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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Specifically, the amended limitation “the first contact pad is not electrically connected to the first metal layer” does not appear to have basis in the original disclosure. While examiner acknowledges first contact pad 191 is not directly connected to first metal layer 160, nowhere does applicant positively recite that first and second contact pads of modulating unit 190 are not electrically connected through the modulating unit. All claims dependent upon claim 1 are rejected under this same basis.
Still, for the sake of compact prosecution, examiner is treating this limitation on its merits in the below rejection. Examiner is treating this limitation as indicating first contact pad 191 as not being connected to first metal layer 160 through connections of the modulating unit 190.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 4-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20190198490 (Li).
As to Claim 1, Li teaches an electronic device (Li Fig 4A) comprising:
a flexible substrate (flexible substrate 23);
an adhesive layer disposed on the flexible substrate (pads P adhere top unit 1a to circuit board 2);
a first metal layer disposed on the adhesive layer (first metal layer being right-most structure 123, more clearly labeled in Fig 6D which shows detailed layer view of Fig 4A);
a driving unit disposed on the adhesive layer (thin film transistor T2 on pads P in view of Fig 4A); and
a modulating unit disposed on the adhesive layer (Fig 4A chip 13 on pad P),
wherein the modulating unit comprises a first contact pad (Fig 6D E2) and a second contact pad (Fig 6D E1), the first contact pad is electrically connected to the driving unit (E2 connect to T2 via left-most metal layer 123 and metal layer 125), the first contact pad is not electrically connected to the first metal layer (E2 is not connected to right-most metal layer 123), and the second contact pad is electrically connected to the first metal layer (E1 connected to right-most 123 via connection pad 122).
As to Claim 4, Li teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the first metal layer comprises an opening (opening between portions of right-most 123 directly beneath chip 13), and the modulating unit overlaps with the opening (13 overlapped with said opening).
As to Claim 5, Li teaches the electronic device of claim 1, further comprising:
an insulating layer disposed between the first metal layer and the driving unit (insulation layer 124 between right-most 123 and T2).
As to Claim 6, Li teaches the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the modulating unit (13) is configured to modulate at least one of a phase, an amplitude, and a frequency (13 can itself be a piezoelectric chip ¶0040, which modulates a voltage in response to strain.)
As to Claim 7, Li teaches the electronic device of claim 1, further comprising:
a protective layer disposed between the driving unit and the modulating unit (protective layer 124 between T2 and 13).
As to Claim 8, Li teaches the electronic device of claim 7, wherein the protective layer comprises a first opening and a second opening (124 has first opening above left-most 123 and second opening above right-most 123 in Fig 6D), the first opening exposes the first metal layer (right-most 123 exposed through first opening), and the second opening exposes a second metal layer (second metal layer 125 exposed through second opening).
As to Claim 9, Li teaches the electronic device of claim 8, wherein the second metal layer is electrically connected to the driving unit and the modulating unit (125 connected to both T2 and left-most 123).
As to Claim 10, Li teaches the electronic device of claim 7, further comprising:
an underfill disposed between the modulating unit and the protective layer (14 between 13 and layer 124).
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(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20070194456 (Cohn).
As to Claim 2, Li teaches the electronic device of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach wherein a thickness of the first metal layer is greater than 0.5 micrometers.
Cohn teaches a device similar to that of Li, and explicitly teaches a thickness of conducting traces and pads being about 25 micrometers (Cohn ¶0023).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the device having a general metal layer taught by Li with the metal layer having a thickness greater than 0.5 micrometers taught by Cohn in order to decrease the resistivity of the metal layer, reducing losses to heat in the device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 23 December 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that prior art Li fails to explicitly teach “the first contact pad is not electrically connected to the first metal layer”. Examiner has clarified that the first metal layer in Li is to be the right-most structure 123 as shown in Li Fig 6D.
Examiner also reiterates that applicant’s disclosure does not positively recite this limitation, as outlined in the 112(a) rejection above.
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 Corbyn D Mellinger whose telephone number is (703)756-5683. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6 Eastern.
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, Zandra Smith can be reached at 571-272-2429. 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.
/Corbyn D Mellinger/Examiner, Art Unit 2899
/ZANDRA V SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights