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
Claims 1-10 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 11 August 2026.
Applicant’s election of the invention of group II in the reply filed on 11 August 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 11-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Smith et al. (US 4425525).
With respect to claim 11, Smith et al. discloses an ultrasonic array (Fig 6), comprising: a piezoelectric material layer (item 13), having at least one or a plurality of piezoelectric units (Fig 6), each of the plurality of piezoelectric units having a first lateral side and a second lateral side corresponding to each other (Fig 6), and comprising: a first cutting slot (item 19) formed on each of the plurality of piezoelectric units in an oblique manner and stretched from the first lateral side to the second lateral side (Fig 6); and a second cutting slot (item 20) formed on each of the plurality of piezoelectric units in the oblique manner and crossed by the first cutting slot (Fig 6); a first lead wire coupled to one electrode surface of each of the plurality of piezoelectric units (Fig 6); and a second lead wire coupled to the other electrode surface of each of the plurality of piezoelectric units (Fig 6).
With respect to claim 12, Smith et al. discloses the ultrasonic array of claim 11, wherein the piezoelectric material layer further has a third cutting slot formed on each of the plurality of piezoelectric units and parallel to the first cutting slot (Fig 6, wherein there are a plurality of slots 19, any of which may be the third cutting slot).
With respect to claim 13, Smith et al. discloses the ultrasonic array of claim 11, wherein two corresponding short sides of four lateral sides on each of the plurality of piezoelectric units are defined as the first lateral side and the second lateral side (Fig 6).
With respect to claim 14, Smith et al. discloses the ultrasonic array of claim 11, wherein the first lateral side comprises a first end point and a second end point opposite to each other, the second lateral side comprises a third end point and a fourth end point opposite to each other, the first end point and the third end point are located on the same side of each of the plurality of piezoelectric units, the second end point and the fourth end point are located on the other side of each of the plurality of piezoelectric units, the first cutting slot is formed from position adjacent to the first end point to position adjacent to the fourth end point, the second cutting slot is formed from position adjacent to the second end point to position adjacent to the third end point (Fig 6).
With respect to claim 15, Smith et al. discloses the ultrasonic array of claim 11, wherein two opposite ends of the first cutting slot are respectively staggered to the first lateral side and the second lateral side (Fig 6).
With respect to claim 16, Smith et al. discloses the ultrasonic array of claim 11, wherein each of the plurality of piezoelectric units further has a third lateral side and a fourth lateral side located by the first lateral side and the second lateral side and corresponding to each other (Fig 6), and two opposite ends of the first cutting slot are respectively staggered to the third lateral side and the fourth lateral side (Fig 6).
With respect to claim 17, Smith et al. discloses the ultrasonic array of claim 11, wherein a depth of the first cutting slot is greater than a thickness of each of the plurality of piezoelectric units or is greater than or equal to two-thirds of the thickness of each of the plurality of piezoelectric units (column 3, lines 21-25).
With respect to claim 18, Smith et al. discloses the ultrasonic array of claim 11, wherein the first cutting slot is symmetrical to the second cutting slot (Fig 6).
With respect to claim 19, Smith et al. discloses the ultrasonic array of claim 11, wherein the piezoelectric material layer further comprises a plurality of fourth cutting slots formed on each of the plurality of piezoelectric units and parallel to the first lateral side or the second lateral side (Fig 6, wherein there are a plurality of slots 20, any of which may be the fourth cutting slot).
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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Smith et al.
With respect to claim 20, Smith et al. discloses the ultrasonic array of claim 19.
Smith et al. is silent with respect to the specifics of the dimensions of their device and therefore does not disclose that a distance between two adjacent fourth cutting slots of the plurality of fourth cutting slots is ranged between 0.01mm ~ 0.2 mm.
However, it has been held that a mere change in relative dimensions is obvious (Gardner v. TEC Systems Inc., 220 USPQ 777). Therefore, at the time of effective filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the device of Smith et al. to any suitable dimensions based on the desired characteristics.
Conclusion
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
Prosecution Insights