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 .
Response to Amendment
Amendments to the claims, filed on 12/9/25, have been entered in the above-identified application.
Any rejections made in the previous action, and not repeated below, are hereby withdrawn.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 1-5 and 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yetter (US 2005/0134142 A1) in view of Joining and Assembly of Plastics (1995).
Regarding claims 1, 2, 4, 5, Yetter teaches a substrate (e.g., piezo-electric composite) comprising resin part (e.g. polymer) (14) and a plurality of ceramic parts (12) provided in the resin part, and a metal layer (e.g., facing layer wherein the species of a metal facing layer is given) (18) provided on one side of the composite substrate, wherein a surface of the metal layer facing the composite substrate is in contact with the ceramic parts; wherein the ceramic parts are exposed from the resin part on a surface side not in contact with the metal layer; wherein the ceramic parts are provided like islands in an in-plane direction inside the resin part; wherein the ceramic parts have a polygonal columnar shape (e.g., posts) or a cylindrical shape (para 27-28, figs 2-6).
Yetter fails to suggest wherein fastening parts for fastening the resin part and the metal layer (e.g., facing layer) are provided.
Joining and Assembly of Plastics teaches it was known at the time of invention that mechanical fastening can be used to join both similar and dissimilar materials, e.g., mechanical fastening is commonly used when joining a plastic to a metal
Therefore, per Joining and Assembly of Plastics, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use mechanical fasters in the piezo-electric composite of Yetter to bond or join the metal to the resin and/or ceramic parts, since it was a known method to join dissimilar materials in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding claim 3, Yetter further teaches each ceramic post or element includes an electrical connection to allow the elements to be connected in parallel (i.e., wherein the ceramic parts are connected with each other on the side not in contact with the metal layer) (para 27).
Regarding claim 9, Yetter teaches a multi-arrayed transducer (e.g., product) that incorporates or includes the piezo-electric composite of claim 1 (abstract, para 27).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yetter and Joining and Assembly of Plastics as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Gururaja (US 2001/0050514 A1).
Yetter as modified by Joining and Assembly of Plastics teaches the substrate of claim 1.
Yetter as modified by Joining and Assembly of Plastics fails to suggest wherein the resin part or one of the ceramic parts contacts with a side surface of the metal layer.
Gururaja teaches a composite piezoelectric transducer; wherein the composite transducer further comprises a first electrode layer (240), a second electrode layer (242) (e.g., metal electrodes or metal facing layer), strips of piezoelectric ceramic (235), and a layer of polymer (238); wherein the resin part or one of the ceramic parts contacts with a side surface of the metal layer (para 2, 6, 38; fig 8a); wherein its transducers provide improved electrical impedance matching to an ultrasonic imaging system and improved acoustic matching to the human body (abstract)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to combine the composite piezoelectric transducers of Gururaja with the piezo-electric composites of Yetter for transducers that provide improved electrical impedance matching to an ultrasonic imaging system and improved acoustic matching to the human body.
Claim 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yetter in view of Inagaki (JP 01087679 A ) and Joining and Assembly of Plastics
Yetter teaches a substrate (e.g., piezo-electric composite) comprising a composite substrate having a resin part (e.g. polymer) (14) and a plurality of ceramic parts (12) provided in the resin part, and a metal layer (e.g., facing layer wherein the species of a metal facing layer is given) (18) provided on one side of the composite substrate (para 27-28, figs 2-6).
Yetter fails to suggest an adhesive layer between the metal layer and the composite substrate; wherein fastening parts for fastening the resin part and the metal layer (e.g., facing layer) are provided.
Inagaki teaches a thin and uniform adhesive layer (i.e., fastening parts) having excellent vibration-transmittance that achieves sufficiently high electric conductivity between a piezoelectric ceramic and a metal (abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use the adhesive of Inagaki in the piezo-electric composite to bond the metal to the resin and ceramic parts for a piezo-electric composite that has excellent vibration-transmittance and achieves sufficiently high electric conductivity between the resin and ceramic composite layer and the metal.
Joining and Assembly of Plastics teaches it was known at the time of invention that mechanical fastening can be used to join both similar and dissimilar materials, e.g., mechanical fastening is commonly used when joining a plastic to a metal
Therefore, per Joining and Assembly of Plastics, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use mechanical fasters in the piezo-electric composite of Yetter to bond or join the metal to the resin and/or ceramic parts, since it was a known method to join dissimilar materials in the art at the time of invention.
Regarding claim 10, Yetter suggests a multi-arrayed transducer (e.g., product) that incorporates or includes the piezo-electric composite of claim 8 (abstract, para 27).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/9/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant contends there are no motivations in Yetter that fastening parts
for fastening the nonconductive material and the facing material are provided.
This is not persuasive since Yetter teaches failure to achieve a good contact between the posts and the acoustic layer can result in a transducer having low gain; and such failures typically occur when the adhesive used to adhere an acoustic layer to the face of the ceramic failed to contact the top of the ceramic posts; and failure due to plating failure can also occur (para 11, 18, 34); therefore Yetter teaches a motivation, e.g., the use of the fasteners to attach either the acoustic layers or to further attached the plated metal layers as a back-up method attachment in case of failure of the adhesive or wedge bonding that is used to attach the acoustic layers and/or in case of failure of the attachment of the metal plating.
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 NATHAN L VAN SELL whose telephone number is (571)270-5152. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur, Generally 7am-6pm.
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, M. Veronica Ewald can be reached at 571-272-8519. 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.
NATHAN VAN SELL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1783
/NATHAN L VAN SELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1783