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 .
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 1-20 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.
Regarding claims 1 and 15, the limitation ‘each of the inner actuators forms with the outer actuator layer a coupled oscillation system for excitation of the oscillation body of the respective inner actuator…’ is unclear inasmuch there is no one to one correspondence between the outer actuator layer and the inner actuators until singulation has taken place (paragraph 0067 of the USPGPUB). That is to say wafer assembly must be diced in to form a coupled oscillation system between each inner actuator and the outer actuator layer. Until such dicing/sawing of the wafer assembly there is no one inner actuator correspondence with one outer actuator layer as described in the claim and shown in figure 1B. Thus the first two limitations of the claim correspond to the wafer assembly but the last limitation of the claim is unclear inasmuch as it does not belong to the wafer assembly strictly but is a property of the micromechanical resonator assemblies derived from the micromechanical resonator wafer assembly. For the purpose of examination examiner will interpret the claim 1 as ‘the device wafer being physically connected to the actuator wafer such that, after singulation of the micromechanical resonator wafer assembly each of the inner actuators forms with the respective outer actuator layer a coupled oscillation system…etc.
A similar interpretation will be given the corresponding limitation in claim 15.
Claims 2-14 and 16-20 are rejected inasmuch as they depend from claim 1 and 15.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 15 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 1 and 15, Hofmann et al. (2014/0159827 A1) teaches a device wafter (5, 4, 3, figure 1) mounted on top of an actuator element (6, figure 1) comprising an inner actuator (3, figure 1) including an oscillating body configured to oscillate about one or more axes, the oscillation of the oscillation body having one or more eigenfrequencies (paragraph 0038). Furthermore Hoffman teaches that the device wafer is physically connected to the actuator element such that each of the inner actuators forms with the outer actuator layer a coupled oscillation system for excitation of the oscillation body of the respective inner actuator by transfer of energy from the oscillating part to the oscillation body when the oscillating part of the outer actuator layer is activated with a frequency selected to excite resonant or near resonant oscillation of the oscillation body of the inner actuator (abstract).
Hofmann does not teach that the actuator is a wafer supporting an outer actuator layer which comprises an oscillating part configured to be driven by an electrical signal, wherein the device wafer is physically connected to the actuator wafer, and then the individual inner actuators are singulated with the outer actuator layer of the actuator wafer to form individual micromechanical resonator assemblies.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN D HOWARD whose telephone number is (571)270-5358. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5:00.
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, Minh-Toan Ton can be reached at 5712722303. 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.
/RYAN D HOWARD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2882 10/14/2025