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) 1-2, 4-8, 10-11, 13-16, & 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakagawa et al. (US PGPub 20200328728), a reference of record, in view of Horikawa (US PGPub 20190334500)
As per claim 1:
Nakagawa discloses in Fig. 39:
A surface acoustic wave device ([0200]) comprising: a multilayer piezoelectric substrate having a support substrate (high velocity member 4C and low acoustic velocity member 5C) and a piezoelectric layer (6C) over the support substrate; and
an interdigital transducer electrode.
Nakagawa does not disclose:
an interdigital transducer electrode having a first portion and a second portion, the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer and the second portion positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall angled relative to the first sidewall, a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer.
Horikawa discloses in Fig. 2:
An elastic wave device (title) comprising an interdigital transducer electrode (3) having a first portion (acoustic velocity adjusting layer 7 and layers 3a-b or just acoustic adjusting layer 7 in an alternative interpretation) and a second portion (layers 3c-3e or layers 3a-3e in an alternative interpretation), the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer (acoustic velocity adjusting layer 7, comprising a metal [0047]) and the second portion (layers 3a-e) positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall angled relative to the first sidewall (as seen in Fig. 2), a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer (as seen in Fig. 2, [0044]).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the interdigital transducer of Nakagawa as per the interdigital transducer of Horikawa to provide the benefit of reducing spurious waves, as taught by Horikawa ([0062]).
As a consequence of the combination, the combination discloses an interdigital transducer electrode having a first portion and a second portion, the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer and the second portion positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall angled relative to the first sidewall, a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer.
As per claims 2, 11, & 19:
Nakagawa discloses in Fig. 39:
the piezoelectric layer is a 40±30°Y-cut X-propagation lithium tantalate layer ([0202]).
As per claims 4 & 13:
Nakagawa does not disclose:
the first portion has a width wider than the second portion at the second surface of the piezoelectric layer.
Horikawa discloses in Fig. 2:
An elastic wave device (title) comprising an interdigital transducer electrode (3) having a first portion (acoustic velocity adjusting layer 7 and layers 3a-b) and a second portion (layers 3c-3e), the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer (acoustic velocity adjusting layer 7, comprising a metal [0047]) and the second portion (layers 3a-e) positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall angled relative to the first sidewall (as seen in Fig. 2), a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer (as seen in Fig. 2, [0044]).
As a consequence of the combination of claims 1 & 10, the first portion has a width wider than the second portion at the second surface of the piezoelectric layer.
As per claims 5 & 14:
Nakagawa does not disclose:
the first portion has a width narrower than the second portion at the second surface of the piezoelectric layer.
Horikawa discloses in Fig. 2:
An elastic wave device (title) comprising an interdigital transducer electrode (3) having a first portion and a second portion, the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer (acoustic velocity adjusting layer 7, comprising a metal [0047]) and the second portion (layers 3a-e) positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall angled relative to the first sidewall (as seen in Fig. 2), a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer (as seen in Fig. 2, [0044]).
As a consequence of the combination of claims 1 & 10, the first portion has a width narrower than the second portion at the second surface of the piezoelectric layer.
As per claims 6 & 15:
Nakagawa does not disclose:
the first portion includes a first material and the second portion includes a second material different from the first material.
Horikawa discloses in Fig. 2:
the first portion includes a first material (Pt, [0040]) and the second portion includes a second material (Al, [0040]) different from the first material.
As a consequence of the combination of claims 1 & 10, the first portion includes a first material and the second portion includes a second material different from the first material.
As per claims 7 & 16:
Nakagawa does not disclose:
the first material is tungsten, molybdenum, platinum, or gold and the second material is aluminum.
Horikawa discloses in Fig. 2:
the first material is tungsten, molybdenum, platinum, or gold and the second material is aluminum ([0040]).
As a consequence of the combination of claims 1 & 10, the first material is tungsten, molybdenum, platinum, or gold and the second material is aluminum.
As per claim 8:
Nakagawa does not disclose:
the first sidewall and the second sidewall are laterally offset by a gap.
Horikawa discloses in Fig. 2:
An elastic wave device (title) comprising an interdigital transducer electrode (3) having a first portion and a second portion, the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer (acoustic velocity adjusting layer 7, comprising a metal [0047]) and the second portion (layers 3a-e) positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall angled relative to the first sidewall (as seen in Fig. 2), a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer (as seen in Fig. 2, [0044]).
As a consequence of the combination of claim 1, the first sidewall and the second sidewall are laterally offset by a gap.
As per claim 10:
Nakagawa discloses in Fig. 39:
A surface acoustic wave device ([0200]) comprising: a multilayer piezoelectric substrate having a support substrate (high velocity member 4C and low acoustic velocity member 5C) and a piezoelectric layer (6C) over the support substrate; and
an interdigital transducer electrode.
Nakagawa does not disclose:
an interdigital transducer electrode having a first portion and a second portion, the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer and the second portion positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall laterally offset from the first sidewall, a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer.
Horikawa discloses in Fig. 2:
An elastic wave device (title) comprising an interdigital transducer electrode (3) having a first portion (acoustic velocity adjusting layer 7 and layers 3a-b) and a second portion (layers 3c-3e), the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer (acoustic velocity adjusting layer 7, comprising a metal [0047]) and the second portion (layers 3a-e) positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall laterally offset from the first sidewall (as seen in Fig. 2), a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer (as seen in Fig. 2, [0044]).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the interdigital transducer of Nakagawa as per the interdigital transducer of Horikawa to provide the benefit of reducing spurious waves, as taught by Horikawa ([0062]).
As a consequence of the combination, the combination discloses an interdigital transducer electrode having a first portion and a second portion, the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer and the second portion positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall laterally offset from the first sidewall, a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer.
As per claim 18:
Nakagawa discloses in Fig. 39:
A surface acoustic wave device ([0200]) comprising:
a multilayer piezoelectric substrate having a support substrate (high velocity member 4C and low acoustic velocity member 5C) and a piezoelectric layer (6C) over the support substrate; and
an interdigital transducer electrode.
Nakagawa does not disclose:
an interdigital transducer electrode having a first layer and a second layer including different materials, at least a portion of the first layer being positioned in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer, the first layer having a first sidewall and a second layer having a second sidewall angled relative to the first sidewall, a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer.
Horikawa discloses in Fig. 2:
An elastic wave device (title) comprising an interdigital transducer electrode (3) having a first layer (acoustic velocity adjusting layer 7 and layers 3a-b) and a second layer (layers 3c-3e) including different materials ([0040]), at least a portion of the first layer being positioned in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer (acoustic velocity adjusting layer 7, in groove portion 8, as seen in Fig. 2), the first layer having a first sidewall and a second layer having a second sidewall angled relative to the first sidewall (as seen in Fig. 2), a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer (as seen in Fig. 2, [0044]).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the interdigital transducer of Nakagawa as per the interdigital transducer of Horikawa to provide the benefit of reducing spurious waves, as taught by Horikawa ([0062]).
As a consequence of the combination, an interdigital transducer electrode having a first layer and a second layer including different materials, at least a portion of the first layer being positioned in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer, the first layer having a first sidewall and a second layer having a second sidewall angled relative to the first sidewall, a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 8-12, 14, & 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakagawa et al. (US PGPub 20200328728) in view of Kimura et al. (US PGPub 20130300253), both references of record, and Horikawa (US PGPub 20190334500)
As per claim 1:
Nakagawa discloses in Fig. 39:
A surface acoustic wave device ([0200]) comprising: a multilayer piezoelectric substrate having a support substrate (high velocity member 4C and low acoustic velocity member 5C) and a piezoelectric layer (6C) over the support substrate; and
an interdigital transducer electrode.
Nakagawa does not disclose:
an interdigital transducer electrode having a first portion and a second portion, the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer and the second portion positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall angled relative to the first sidewall, a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer.
Kimura et al. discloses in Figs. 1-2 & 10:
A surface acoustic wave device (title) wherein an interdigital transducer electrode (102) having a first portion (first layer 102i) and a second portion (second electrode layer 102o), the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of a piezoelectric layer (101) and the second portion positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall angled relative to the first sidewall (as seen in Fig. 10, wherein the lateral surfaces of the groove are set by an angle alpha from the horizontal [0073]).
Horikawa discloses in Fig. 2:
An elastic wave device (title) comprising an interdigital transducer electrode (3) having a first portion and a second portion, the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer (acoustic velocity adjusting layer 7, comprising a metal [0047]) and the second portion (layers 3a-e) positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall angled relative to the first sidewall (as seen in Fig. 2), a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer (as seen in Fig. 2, [0044]).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the interdigital transducer of Nakagawa as per the interdigital transducer of Kimura to provide the benefit of reducing spurious waves and increasing the bandwidth ratio, as taught by Kimura ([0009 & 0011]).
As a consequence of the combination, the combination discloses an interdigital transducer electrode having a first portion and a second portion, the first portion positioned below the second surface of the piezoelectric layer and the second portion positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall angled relative to the first sidewall.
It would have been further obvious for the IDT to be formed so that a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extends beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, to provide the benefit of ensuring that the first portion of the electrode is covered by the second portion of the electrode as taught by Horikawa et al. ([0058-0059])
As per claims 2 & 11:
Nakagawa discloses in Fig. 39:
the piezoelectric layer is a 40±30°Y-cut X-propagation lithium tantalate layer ([0202]).
As per claims 3 & 12:
Nakagawa does not disclose:
the first sidewall and the second sidewall are angled by an angle in a range between 5 degrees and 60 degrees.
Kimura et al. discloses in Figs. 1-2 & 10:
the first sidewall and the second sidewall are angled by an angle in a range between 5 degrees and 60 degrees (lateral surfaces can be angled at 50-70° from the piezoelectric surface [0073], thus 20-40 degrees from the vertical).
As a consequence of the combination of claim 1, the first sidewall and the second sidewall are angled by an angle in a range between 5 degrees and 60 degrees.
As per claims 5 & 14:
Nakagawa does not disclose:
the first portion has a width narrower than the second portion at the second surface of the piezoelectric layer.
Horikawa discloses in Fig. 2:
An elastic wave device (title) comprising an interdigital transducer electrode (3) having a first portion and a second portion, the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer (acoustic velocity adjusting layer 7, comprising a metal [0047]) and the second portion (layers 3a-e) positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall angled relative to the first sidewall (as seen in Fig. 2), a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer (as seen in Fig. 2, [0044]).
As a consequence of the combination of claims 1 & 10, the first portion has a width narrower than the second portion at the second surface of the piezoelectric layer.
As per claim 8:
Nakagawa does not disclose:
the first sidewall and the second sidewall are laterally offset by a gap.
Horikawa discloses in Fig. 2:
An elastic wave device (title) comprising an interdigital transducer electrode (3) having a first portion and a second portion, the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer (acoustic velocity adjusting layer 7, comprising a metal [0047]) and the second portion (layers 3a-e) positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall angled relative to the first sidewall (as seen in Fig. 2), a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer (as seen in Fig. 2, [0044]).
As a consequence of the combination of claim 1, the first sidewall and the second sidewall are laterally offset by a gap.
As per claims 9 & 17:
Nakagawa does not disclose:
a depth of the interdigital transducer electrode positioned in the piezoelectric layer is in a range between 0.02L and 0.08L, L being a wavelength of a surface acoustic wave generated by the surface acoustic wave device.
Kimura discloses in Figs. 1-2:
a depth of the interdigital transducer electrode positioned in the piezoelectric layer is in a range between 0.02L and 0.08L ([0060, 0064], and shown in Fig. 9), 0.08L, L being a wavelength of a surface acoustic wave generated by the surface acoustic wave device.
As a consequence of the combination of claim 1, a depth of the interdigital transducer electrode positioned in the piezoelectric layer is in a range between 0.02L and 0.08L ([0060, 0064, and shown in Fig. 9]), 0.08L, L being a wavelength of a surface acoustic wave generated by the surface acoustic wave device, and would further be obvious a design parameter for determining the bandwidth as shown in Fig. 9.
As per claim 10:
Nakagawa discloses in Fig. 39:
A surface acoustic wave device ([0200]) comprising: a multilayer piezoelectric substrate having a support substrate (high velocity member 4C and low acoustic velocity member 5C) and a piezoelectric layer (6C) over the support substrate; and
an interdigital transducer electrode.
Nakagawa does not disclose:
an interdigital transducer electrode having a first portion and a second portion, the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer and the second portion positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall laterally offset from the first sidewall, a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer.
Kimura et al. discloses in Figs. 1-2 & 10:
A surface acoustic wave device (title) wherein an interdigital transducer electrode (102) having a first portion (first layer 102i) and a second portion (second electrode layer 102o), the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of a piezoelectric layer (101) and the second portion positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall laterally offset from the first sidewall (as seen in Fig. 10, wherein each portion has two lateral surfaces, with opposite surfaces laterally offset from each other).
Horikawa discloses in Fig. 2:
An elastic wave device (title) comprising an interdigital transducer electrode (3) having a first portion and a second portion, the first portion positioned below the second surface in a cavity of the piezoelectric layer (acoustic velocity adjusting layer 7, comprising a metal [0047]) and the second portion (layers 3a-e) positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall laterally offset from the first sidewall (as seen in Fig. 2), a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extending beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer (as seen in Fig. 2, [0044]).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the interdigital transducer of Nakagawa as per the interdigital transducer of Kimura to provide the benefit of reducing spurious waves and increasing the bandwidth ratio, as taught by Kimura ([0009 & 0011]).
It would have been further obvious for the IDT to be formed so that a periphery of the interdigital transducer electrode extends beyond the cavity and onto the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, to provide the benefit of ensuring that the first portion of the electrode is covered by the second portion of the electrode as taught by Horikawa et al. ([0058-0059])
As a consequence of the combination, the combination discloses an interdigital transducer electrode having a first portion and a second portion, the first portion positioned below the second surface of the piezoelectric layer and the second portion positioned above the second surface of the piezoelectric layer, the first portion having a first sidewall and a second portion having a second sidewall laterally offset from the first sidewall.
Claim(s) 3, 9, 12, 17, & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the resultant combination of Nakagawa et al. (US PGPub 20200328728), a reference of record, in view of Horikawa (US PGPub 20190334500) as applied to claims 1, 10, & 18 above, and further in view of Kimura et al. (US PGPub 20130300253), a reference of record.
The resultant combination discloses the surface acoustic wave device of claims 1, 10, & 18, as rejected above.
As per claims 3, 12, & 20:
The resultant combination does not disclose:
the first sidewall and the second sidewall are angled by an angle in a range between 5 degrees and 60 degrees.
Kimura et al. discloses in Figs. 1-2 & 10-11:
The use of an IDT partially embedded in a piezoelectric substrate wherein a first sidewall of the embedded portion and the second sidewall of the non-embedded portion are angled by an angle in a range between 5 degrees and 60 degrees (lateral surfaces can be angled at 50-70° from the piezoelectric surface [0073], thus 20-40 degrees from the vertical).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the first sidewall and the second sidewall to be angled by an angle in a range between 5 degrees and 60 degrees as a design parameter for determining a bandwidth ratio of the resonator as taught by Kimura et al. ([0074])
As per claims 9 & 17:
The resultant combination does not disclose:
a depth of the interdigital transducer electrode positioned in the piezoelectric layer is in a range between 0.02L and 0.08L, L being a wavelength of a surface acoustic wave generated by the surface acoustic wave device.
Kimura discloses in Figs. 1-2, 7a-c, & 9:
a depth of a partially embedded interdigital transducer electrode positioned in the piezoelectric layer is in a range between 0.02L and 0.08L ([0060, 0064], and shown in Figs. 7a-c & 9), 0.08L, L being a wavelength of a surface acoustic wave generated by the surface acoustic wave device.
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art for the a depth of the interdigital transducer electrode positioned in the piezoelectric layer is in a range between 0.02L and 0.08L, L being a wavelength of a surface acoustic wave generated by the surface acoustic wave device, as the depth of the interdigital transducer electrode is a design parameter for optimizing energy concentration and bandwidth and providing the benefit of producing surface acoustic waves efficiently as taught by Kimura et al. (Figs. 7a-c, [0057] & [0069])
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see applicant’s remarks, filed 02/23/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under Nakagawa and Kimura with Yaoi and Kimura 2 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 Nakagawa in view of Horikawa (US PGPub 20190334500) and Kimura.
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 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
Prosecution Insights