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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/08/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Receipt is acknowledged of the amendment filed 9/26/2025. Claims 1 and 9 are amended and claims 1-12 are currently pending.
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.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US PG Pub. 2020/0057298 to Boni et al. (hereinafter Boni; cited by Applicant) in view of US Pat. No. 9,910,269 to van Lierop et al. (hereinafter Lierop).
Regarding claim 1, Boni discloses a piezoelectric driving element (Figs. 5-6) comprising: a support (plate 104, Figs. 5-6); a plate-shaped movable part (a tiltable platform 126, Fig. 5-6) on which a rib (supporting elements 102C, Figs. 5-6) is disposed; a pair of meander-type piezoelectric actuators (first and second transverse arms 171, 173 and bands of piezoelectric material 180 and 182, Figs. 5-6) each supported at one end thereof by the support (Figs. 5-6); and a coupling part (supporting structure 134, Fig. 5-6) coupling another end of each of the pair of piezoelectric actuators to the movable part, the coupling part having higher rigidity than the movable part (due to supporting element 102B, Figs. 5-6; [0047]).
Boni discloses the claimed invention as cited above though does not explicitly disclose the coupling part is directly connected to the rib.
Lierop discloses: a piezoelectric driving element (Fig. 3A-3D) comprising: a support (frame 60, Figs. 3A-3D); a plate-shaped movable part (mirror body 50, Figs. 3A-3D) on which a rib (“additional reinforcement beams 91x, 93x”, Figs. 3A-3D) is disposed; a pair of meander-type piezoelectric actuators (“Piezoelectric actuators can be integrated in the cantilever beams or the cantilever beams can be made of piezoelectric material to produce alternating beam bending forces in response to an electrical signal and generate the required oscillation torque”, Figs. 3A-3D; col. 11, ll. 35-59) each supported at one end thereof by the support; and a coupling part coupling (“coaxial support beams have a rigid longitudinal portion 42 that mechanically couples the corresponding end-portion 51, 53 to a cantilever beam assembly 70”, Fig. 3A-3D; col. 7, ll. 31-39) another end of each of the pair of piezoelectric actuators to the movable part (Figs. 3A-3D), wherein the coupling part is directly connected to the rib (Fig. 3A-3D).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to connect a coupling part directly to a rib as taught by Lierop with the system as disclosed by Boni. The motivation would have been to improve mirror responsiveness and image quality while avoiding an increase in mirror inertia and stress (col. 2, ll. 35-52).
Regarding claim 2, Boni discloses the coupling part has a larger thickness than the movable part (supporting element 102b and frame 34 thicker than tiltable platform 126, Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 3, Boni discloses an end portion of the coupling part (portions near actuation members 114 and arms 136, Fig. 5) extends to the rib and is connected to the rib (Figs. 5-6).
Regarding claim 4, Boni discloses the coupling part is connected to the movable part so as to be substantially included in a range between a straight line connecting a connection position between the coupling part and the piezoelectric actuator and a center of the movable part, and a rotation axis of the movable part by the piezoelectric actuator (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 5, Boni discloses the rib and the coupling part are composed of the same material (“a supporting body 102, of semiconductor material (for example, silicon)”, Figs. 5-6), and the coupling part has a thickness equal to a sum of thicknesses of the movable part and the rib (Fig. 5).
Regarding claims 6 and 11, Boni discloses the piezoelectric driving element is an element formed by processing a SOI substrate (“the bearing structure 112 are obtained from a same die of semiconductor material, for example silicon”, insulating layer 190, a first electrode 191, “a piezoelectric material layer 192, and a second electrode 193”, Figs. 6-7).
Regarding claim 7, Boni discloses the coupling part is connected to the movable part at positions symmetrical with respect to a center of the movable part (Fig. 5).
Regarding claims 8 and 12, Boni discloses a mirror is disposed on the movable part (“mobile portion 120 comprises a tiltable platform 126, which carries a reflecting surface 128. In particular, the reflecting surface 128 is here a mirror”, Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 9, Boni discloses a piezoelectric driving element (Figs. 5-6) comprising: a support (plate 104, Figs. 5-6); a plate-shaped movable part (a tiltable platform 126, Fig. 5-6) on which a rib (supporting elements 102C, Figs. 5-6) is disposed; a pair of meander-type piezoelectric actuators (first and second transverse arms 171, 173 and bands of piezoelectric material 180 and 182, Figs. 5-6) each supported at one end thereof by the support (Fig. 5); and a coupling part (supporting structure 134, Fig. 5-6) coupling another end of each of the pair of piezoelectric actuators and the movable part (Fig. 5), wherein the coupling part is connected to the movable part so as to be substantially included in a range between a straight line connecting a connection position between the coupling part and the piezoelectric actuator and a center of the movable part, and a rotation axis of the movable part by the piezoelectric actuator (Fig. 5).
Boni discloses the claimed invention as cited above though does not explicitly disclose the coupling part is directly connected to the rib.
Lierop discloses: a piezoelectric driving element (Fig. 3A-3D) comprising: a support (frame 60, Figs. 3A-3D); a plate-shaped movable part (mirror body 50, Figs. 3A-3D) on which a rib (“additional reinforcement beams 91x, 93x”, Figs. 3A-3D) is disposed; a pair of meander-type piezoelectric actuators (“Piezoelectric actuators can be integrated in the cantilever beams or the cantilever beams can be made of piezoelectric material to produce alternating beam bending forces in response to an electrical signal and generate the required oscillation torque”, Figs. 3A-3D; col. 11, ll. 35-59) each supported at one end thereof by the support; and a coupling part coupling (“coaxial support beams have a rigid longitudinal portion 42 that mechanically couples the corresponding end-portion 51, 53 to a cantilever beam assembly 70”, Fig. 3A-3D; col. 7, ll. 31-39) another end of each of the pair of piezoelectric actuators to the movable part (Figs. 3A-3D), wherein the coupling part is directly connected to the rib (Fig. 3A-3D).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to connect a coupling part directly to a rib as taught by Lierop with the system as disclosed by Boni. The motivation would have been to improve mirror responsiveness and image quality while avoiding an increase in mirror inertia and stress (col. 2, ll. 35-52).
Regarding claim 10, Boni discloses the coupling part is connected to the movable part at positions symmetrical with respect to a center of the movable part (Fig 5).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references 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 CHRISTOPHER J STANFORD whose telephone number is (571)270-3337. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM-4PM PST M-F.
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, Ricky Mack can be reached at (571)272-2333. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER STANFORD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872