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 § 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omura (US PGPub 20200212889), a reference of record, in view of Ylilammi et al. (US PGPub 20200083860)
As per claim 1:
Omura discloses in Figs. 1-2:
A filter, comprising:
a substrate (2);
a series resonator (S11), wherein the series resonator comprises a first Bragg reflection layer (acoustic impedance layer 4A) and a first piezoelectric transduction structure (interdigital transducer electrode 7A and piezoelectric layer 5) that are sequentially stacked on the substrate;
a parallel resonator (P11), wherein the parallel resonator comprises a second Bragg reflection layer (acoustic impedance layer 40) and a second piezoelectric transduction structure (interdigital transducer electrode 8 and piezoelectric layer 5) that are sequentially stacked on the substrate, and
wherein a structure of the first Bragg reflection layer is different from a structure of the second Bragg reflection layer (being isolated, in separate positions, and under different resonators, as seen in Figs. 1-2 & 6-7), and the first Bragg reflection layer and the second Bragg reflection laver have a same thickness in a stacking direction (as seen in Fig. 7, wherein intermediate layer 3 has a consistent height);
a series branch (path between input terminal 15 and output terminal 16), wherein the series branch comprises the series resonator, and the series branch is coupled between an input end of the filter (15) and an output end of the filter (16); and
a parallel branch, wherein the parallel branch comprises the parallel resonator, and the parallel branch is coupled between the series branch and a common ground (ground terminal 17).
Omura does not disclose:
wherein the first piezoelectric transduction structure includes a first electrode, a second electrode, and a thin film structure between the first electrode and the second electrode.
Ylilammi et al. discloses in Fig. 1A:
A plate wave resonator ([0047]) comprising a piezoelectric transduction structure including a first electrode (120), a second electrode (IDT electrodes 150/170), and a thin film structure (piezoelectric 110) between the first electrode and the second electrode; wherein a reflection layer (130) and the piezoelectric transduction structure are sequentially stacked on a substrate (140).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace the piezoelectric transduction structures of Omura with piezoelectric transduction structure of Yilammi as art-recognized alternative/equivalent plate wave resonators as disclosed by Yilammi ([0047])
Claim(s) 2-5, 7-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over The resultant combination of Omura (US PGPub 20200212889), a reference of record, in view of Ylilammi et al. (US PGPub 20200083860) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sturzebecher et al. (US PGPub 20190319602), and Mogilevsky (US PGPub 20220123724), both references of record.
The resultant combination discloses the filter of claim 1, as rejected above.
As per claim 2:
The resultant combination discloses in Omura, Figs. 1-2:
the filter further comprises a low acoustic impedance structure (intermediate layer 3, forming low acoustic impedance layers 42, and formed of SiO2 [0033]) for forming the first Bragg reflection layer and the second Bragg reflection layer;
the first Bragg reflection layer comprises a first high acoustic impedance structure (high acoustic impedance layer 411, [0072]) buried in the low acoustic impedance structure;
the second Bragg reflection layer comprises a second high acoustic impedance structure (high acoustic impedance layer 411, [0072]) buried in the low acoustic impedance structure.
The resultant combination does not disclose:
in a stacking direction, the first high acoustic impedance structure and the second high acoustic impedance structure have different thicknesses.
Sturzebecher et al. discloses in Figs. 5A-C, 7, & 8:
A filter (36A), comprising:
a substrate (12);
a series resonator (ladder filter 36A incorporates multiple resonators formed as a ladder network, such as that in Figs. 5A-C, where the resonators have at least two series resonant frequencies, [0061], corresponding to the series and shunt resonators of Figs. 5A-C [0050]) wherein the series resonator comprises a first Bragg reflection layer (reflector 14) and a first piezoelectric transduction structure (16) that are sequentially stacked on the substrate (resonators are formed as per Fig. 7, wherein each resonator features a respective reflector 14, [0061]);
a parallel resonator (ladder filter 36A incorporates multiple resonators formed as a ladder network, such as that in Figs. 5A-C, where the resonators have at least two series resonant frequencies, [0061], corresponding to the series and shunt (parallel) resonators of Figs. 5A-C [0050]), wherein the parallel resonator comprises a second Bragg reflection layer (reflector 14) and a second piezoelectric transduction structure (16) that are sequentially stacked on the substrate, and wherein a structure of the first Bragg reflection layer is different from a structure of the second Bragg reflection layer (resonators are formed as per Fig. 7, wherein each resonator features a respective reflector 14, [0061], wherein respective reflectors are formed with thicknesses based on the series resonant frequency of the respective resonator, [0057]);
a series branch (series resonators Bser between input/output ports I/P and O/P), wherein the series branch comprises the series resonator, and the series branch is coupled between an input end of the filter and an output end of the filter; and
a parallel branch (shunt resonator Bsh), wherein the parallel branch comprises the parallel resonator, and the parallel branch is coupled between the series branch and a common ground (as seen in Fig. 5A);
wherein the respective series and parallel resonators have separate resonance frequencies ([0050]), and in a stacking direction, the first high acoustic impedance structure and the second high acoustic impedance structure have different thicknesses ([0057]).
Mogilevsky discloses that providing a common vertical position for functional structures such as acoustic resonators provides the benefit of improving electrical connection ([0011]), wherein different acoustic mirrors (AM) are provided below two resonators (functional structures FS2 and FS3).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the series and parallel resonators of the filter of The resultant combination to have separate resonance frequencies, as commonly the case in a band pass filter as is well understood in the art and taught by Sturzebecher ([0050]), and further for in a stacking direction, the first high acoustic impedance structure and the second high acoustic impedance structure of The resultant combination to have different thicknesses, corresponding to the resonance frequency of the respective resonators, as taught by Sturzebecher ([0057]), and to provide the benefit of reflecting the desired acoustic mode as is well understood in the art.
It would have been further obvious for the first Bragg reflection layer and the second Bragg reflection layer of the combination to have a same thickness in a stacking direction to provide the benefit of improving electrical connection between resonators, as taught by Mogilevsky ([0011]).
As per claim 3:
The resultant combination discloses in Omura Figs. 1-2:
the low acoustic impedance structure is stacked on a surface of the substrate (as seen in Fig. 2);
the second piezoelectric transduction structure further comprises a third electrode (third interdigital transducer electrode 8); and
both the third electrode and the second electrode are disposed on a surface (top) that is of the thin film structure and that is away from the substrate.
The resultant combination discloses in Ylilammi Fig. 1A:
the filter further comprises the first electrode and the thin film structure for forming the first piezoelectric transduction structure and the second piezoelectric transduction structure, wherein the first electrode, the thin film structure, and the second electrode are sequentially stacked on a surface that is of the reflection structure and that is away from the substrate.
As per claim 4:
Omura discloses in Figs. 1-2:
in the stacking direction, the first high acoustic impedance structure comprises a first surface (top) away from the substrate, the low acoustic impedance structure comprises a first surface (top) away from the substrate, and there is a first distance (the thickness of layers 421, 412, and 422) between the first surface of the first high acoustic impedance structure and the first surface of the low acoustic impedance structure;
in the stacking direction, the second high acoustic impedance structure comprises a first surface (top) away from the substrate, and there is a second distance between the first surface of the second high acoustic impedance structure and the first surface of the low acoustic impedance structure;
Omura does not disclose:
the first distance is different from the second distance.
Sturzebecher et al. discloses in Figs. 5A-C, 7, & 8:
the respective series and parallel resonators have separate resonance frequencies ([0050]), and in a stacking direction, the first high acoustic impedance structure and the second high acoustic impedance structure have different thicknesses with layer thicknesses averaging out to a quarter of the wavelength of the resonance frequency of the respective resonator ([0057]).
As a consequence of the combination of claim 2, the thickness of the layers of the first and second Bragg reflection layers correspond to a quarter of the wavelength of the resonance frequency of the respective resonator, such that the first distance is different from the second distance (due to different layer thicknesses).
As per claim 5:
Omura discloses in Figs. 1-2:
the first Bragg reflection layer further comprises a third high acoustic impedance structure (respective high acoustic impedance layer 412, [0072]) buried in the low acoustic impedance structure, and, in the stacking direction, the third high acoustic impedance structure is disposed in parallel on a side (top) that is of the first high acoustic impedance structure and that is away from the substrate, and the low acoustic impedance structure is disposed between the third high acoustic impedance structure and the first high acoustic impedance structure;
the second Bragg reflection layer further comprises a fourth high acoustic impedance structure (respective high acoustic impedance layer 412, [0072]) buried in the low acoustic impedance structure, and in the stacking direction, the fourth high acoustic impedance structure is disposed in parallel on a side (top) that is of the second high acoustic impedance structure and that is away from the substrate, and the low acoustic impedance structure is disposed between the fourth high acoustic impedance structure and the second high acoustic impedance structure;
Omura does not disclose:
in the stacking direction, the third high acoustic impedance structure and the fourth high acoustic impedance structure have different thicknesses.
Sturzebecher et al. discloses in Figs. 5A-C, 7, & 8:
the respective series and parallel resonators have separate resonance frequencies ([0050]), and in a stacking direction, the first high acoustic impedance structure and the second high acoustic impedance structure have different thicknesses with layer thicknesses averaging out to a quarter of the wavelength of the resonance frequency of the respective resonator ([0057]).
As a consequence of the combination of claim 2, in the stacking direction, the third high acoustic impedance structure and the fourth high acoustic impedance structure have different thicknesses.
As per claim 7:
Omura discloses in Figs. 1-2:
in the stacking direction, the third high acoustic impedance structure comprises a first surface (top) away from the substrate, the low acoustic impedance structure comprises a first surface (top) away from the substrate, and there is a third distance between the first surface of the third high acoustic impedance structure and the first surface of the low acoustic impedance structure;
in the stacking direction, the fourth high acoustic impedance structure comprises a first surface (top) away from the substrate, and there is a fourth distance between the first surface of the fourth high acoustic impedance structure and the first surface of the low acoustic impedance structure;
Omura does not disclose:
the third distance is different from the fourth distance.
Sturzebecher et al. discloses in Figs. 5A-C, 7, & 8:
the respective series and parallel resonators have separate resonance frequencies ([0050]), and in a stacking direction, the first high acoustic impedance structure and the second high acoustic impedance structure have different thicknesses with layer thicknesses averaging out to a quarter of the wavelength of the resonance frequency of the respective resonator ([0057]).
As a consequence of the combination of claim 2, the thickness of the layers of the first and second Bragg reflection layers correspond to a quarter of the wavelength of the resonance frequency of the respective resonator, such that the third distance is different from the fourth distance (due to different layer thicknesses).
As per claim 8:
Omura discloses in Figs. 1-2:
In the stacking direction, the third high acoustic impedance structure comprises a second surface (bottom) close to the substrate, the first high acoustic impedance structure comprises a first surface (top) away from the substrate, and there is a fifth distance between the second surface of the third high acoustic impedance structure and the first surface of the first high acoustic impedance structure;
in the stacking direction, the fourth high acoustic impedance structure comprises a second surface (bottom) close to the substrate, the second high acoustic impedance structure comprises a first surface (top) away from the substrate, and there is a sixth distance between the second surface of the fourth high acoustic impedance structure and the first surface of the second high acoustic impedance structure.
Omura does not disclose:
the fifth distance is different from the sixth distance.
Sturzebecher et al. discloses in Figs. 5A-C, 7, & 8:
the respective series and parallel resonators have separate resonance frequencies ([0050]), and in a stacking direction, the first high acoustic impedance structure and the second high acoustic impedance structure have different thicknesses with layer thicknesses averaging out to a quarter of the wavelength of the resonance frequency of the respective resonator ([0057]).
As a consequence of the combination of claim 2, the thickness of the layers of the first and second Bragg reflection layers correspond to a quarter of the wavelength of the resonance frequency of the respective resonator, such that the fifth distance is different from the sixth distance (due to different layer thicknesses).
As per claim 9:
Omura discloses in Figs. 1-2:
the first high acoustic impedance structure comprises a second surface (bottom) close to the substrate, the low acoustic impedance structure comprises a second surface (bottom) close to the substrate, and there is a seventh distance between the second surface of the first high acoustic impedance structure and the second surface of the low acoustic impedance structure;
the second high acoustic impedance structure comprises a second surface (bottom) close to the substrate, and there is an eighth distance between the second surface of the second high acoustic impedance structure and the second surface of the low acoustic impedance structure.
Omura does not disclose:
the seventh distance is different from the eighth distance.
Sturzebecher et al. discloses in Figs. 5A-C, 7, & 8:
the respective series and parallel resonators have separate resonance frequencies ([0050]), and in a stacking direction, the first high acoustic impedance structure and the second high acoustic impedance structure have different thicknesses with layer thicknesses averaging out to a quarter of the wavelength of the resonance frequency of the respective resonator ([0057]).
As a consequence of the combination of claim 2, the thickness of the layers of the first and second Bragg reflection layers correspond to a quarter of the wavelength of the resonance frequency of the respective resonator, such that the seventh distance is different from the eighth distance (due to different layer thicknesses).
As per claim 10:
Omura discloses in Figs. 1-2:
a material of the low acoustic impedance structure comprises one of silicon dioxide or silicon nitride ([0033]).
As per claim 11:
Omura discloses in Figs. 1-2:
materials of the first high acoustic impedance structure, the second high acoustic impedance structure, the third high acoustic impedance structure, and the fourth high acoustic impedance structure comprise tungsten, molybdenum, aluminum nitride, or tantalum pentoxide ([0072]).
Claim(s) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Omura (US PGPub 20200212889) in view of Guyette (US PGPub 20200295733), both references of record, and Ylilammi et al. (US PGPub 20200083860)
As per claim 12:
Omura discloses in Figs. 1-2:
An electronic device, the electronic device comprising a filter, the filter
comprising:
a substrate (2);
a series resonator (S11), wherein the series resonator comprises a first Bragg reflection layer (acoustic impedance layer 4A) and a first piezoelectric transduction structure (interdigital transducer electrode 7A and piezoelectric layer 5) that are sequentially stacked on the substrate;
a parallel resonator (P11), wherein the parallel resonator comprises a second Bragg reflection layer (acoustic impedance layer 40) and a second piezoelectric transduction structure (interdigital transducer electrode 8 and piezoelectric layer 5) that are sequentially stacked on the substrate, and
wherein a structure of the first Bragg reflection layer is different from a structure of the second Bragg reflection layer (being isolated and in separate positions, as seen in Figs. 1-2) and the first Bragg reflection layer and the second Bragg reflection laver have a same thickness in a stacking direction (as seen in Fig. 7, wherein intermediate layer 3 has a consistent height);
a series branch (path between input terminal 15 and output terminal 16), wherein the series branch comprises the series resonator, and the series branch is coupled between an input end of the filter (15) and an output end of the filter (16); and
a parallel branch, wherein the parallel branch comprises the parallel resonator, and the parallel branch is coupled between the series branch and a common ground (ground terminal 17).
Omura does not disclose that the electronic device comprises a transceiver, and the transceiver comprises the filter, and wherein the first piezoelectric transduction structure includes a first electrode, a second electrode, and a thin film structure between the first electrode and the second electrode.
Guyette discloses in Fig. 2 the use of acoustic resonator bandpass filters (transmit filter 210 and receive filter 220) having a ladder configuration in electronic devices comprising a transceiver ([0005-0006]).
Ylilammi et al. discloses in Fig. 1A:
A plate wave resonator ([0047]) comprising a piezoelectric transduction structure including a first electrode (120), a second electrode (IDT electrodes 150/170), and a thin film structure (piezoelectric 110) between the first electrode and the second electrode; wherein a reflection layer (130) and the piezoelectric transduction structure are sequentially stacked on a substrate (140).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the filter of Omura to be used for either a transmit filter or a receive filter in an electronic device comprising a transceiver as shown in Fig. 2 of Guyette as a typical use for an acoustic resonator bandpass filter as is well understood in the art, and as taught by Guyette.
It would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace the piezoelectric transduction structures of Omura with piezoelectric transduction structure of Yilammi as art-recognized alternative/equivalent plate wave resonators as disclosed by Yilammi ([0047])
As per claim 13:
Omura does not disclose:
the electronic device further comprises a circuit board, and the transceiver is disposed on the circuit board.
Guyette discloses in Fig. 2:
the electronic device further comprises a circuit board (duplexer package 230, [0031]), and the transceiver is disposed on the circuit board.
As a consequence of the combination of claim 12, the electronic device further comprises a circuit board, and the transceiver is disposed on the circuit board.
Claim(s) 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over The resultant combination of Omura (US PGPub 20200212889) in view of Guyette (US PGPub 20200295733), both references of record, and Ylilammi et al. (US PGPub 20200083860) as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Sturzebecher et al. (US PGPub 20190319602) and Mogilevsky (US PGPub 20220123724), both references of record.
As per claim 16:
The resultant combination discloses in Figs. 1-2 of Omura:
the filter further comprises a low acoustic impedance structure (intermediate layer 3, forming low acoustic impedance layers 42, and formed of SiO2 [0033]) for forming the first Bragg reflection layer and the second Bragg reflection layer;
the first Bragg reflection layer comprises a first high acoustic impedance structure (high acoustic impedance layer 411, [0072]) buried in the low acoustic impedance structure;
the second Bragg reflection layer comprises a second high acoustic impedance structure (high acoustic impedance layer 411, [0072]) buried in the low acoustic impedance structure.
The resultant combination does not disclose:
in a stacking direction, the first high acoustic impedance structure and the second high acoustic impedance structure have different thicknesses.
Sturzebecher et al. discloses in Figs. 5A-C, 7, & 8:
A filter (36A), comprising:
a substrate (12);
a series resonator (ladder filter 36A incorporates multiple resonators formed as a ladder network, such as that in Figs. 5A-C, where the resonators have at least two series resonant frequencies, [0061], corresponding to the series and shunt resonators of Figs. 5A-C [0050]) wherein the series resonator comprises a first Bragg reflection layer (reflector 14) and a first piezoelectric transduction structure (16) that are sequentially stacked on the substrate (resonators are formed as per Fig. 7, wherein each resonator features a respective reflector 14, [0061]);
a parallel resonator (ladder filter 36A incorporates multiple resonators formed as a ladder network, such as that in Figs. 5A-C, where the resonators have at least two series resonant frequencies, [0061], corresponding to the series and shunt (parallel) resonators of Figs. 5A-C [0050]), wherein the parallel resonator comprises a second Bragg reflection layer (reflector 14) and a second piezoelectric transduction structure (16) that are sequentially stacked on the substrate, and wherein a structure of the first Bragg reflection layer is different from a structure of the second Bragg reflection layer (resonators are formed as per Fig. 7, wherein each resonator features a respective reflector 14, [0061], wherein respective reflectors are formed with thicknesses based on the series resonant frequency of the respective resonator, [0057]);
a series branch (series resonators Bser between input/output ports I/P and O/P), wherein the series branch comprises the series resonator, and the series branch is coupled between an input end of the filter and an output end of the filter; and
a parallel branch (shunt resonator Bsh), wherein the parallel branch comprises the parallel resonator, and the parallel branch is coupled between the series branch and a common ground (as seen in Fig. 5A);
wherein the respective series and parallel resonators have separate resonance frequencies ([0050]), and in a stacking direction, the first high acoustic impedance structure and the second high acoustic impedance structure have different thicknesses ([0057]).
Mogilevsky discloses that providing a common vertical position for functional structures such as acoustic resonators provides the benefit of improving electrical connection ([0011]), wherein different acoustic mirrors (AM) are provided below two resonators (functional structures FS2 and FS3)
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the series and parallel resonators of the filter of the resultant combination to have separate resonance frequencies, as commonly the case in a band pass filter as is well understood in the art and taught by Sturzebecher ([0050]), and further for in a stacking direction, the first high acoustic impedance structure and the second high acoustic impedance structure of the resultant combination to have different thicknesses, corresponding to the resonance frequency of the respective resonators, as taught by Sturzebecher ([0057]), and to provide the benefit of reflecting the desired acoustic mode as is well understood in the art.
It would have been further obvious for the first Bragg reflection layer and the second Bragg reflection layer of the combination to have a same thickness in a stacking direction to provide the benefit of improving electrical connection between resonators, as taught by Mogilevsky ([0011]).
As per claim 17:
The resultant combination discloses in Figs. 1-2 of Omura:
the low acoustic impedance structure is stacked on a surface of the substrate (as seen in Fig. 2);
the second piezoelectric transduction structure further comprises a third electrode (third interdigital transducer electrode 8); and
both the third electrode and the second electrode are disposed on a surface (top) that is of the thin film structure and that is away from the substrate.
The resultant combination discloses in Ylilammi Fig. 1A:
the filter further comprises the first electrode and the thin film structure for forming the first piezoelectric transduction structure and the second piezoelectric transduction structure, wherein the first electrode, the thin film structure, and the second electrode are sequentially stacked on a surface that is of the reflection structure and that is away from the substrate.
As per claim 18:
The resultant combination discloses in Figs. 1-2 of Omura:
in the stacking direction, the first high acoustic impedance structure comprises a first surface (top) away from the substrate, the low acoustic impedance structure comprises a first surface (top) away from the substrate, and there is a first distance (the thickness of layers 421, 412, and 422) between the first surface of the first high acoustic impedance structure and the first surface of the low acoustic impedance structure;
in the stacking direction, the second high acoustic impedance structure comprises a first surface (top) away from the substrate, and there is a second distance between the first surface of the second high acoustic impedance structure and the first surface of the low acoustic impedance structure;
The resultant combination does not disclose:
the first distance is different from the second distance.
Sturzebecher et al. discloses in Figs. 5A-C, 7, & 8:
the respective series and parallel resonators have separate resonance frequencies ([0050]), and in a stacking direction, the first high acoustic impedance structure and the second high acoustic impedance structure have different thicknesses with layer thicknesses averaging out to a quarter of the wavelength of the resonance frequency of the respective resonator ([0057]).
As a consequence of the combination of claim 16, the thickness of the layers of the first and second Bragg reflection layers correspond to a quarter of the wavelength of the resonance frequency of the respective resonator, such that the first distance is different from the second distance (due to different layer thicknesses).
As per claim 19:
The resultant combination discloses in Figs. 1-2 of Omura:
the first Bragg reflection layer further comprises a third high acoustic impedance structure (respective high acoustic impedance layer 412, [0072]) buried in the low acoustic impedance structure, and, in the stacking direction, the third high acoustic impedance structure is disposed in parallel on a side (top) that is of the first high acoustic impedance structure and that is away from the substrate, and the low acoustic impedance structure is disposed between the third high acoustic impedance structure and the first high acoustic impedance structure;
the second Bragg reflection layer further comprises a fourth high acoustic impedance structure (respective high acoustic impedance layer 412, [0072]) buried in the low acoustic impedance structure, and in the stacking direction, the fourth high acoustic impedance structure is disposed in parallel on a side (top) that is of the second high acoustic impedance structure and that is away from the substrate, and the low acoustic impedance structure is disposed between the fourth high acoustic impedance structure and the second high acoustic impedance structure;
The resultant combination does not disclose:
in the stacking direction, the third high acoustic impedance structure and the fourth high acoustic impedance structure have different thicknesses.
Sturzebecher et al. discloses in Figs. 5A-C, 7, & 8:
the respective series and parallel resonators have separate resonance frequencies ([0050]), and in a stacking direction, the first high acoustic impedance structure and the second high acoustic impedance structure have different thicknesses with layer thicknesses averaging out to a quarter of the wavelength of the resonance frequency of the respective resonator ([0057]).
As a consequence of the combination of claim 2, in the stacking direction, the third high acoustic impedance structure and the fourth high acoustic impedance structure have different thicknesses.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 & 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the combination of limitations found in both claims 6 & 20 including the limitations of the claims upon which they are dependent upon were not found or rendered obvious over the prior art. While Sturzebecher allows deviation between the thickness of Bragg reflector layers to maintain an average value, and further the prior art of Panasik (US Patent 6441703) provides for stacked Bragg reflector layers with different thicknesses to reflect different frequencies, the claimed arrangement wherein the thicknesses of the first and second high acoustic impedance structures are different, and the third and fourth high acoustic layers match the thicknesses of the second and first high acoustic impedance structures, respectively, is not provided for.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see applicant’s remarks, filed 12/19/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-5, 7-13, & 16-19 under Omura et al. have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Omura et al. in view of Ylilammi et al.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL S OUTTEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7123. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30AM-6:00PM.
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, Andrea Lindgren Baltzell can be reached at (571) 272-1988. 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.
/Samuel S Outten/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2843