film) layer 105, a piezoelectric material film layer 106 and a second electrode film (upper electrode film) layer 107 sequentially”) to define a beam (The beam regions 104a, 104b, 104c, 104d , col. 9, ll. 64-67) extending between a proximal portion and a distal end (annotated FIG. 13 below depicts end portions of the beam);
attaching the electrode to the beam (electrode film layers 105 and 107 in FIG. 13, col. 9, ll. 64-67, “The beam regions 104a, 104b, 104c, 104d have respectively the first electrode film layer 105, the piezoelectric material film layer 106 and the second electrode film layer 107”);
attaching the beam to a substrate in cantilever form so that the proximal portion of the beam is anchored to the substrate and the distal end of the beam is unsupported (FIG. 2, col. 7, ll. 22-24, “Further, each of the cantilevered beams 21, 22, 23, 24 respectively has base parts 21a, 22a, 23a, 24a, fixed on the element substrate 2, and free beam parts 21b, 22b, 23b, 24b, not fixed on the element substrate 2”); and
mounting the one or more piezoelectric microelectromechanical systems microphones on the printed circuit board (col. 8, ll. 23-28, “The MEMS transducer 10 is mounted on the package surface 30a”).
However, Wan fails to disclose modeling a strain distribution on the beam based on a force applied to the beam; based on the modeled strain distribution, defining an outer boundary with a shape substantially corresponding to a contour line of the modeled strain distribution on the beam; and forming or providing an electrode having said outer boundary shape;
Takano discloses (Title: Transducer for Ultrasonic Motor) a method of making a piezoelectric sensor (piezoelectric transducer element1, ¶Abstract), comprising:
modeling a strain distribution (strain distribution, ¶33) on the beam (transducer 1, ¶33) based on a force applied to the beam (¶33, “FIG. 2(a) is a perspective view schematically illustrating a strain distribution in a second-order bending natural vibration mode when a voltage is applied to the transducer using a stripe-like pattern. FIG. 2(b) is a perspective view schematically illustrating a stretching strain distribution in a first-order stretching natural vibration mode similarly”);
based on the modeled strain distribution, defining an outer boundary with a shape substantially corresponding to a contour line of the modeled strain distribution on the beam (contour lines, ¶33, “contour lines of the strain distribution connecting positions having the same strain value in the longitudinal direction”; ¶37, “ the contour lines of the strain distribution are curved lines in both cases of the bending vibration and the stretching vibration”); and
forming or providing an electrode having said outer boundary shape (¶Abstract, “ the outline curved sections of the electrodes (7, 8) are shaped so as to follow along strain contours (3, 4)”; ¶37, “the electrodes 7, 8, and 9 having the outline shapes being (partially and) substantially along the curve of the contour lines are disposed”);
Wan discloses a method of making a piezoelectric sensor comprising of forming the beam comprising piezoelectric layers and electrodes in a cantilever form. Takano discloses of a method of making a piezoelectric transducer element such that it forms electrodes following the contour shape of the beam’s strain distribution based of bending and stretching vibrations. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to implement the method of shaping the electrode based on the contour shape of a strain distribution, taught by Takano, and apply it to the method of making a piezoelectric sensor, taught by Wan, to reduce transducer loss through temperature increase and/or heat generations of the transducer (Takano, ¶24). Takano also discloses that pre-shaping the electrode would allow for reduction in fatigue cracking/breakage due to stress concentrations, improving durability and reliability of the transducer (Takano, ¶24). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a POSITA pre-shaping the electrode would reduce excessive use electrode material in regions not needing measurement, reducing costs and waste during manufacturing as well as increased accuracy of the piezoelectric sensor.
Regarding claim 12, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 1, as detailed above, and Wan further discloses wherein the beam is a triangular beam (FIG. 2, col. 7, ll. 20-22, “each of the cantilevered beams 21, 22, 23, 24 is formed in a triangular shape in a plan view”), the unsupported distal end being a distal tip of the triangular beam (refer to rejection of claim 2 for annotated FIG. 2).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 11, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 12 in the manner of pre-shaping an electrode to reduce transducer loss).
Regarding claim 13, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 1, as detailed above, and Wan further discloses wherein at least a portion of two edges of the outer boundary of the electrode are disposed inward of a pair of outer edges of the beam (refer to rejection of claim 3 for annotated FIG. 2, Inner electrodes 14 have edges that are disposed inward of the beam’s outer edge).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 11, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 13 in the manner of pre-shaping an electrode to reduce transducer loss).
Regarding claim 14, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 1, as detailed above, and Wan further discloses wherein two corners of the proximal portion of the beam are not covered by the electrode (refer to rejection of claim 4 for annotated FIG. 2, electrodes 14 don’t cover the beam’s corner).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 11, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 14 in the manner of pre-shaping an electrode to reduce transducer loss).
Regarding claim 15, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 1, as detailed above, and Wan further discloses wherein at least a portion of the outer boundary of the electrode is non-linear. (refer to rejection of claim 5 for annotated FIG. 2, each electrode 14 covers a boundary where the edges of each electrode are not linear and parallel from one another).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 11, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 15 in the manner of pre-shaping an electrode to reduce transducer loss).
Regarding claim 16, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 11, as detailed above, and Takano further discloses wherein the beam has a rectangular shape (rectangular plate-like piezoelectric element 1, ¶33).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 11, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 16 in the manner of pre-shaping an electrode to reduce transducer loss).
Regarding claim 17, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 16, as detailed above, and Wan further discloses wherein the electrode has a rectangular shape that covers a proximal portion of the beam (refer to the rejection of claim 7 for annotated FIG. 2 depicting rectangular electrodes on the proximal portion).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 11, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 17 in the manner of pre-shaping an electrode to reduce transducer loss).
Regarding claim 18, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 16, as detailed above, and Takano further discloses wherein the electrode has a contoured edge (¶37, “the electrodes 7, 8, and 9 having the outline shapes being (partially and) substantially along the curve of the contour lines are disposed”).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 11, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 18 in the manner of pre-shaping an electrode to reduce transducer loss).
Regarding claim 19, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 1, as detailed above, and Wan further discloses wherein the force is applied to the distal end of the beam (Wan, weight 25 in FIG. 13, col. 6, ll. 64-66, the weight applied to the distal end of the beam creates a force to propagate vibration of the beam).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 11, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 19 in the manner of pre-shaping an electrode to reduce transducer loss).
Claims 10 & 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wan, in view of Takano, and further in view of Feng et al (W.P. Patent Application Publication 2018191842 A1) hereinafter Feng.
Regarding claim 10, Wan in view of Takano teaches the method of claim 1, as detailed above.
However, both Wan and Takano fail to disclose wherein the force is applied on substantially an entire surface of the beam.
Feng discloses (Title: Optimized Capacitor Shape Micro Electro-mechanical Systems Piezoelectric Transducer, Has Transducer Body Covered With M-sets Of Capacitances, Where Connection Between Same Set Of Capacitors And Different Sets Of Capacitors Connect In Series) a method of making a piezoelectric sensor (transducer, ¶Abstract) wherein the force is applied on substantially an entire surface of the beam (FIG. 1A depicts the beam subject to a load across the entire beam surface).
PNG
media_image9.png
274
558
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Wan, in view of Takano, discloses a method of making a piezoelectric sensor comprising of forming the beam comprising piezoelectric layers and electrodes in a cantilever form, wherein the force is applied to the distal end of the beam. Feng discloses of a method of making a piezoelectric transducer element wherein the force is applied across the entire surface of the beam. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to utilize the applied force method across the entire surface of the beam, taught by Feng, to the method of Wan, in view of Takano, to provide predictable results of yielding uniform distribution of stress. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a POSITA as uniform stress allows for a beam to maintain integral strength, allowing for improved durability and reliability of the transducer (Takano, ¶24).
Regarding claim 20, Wan, in view of Takano and Feng, teaches the method of claim 11, as detailed above, and Feng further discloses wherein the force is applied on substantially an entire surface of the beam (FIG. 1A depicts the beam subject to a load across the entire beam surface).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to the rejection of claim 10, supra, as it is applicable to the rejection of claim 20 in the manner of providing uniform equal stress across the entire beam to increase durability).
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 EUGENE REY D LEGASPI whose telephone number is (571)272-2956. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5PM.
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/E.D.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3729 /THOMAS J HONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3729
Prosecution Insights