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 § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 9, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20210215735 (herein Tseng).
Regarding claim 1, Tseng teaches an acceleration sensor which, when three directions orthogonal to one another are defined as a first direction, a second direction, and a third direction, detects an acceleration occurring in the third direction based on a change in a capacitance (accelerometer, [0026], Fig. 1; using capacitance for detecting displacement, [0030]), the acceleration sensor comprising:
a substrate (10, [0030]);
a fixed portion fixed to the substrate (anchor 23, [0032]);
a support beam having one end coupled to the fixed portion and provided along the second direction (elastic element 24, [0036]);
a movable body coupled to the other end of the support beam (movable mass block 20a, [0027]);
a first fixed electrode overlapping the substrate in a plan view along the third direction and disposed in the first direction of the support beam (stator electrode element 322b, [0028]); and
a second fixed electrode group overlapping the substrate in a plan view along the third direction and disposed in a fourth direction that is an opposite direction to the first direction of the support beam (stator electrode element 322c, [0028]),
wherein the first fixed electrode group includes a first fixing portion arranged along the second direction and a first comb tooth-shaped fixed electrode extending from the first fixing portion, the first comb tooth-shaped fixed electrode is floating above the substrate (electrode element 322b is electrically connected with the electric-conduction contacts 11b of the first substrate 10, and is a finger electrode, [0033]; Fig. 2 and [0026] teach stator electrode elements 322a floating over substrate 10, and Fig. 1 teaches corresponding overlap in plan view),
the second fixed electrode group includes a second fixing portion arranged along the second direction and a second comb tooth-shaped fixed electrode extending from the second fixing portion, the second comb tooth-shaped fixed electrode is floating above the substrate (electrode element 322c is electrically connected with the electric-conduction contacts 11b of the first substrate 10, and is a finger electrode, [0033]; Fig. 2 and [0026] teach stator electrode elements 322c floating over substrate 10, and Fig. 1 teaches corresponding overlap in plan view),
the movable body includes a first coupling portion coupled to the other end of the support beam and extending from the support beam in the first direction (connection segment 21b, [0027], corresponding to the portion that connects 24 to 21a);
a first base portion coupled to the first coupling portion and provided along the second direction (connection segment 21a, [0027]);
a first movable electrode group provided at the first base portion (movable electrode elements 321b, [0031]);
a second coupling portion coupled to the other end of the support beam and extending from the support beam in the fourth direction (connection segment 21b, [0027], corresponding to the portion that connects 24 to 21c);
a second base portion coupled to the second coupling portion and provided along the second direction (connection segment 21c, [0027]);
a second movable electrode group provided at the second base portion (movable electrode elements 321c, [0031]); and
a mass portion coupled to the first coupling portion and provided at a first direction side of the first movable electrode group (mass region 22b, [0027]),
the first movable electrode group includes a first comb tooth-shaped movable electrode that faces the first comb tooth-shaped fixed electrode in the second direction, the second movable electrode group includes a second comb tooth-shaped movable electrode that faces the second comb tooth-shaped fixed electrode in the second direction (element 321b, c are finger electrodes, [0033]; Fig. 1 teaches corresponding positions opposite electrodes 322b, c),
the movable body swings around the support beam as a rotation axis (movable mass block 20a may rotate/swing with respect to the second axis A2, [0034]),
the fixed portion is located closer to an outer edge of the substrate than each of the support beam, the movable body, and the first and second fixed electrode groups in the plan view (Fig. 1 teaches anchor 23 closer to top edge of substrate 10 than any of the ‘b’ and ‘c’ labeled elements cited above),
the support beam is disposed between the first movable electrode group and the second movable electrode group in the plan view (Fig. 1 teaches elastic element 24 between electrode elements 321b and 321c), and
the fixed portion is disposed at: an outside of a region between the first movable electrode group and the second movable electrode group (Fig. 1 teaches anchor 23 outside, and above, an arbitrary region between electrode elements 321b and 321c); and an outside of a region between the first coupling portion and the second coupling portion (Fig. 1 teaches anchor 23 not residing between sides of connection segment 21b).
Regarding claim 2, Tseng teaches wherein at the first direction side of the first movable electrode group, the mass portion extends along the second direction from the first coupling portion (see mass region 22b in Fig. 1 that corresponds to mass portion of the present invention).
Regarding claim 9, Tseng teaches
a third fixed electrode group and a fourth fixed electrode group (stator electrode elements 322a, d, [0026]),
wherein the movable body includes a third coupling portion coupled to the other end of the support beam and extending from the support beam in the first direction (connection segment 21d, [0027], corresponding to the portion that connects 24 to 21a),
a third base portion coupled to the third coupling portion and provided along the second direction (portion of connection segment 21a, [0027] to reach 321a),
a third movable electrode group provided at the third base portion and facing the third fixed electrode group in the second direction (321a, [0031]),
a fourth coupling portion coupled to the other end of the support beam and extending from the support beam in the fourth direction (connection segment 21d, [0027], corresponding to the portion that connects 24 to 21c),
a fourth base portion coupled to the fourth coupling portion and provided along the second direction (portion of connection segment 21c, [0027] to reach 321d), and
a fourth movable electrode group provided at the fourth base portion and facing the fourth fixed electrode group in the second direction (321d, [0031]).
Regarding claim 11, Tseng teaches wherein the support beam is a torsion spring that is twisted with the second direction as a rotation axis (elastic element 24, whereby the movable mass block 20a can swing with respect to the second axis A2, [0027]; note that this rotating movement described results in torsion).
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.
Claim(s) 3 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tseng as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20210123944 (herein Tanaka).
Regarding claims 3, Tseng does not teach, “wherein hm=hr, where hm is a height of a gravity center position of the movable body in the third direction and hr is a height of a rotation center of the support beam in the third direction.” However, [0092] and Fig. 2 teaches the structure including support beam 33 and mass 321 being uniform in thickness, which results in equal height.
Regarding claim 12, Tseng teaches An inertial measurement unit (accelerometer, [0026]) comprising: the acceleration sensor according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above). Tseng does not teach, “a control unit configured to perform control based on a detection signal output from the acceleration sensor.” However, Tanaka teaches it is known in the art to control based on detection from an acceleration sensor (MCU (micro controller unit) and controls each part of the inertial measurement unit 2000, [0168]).
For claims 3 and 12, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to incorporate heights described by Tanaka into the structure of Tseng. One would be motivated to do so for at least the purpose of achieving a required sensitivity of detection ([0092]).
Claim(s) 4-8, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tseng as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of US 20200132714 (herein Matsuura).
Regarding claims 4, Tseng does not teach, “wherein thicknesses of the first movable electrode group and the second movable electrode group in the third direction are equal to a thickness of the support beam in the third direction.” However, Matsuura teaches thickness h1 of movable electrode fingers, and thickness h3 of movable electrode fingers, where h1=h3.
Regarding claims 5, Tseng does not teach, “wherein thicknesses of the first base portion, the second base portion, the first coupling portion, and the second coupling portion in the third direction are equal to the thickness of the support beam in the third direction.” However, Matsuura teaches thickness h2 of base part 50 in [0082], where equivalent base portion, coupling portion, and support beams are part of base 50.
Regarding claims 6, Tseng does not teach, “wherein a thickness of the first movable electrode group in the third direction is larger than a thickness of the first fixed electrode group in the third direction, and a thickness of the second movable electrode group in the third direction is larger than a thickness of the second fixed electrode group in the third direction.” However, Matsuura teaches thickness h1 of movable electrode fingers, and thickness h3 of movable electrode fingers, where h1>h3.
Regarding claims 7, Tseng does not teach, “wherein a thickness of the first movable electrode group in the third direction is smaller than a thickness of the first fixed electrode group in the third direction, and a thickness of the second movable electrode group in the third direction is smaller than a thickness of the second fixed electrode group in the third direction.” However, Matsuura teaches thickness h1 of movable electrode fingers, and thickness h3 of movable electrode fingers, where h1<h3.
Regarding claims 8, Tseng teaches wherein positions of the first movable electrode group and the first fixed electrode group on a back surface side coincide with each other in an initial state, and positions of the second movable electrode group and the second fixed electrode group on the back surface side coincide with each other in the initial state (Fig. 3 teaches corresponding configuration and relationship between electrodes 44, 45, and 46).
Regarding claims 10, Tseng does not teach, “wherein a thickness of the first movable electrode group in the third direction is smaller than a thickness of the first fixed electrode group in the third direction, and a thickness of the second movable electrode group in the third direction is smaller than a thickness of the second fixed electrode group in the third direction.” However, Matsuura teaches thickness h1 of movable electrode fingers, and thickness h3 of movable electrode fingers, where h1>h3.
For claims 4-8 and 10, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to incorporate thicknesses of layers described by Matsuura into the structure of Tseng. One would be motivated to do so for at least the purpose of increasing the measurement sensitivity for acceleration ([0004]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/23/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant states the fixed portion of Tseng is located at an inner side of the sensor. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., the fixed portion of Tseng is located at an inner side of the sensor) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). The configuration shown in Fig. 1 still teaches the present invention even if it remains at an inner center of a sensor, as the claims do not exclude such a configuration. The anchor is closer to the top of substrate as explained above, than the b and c elements cited in Tseng.
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 PHILIP FADUL whose telephone number is (571)272-5411. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8pm-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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at (571) 272-1674. 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.
/WALTER L LINDSAY JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2852
/PHILIP T FADUL/Examiner, Art Unit 2852