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
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) 1-8, 10-13 and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hara (JP 2007208728).
Considering claim 1, Hara (Figures 1-4) teaches an acoustic wave device, comprising: a piezoelectric layer (44 + paragraph 0025) including a first major surface and a second major surface that face each other; a functional electrode (45 + paragraph 0025) provided on at least one of the first major surface and the second major surface of the piezoelectric layer; a support substrate (41 + paragraph 0025) laminated on a second major surface side of the piezoelectric layer; wherein an air gap (46 + paragraph 0025) is provided between the support substrate and the piezoelectric layer; at least a portion of the functional electrode overlaps (45 + paragraph 0025) the air gap (46) as seen in a laminating direction of the support substrate and the piezoelectric layer; a through-hole (47 + paragraph 0025) that penetrates the piezoelectric layer and reaches the air gap is provided; and a protrusion (upper portion of 45 + paragraph 0025) is provided in a region defining an outer edge of the through-hole in the first major surface of the piezoelectric layer and is more protruded than a region where the through-hole is not provided (see Figure 4b).
Considering claim 2, Hara (Figures 1-4) teaches wherein at least a portion of the protrusion includes a curved surface (see Figure 4 + paragraph 0025).
Considering claim 3, Hara teaches wherein at least one of an outer wall and an inner wall of the protrusion includes a curved surface (see Figure 4 + paragraph 0025).
Considering claim 4, Hara teaches wherein an outer wall of the protrusion has a shape widening from inside toward outside or shape narrowing from inside toward outside (see Figure 4 near where item 25 is located).
Considering claim 5, Hara (Figures 1-4) teaches wherein at least a portion of the through-hole (47 + paragraph 0025) is curved (Dome shape see Figure 4b) as seen in the lamination direction of the support substrate and the piezoelectric layer.
Considering claim 6, Hara (Figures 1-4) teaches wherein an end portion of the through-hole (47 + paragraph 0025) on a first major surface side of the piezoelectric layer has an inverse tapered shape increasing in cross-sectional area toward the first major surface (paragraph 0032).
Considering claim 7, Hara (Figures 1-4) teaches an intermediate layer provided between the support substrate (32 + paragraph 0036) and the piezoelectric layer; wherein the air gap (36 + paragraph 0031) is provided in a portion of the intermediate layer.
Considering claim 8, Hara (Figures 1-4) teaches wherein the protrusion includes a reinforcement film (45 + paragraph 0025) provided on the first major surface of the piezoelectric layer.
Considering claim 10, Hara (Figures 1-4) teaches wherein the reinforcement film (43 + paragraph 0025) is further provided on the second major surface of the piezoelectric layer.
Considering claim 11, Hara (Figure 4b) teaches wherein the air gap (46 + paragraph 0025) is adjacent to a surface of the reinforcement film provided on the second major surface of the piezoelectric layer.
Considering claim 12, Hara (Figure 4b) teaches wherein the reinforcement film (43 + 45 + paragraph 0025) provided on the second major surface of the piezoelectric layer is in contact with a sidewall of the air gap (see Figure 4b).
Considering claim 13, Hara (Figure 4b) teaches wherein the reinforcement film provided on the second major surface (43 + paragraph 0025) of the piezoelectric layer extends across a sidewall of the air gap as seen in the lamination direction of the support substrate and the piezoelectric layer (see Figure 4b).
Considering claim 26, Hara (Figures 1-4) teaches wherein the functional electrode includes an upper electrode (45 + paragraph 0025) provided on the first major surface of the piezoelectric layer and a lower electrode (23 + paragraph 0025) provided on the second major surface of the piezoelectric layer.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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) 14-16 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara (JP 2007208728).
Considering claim 14, Hara discloses the claimed invention except for wherein a material of the reinforcement film is a dielectric. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include a material of the reinforcement film is a dielectric, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Considering claim 15, Hara discloses the claimed invention except for wherein a material of the reinforcement film is any one of SiO2, SiN and Al2O3. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include a material of the reinforcement film is any one of SiO2, SiN and Al2O3, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Considering claim 16, Hara discloses the claimed invention except for wherein a material of the reinforcement film is a metal. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to include a material of the reinforcement film is a metal, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice.
Considering claim 27, Hara discloses the claimed invention except for wherein Euler angels of the lithium niobate or the lithium tantalate are within a range expressed by Expression (1), (2), or (3):
PNG
media_image1.png
170
644
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to include Euler angels of the lithium niobate or the lithium tantalate are within a range expressed by Expression (1), (2), or (3):
PNG
media_image1.png
170
644
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art.
Claim(s) 18 and 20-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara (JP 2007208728) and in view of Yantchev (PG Pub 20200350890).
Considering claim 20, Hara teaches the acoustic wave device as described above.
However, Hara does not teach wherein the piezoelectric layer includes lithium niobate or lithium tantalate.
Yantchev teaches wherein the piezoelectric layer includes lithium niobate or lithium tantalate (paragraph 0024).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the piezoelectric layer includes lithium niobate or lithium tantalate into Hara’s device for the benefit of using a common or well-known piezoelectric material.
Considering claim 21, Yantchev teaches wherein the acoustic wave device is structured to generate a thickness-shear mode bulk wave (paragraph 0029).
Considering claim 22, Yantchev teaches wherein d/p < about 0.5 where d is a thickness of the piezoelectric layer (paragraph 0038) and p is a center-to-center distance between a first electrode and a second electrode (136 + paragraph 0033) that are adjacent among the one or more first electrodes and the one or more second electrodes (it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art).
Considering claim 23, Yantchev teaches wherein d/p < about 0.24 (it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art).
Considering claim 24, Yantchev discloses the claimed invention except for wherein MR < about 1.75 (d/p) + 0.75, where MR is a metallization ratio that is a ratio of an area of a first electrode and a second electrode that are adjacent among the one or more first electrodes and the one or more second electrodes to an area of an excitation region where the first electrode and the second electrode that are adjacent overlap each other as seen in a direction in which the first electrode and the second electrode that are adjacent face each other, d is a thickness of the piezoelectric layer, and p is a center to center distance between the first electrode and the second electrode that are adjacent. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have wherein MR < about 1.75 (d/p) + 0.75, where MR is a metallization ratio that is a ratio of an area of a first electrode and a second electrode that are adjacent among the one or more first electrodes and the one or more second electrodes to an area of an excitation region where the first electrode and the second electrode that are adjacent overlap each other as seen in a direction in which the first electrode and the second electrode that are adjacent face each other, d is a thickness of the piezoelectric layer, and p is a center to center distance between the first electrode and the second electrode that are adjacent, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art.
Considering claim 25, Yantchev discloses the claimed invention except for wherein MR < about 1.75(d/p) + 0.05. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to wherein MR < about 1.75(d/p) + 0.05, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves only routine skill in the art.
Considering claim 18, Hara teaches the functional electrode as described above.
However, Hara does not teach the functional electrode includes one or more first electrodes, a first busbar electrode coupled to the one or more first electrodes, one or more second electrodes, and a second busbar electrode coupled to the one or more second electrodes; and the one or more first electrodes, the first busbar electrode, the one or more second electrodes, and the second busbar electrode are provided on the first major surface of the piezoelectric layer.
Yantchev (Figure 1) teaches the functional electrode includes one or more first electrodes, a first busbar electrode (132 + paragraph 0028) coupled to the one or more first electrodes, one or more second electrodes (136), and a second busbar electrode (134 + paragraph 0028) coupled to the one or more second electrodes; and the one or more first electrodes, the first busbar electrode, the one or more second electrodes, and the second busbar electrode are provided on the first major surface of the piezoelectric layer.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include the functional electrode includes one or more first electrodes, a first busbar electrode coupled to the one or more first electrodes, one or more second electrodes, and a second busbar electrode coupled to the one or more second electrodes; and the one or more first electrodes, the first busbar electrode, the one or more second electrodes, and the second busbar electrode are provided on the first major surface of the piezoelectric layer into Hara’s device for the benefit of providing electrical connection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 17, 19 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.
Considering claim 9, the prior art does not teach wherein the reinforcement film is further provided on a sidewall of the through-hole in combination with the rest of the applicant’s claimed limitations.
Considering claim 17, the prior art does not teach the functional electrode includes one or more first electrodes, a first busbar electrode coupled to the one or more first electrodes, one or more second electrodes, and a second busbar electrode coupled to the one or more second electrodes; the through-hole is provided in at least one of a region between the first electrode and the second busbar electrode and a dielectric film is provided on a side wall of the through-hole in combination with the rest of the applicant’s claimed limitations.
Furthermore, claim 19, which depends upon claim 17, would also be allowed if it depended from an independent and allowable claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN P GORDON whose telephone number is (571)272-5394. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 a.m. - 4:30 p.m..
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 K 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.
/BRYAN P GORDON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
