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 .
Status of the claims
The argument received on August 5, 2026 has been acknowledged and entered. Claims 1-19 are currently pending. This action is a second non-final due to the new ground of rejection.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-7, filed August 5, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-19 under 35 U.S.C. 102 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 Liu.
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 6-7, 9-10, 12, 17 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Montrose et al. (US 2004/0257086 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Montrose”) (cited in IDS dated July 11, 2025) in view of Liu et al. (US 2017/0117110, hereinafter referred to as “Liu”).
Regarding claim 1, Montrose teaches a system for testing a micro-electromechanical-system (MEMS) switch under hot switching conditions (Fig. 2, 64; para. [0018]: the load is defined as a voltage limited constant current), the system comprising:
a processor (Fig. 2, computer 40, computer system 50); and
an instruction memory with computer code instructions stored thereon, the processor and the memory with computer code instructions configured to cause the system (Fig. 2, computer 40, computer system 50) to:
cause the MEMS switch (Fig. 2, 64) to cyclically (para. [0018]: when the switch of device 20 is closed, it passes a constant current, and when the switch is open, a limited voltage is present across the contacts 28, 30 (FIG. 1) … Since the activation waveform 56 is a pulse train of a predetermined length, each switch driver 54 also includes a digital counter indicated generally with arrow 66 used to count the actual number of closures of the switch contacts 28, 30, note that “activation waveform 56” in paras. [0017] and[0018] reads on “cyclically”) from a master control card 58 ) open and close while a voltage is applied to at least one contact of the MEMS switch (para. [0018]: when the switch of device 20 is closed, it passes a constant current, and when the switch is open, a limited voltage is present across the contacts 28, 30 (FIG. 1));
measure and store in a characteristic memory (para. [0008]:testing performance characteristics of a MEMS relay ; para. [0019]: Computer 40 with custom software is configured to provide all of the system control, data acquisition, data storage, and data analysis; para. [0026]: Readout data is accumulated by periodically interrupting stress and measuring device performance) one or more characteristic values (para. [0008]: testing performance characteristics of a MEMS relay; para. [0018]: testing performance characteristics of a MEMs device 20) associated with the MEMS switch during the cyclical open and closing (para. [0017]: The activation driver 52 receives an activation waveform 56 (or DC voltage; para. [0018]: when the switch of device 20 is closed, it passes a constant current, and when the switch is open, a limited voltage is present across the contacts 28, 30 (FIG. 1) … Since the activation waveform 56 is a pulse train of a predetermined length, each switch driver 54 also includes a digital counter indicated generally with arrow 66 used to count the actual number of closures of the switch contacts 28, 30); and
record an operational status of the MEMS switch (para. [0026]: Readout data is accumulated by periodically interrupting stress and measuring device performance).
wherein the operational status of the MEMS switch is either an operational state or a failure state (para. [0016]: The system and method include the ability to measure basic device parameters such as pull-in voltage, drop-out voltage, contact resistance, and lifetime (measured in the number of actions before failure), note that the above feature “measure basic device parameters” reads on “the operational status of the MEMS switch is either an operational state or a failure state”);
the processor and instruction memory with computer code instructions stored thereon (Fig. 2, computer 40, computer system 50) further configured to:
calculate a life expectancy of the MEMS switch utilizing the measured characteristic values associated with the MEMS switch (para. [0008]: specifying lifetime parameters (e.g., number of closures vs. switch load); para. [0018]: this allows for verification of the operation of the device for wear-out and lifetime qualifications, note that the above feature of “specifying lifetime parameters” in para. [0008] and “verification of the operation of the device for wear-out and lifetime qualifications” reads on “calculate a life expectancy of the MEMS switch utilizing the measured characteristic values associated with the MEMS switch”) and
the operational status of the MEMS switch (para. [0005]: the devices provide the desired operational and performance characteristics; para. [0016]: The system and method include the ability to measure basic device parameters such as pull-in voltage, drop-out voltage, contact resistance, and lifetime (measured in the number of actions before failure); para. [0018]: verification of the operation of the device for wear-out and lifetime qualifications).
Montrose does not specifically teach during one or more cycles of the MEMS switch being opened and closed.
However, Liu teaches during one or more cycles of the MEMS switch being opened and closed (para. [0007]: the control circuit programmed to transmit a control signal to the driver circuit to cause the MEMS switch to actuate to an open or closed position across a switching interval, activate the auxiliary circuit during the switching interval when the MEMS switch is switching between the open and closed positions; para. [0033]: the control circuit 16 is programmed to send control signals to the auxiliary circuit 14 that cause the auxiliary circuit 14 to be activated during the switching interval of the MEMS switch 24 when moving between the open and closed positions, note that the above feature of “switching interval” in paras. [0007] and [0033] reads on “during one or more cycles of the MEMS switch being opened and closed”).
Montrose and Liu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of micro-electromechanical system (MEMS) based switching devices. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the one or more cycles of the MEMS switch being opened and closed such as is described in Liu into Montrose, in order to send control signals to the driver circuit to cause the driver circuit to move the MEMS switch from the open position to the closed position or from the closed position to the open position within the switching interval (Liu, para. [0008]).
Regarding claim 2, Montrose in view of Liu teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Montrose teaches that the one or more characteristic values comprises a pull-in voltage, pull-off voltage, on-resistance, and/or off-resistance (para. [0016]: The system and method include the ability to measure basic device parameters such as pull-in voltage, drop-out voltage, contact resistance, and lifetime (measured in the number of actions before failure)) of at least one channel of the MEMS switch (para. [0018]: The values of the voltage and current are set on a per channel basis (e.g., each channel can be set to a different load condition). Each channel is individually programmable for load current (contacts closed) and load voltage (contacts open)).
Regarding claim 3, Montrose in view of Liu teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Montrose teaches further comprising a test circuit that: (i) hosts the MEMS switch (Fig. 2; para. [0008], [0019]: master control card 58), and (ii) is operatively coupled to the processor to receive one or more control signals from the processor for controlling the MEMS switch () and to provide one or more characteristic values associated with the MEMS switch to the processor (para. [0016]: The system and method include the ability to measure basic device parameters such as pull-in voltage, drop-out voltage, contact resistance, and lifetime (measured in the number of actions before ; para. [0019]: the master control card 58, which is in communication with the controlling computer 4).
Regarding Claim 6, Montrose in view of Liu teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Montrose teaches that the computer code instructions are further configured to cause the system to measure the one or more characteristic values prior to the MEMS switch (Fig. 2, 64) being cyclically opened and closed and/or after the operational status indicates a failure state of the MEMS switch (Fig. 2 and para. [0016]: The system and method include the ability to measure basic device parameters such as pull-in voltage, drop-out voltage, contact resistance, and lifetime (measured in the number of actions before failure); para. [0018]: when the switch of device 20 is closed, it passes a constant current, and when the switch is open, a limited voltage is present across the contacts 28, 30 (FIG. 1)… Since the activation waveform 56 is a pulse train of a predetermined length, each switch driver 54 also includes a digital counter indicated generally with arrow 66 used to count the actual number of closures of the switch contacts 28, 30; para. [0026]: Readout data is accumulated by periodically interrupting stress and measuring device performance; para. [0029]: many modifications may be made to adapt a particular situation or material to the teachings of the invention without departing from the essential scope thereof).
Regarding claim 7, Montrose in view of Liu teaches all the limitation of claim 6, in addition, Montrose teaches that the failure state is determined by any one of the MEMS switches (Fig. 2, 64) failing to open or failing to close, any one of a parametric value being outside of a manufacturer specified value for the MEMS switch (Fig. 2, 64), or any combination thereof (para. [0018]: see claim 6 above; para. [0026]: In-situ data is accumulated during stress, and will consist of the pulse counts from the switch driver to ensure that stress has actually occurred. Readout data is accumulated by periodically interrupting stress and measuring device performance; para. [0027]: When the pull-in voltage exceeds predetermined limits, the end of life of the device has been reached; para. [0028]: the operations are performed on an actuation side and a contact or switch side, note that the above feature of “switching device in para. [0018], “accumulated data during stress” in para. [0026], and “exceeds predetermined limits, the end of life of the device has been reached”, and “the operations are performed on an actuation side and a contact or switch side” in para. [0028] reads on “the failure state is determined by any one of the MEMS switches” failing to open or failing to close, any one of a parametric value being outside of a manufacturer specified value for the MEMS switch or any combination thereof”).
Regarding claim 9. Montrose in view of Liu teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Montrose teaches that the cyclically opening and closing the MEMS switch further comprises cycling the MEMS switch through a predetermined number of open-to-close and close-to-open cycles (para. [0018]: when the switch of device 20 is closed, it passes a constant current, and when the switch is open, a limited voltage is present across the contacts 28, 30 (FIG. 1)… Since the activation waveform 56 is a pulse train of a predetermined length, each switch driver 54 also includes a digital counter indicated generally with arrow 66 used to count the actual number of closures of the switch contacts 28, 30, note that since Montrose teaches, note that the above feature of “operation of switching device based on digital counter” reads on “cycling the MEMS switch through a predetermined number of open-to-close and close-to-open cycle”).
Regarding claim 10, Montrose in view of Liu teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Montrose teaches that the system is configured to measure, test, and record repeatedly until the MEMS switch indicates a failure state (para. [0026]: Readout data is accumulated by periodically interrupting stress and measuring device performance; para. [0027]: The pull-in and drop-out voltages can be determined at each readout time by processing the data using a contact resistance criterion. This will create a table of pull-in voltage as a function of the number of switch actions. When the pull-in voltage exceeds predetermined limits, the end of life of the device has been reached).
Regarding claim 12, Montrose in view of Liu e teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Montrose teaches that the voltage is non-zero (para. [0017]-[0019]: voltage; para. [0020]: generating wave shapes with two positive voltage levels to the activation driver 52 ; Activation driver 52 is configured to drive an accurate 0-30V DC for simple device operation).
Regarding claim 17, Montrose in view of Liu teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Montrose teaches that the instruction memory and the characteristic memory share a common physical memory space (Fig. 2, computer 40, computer system 50; para. [0008]: testing performance characteristics of a MEMS relay; para. [0019]: Computer 40 with custom software is configured to provide all of the system control, data acquisition, data storage, and data analysis; para. [0026]: Readout data is accumulated by periodically interrupting stress and measuring device performance).
Regarding claim 18, it is a system type claim and has similar limitations as of claim 1 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 19, it is a method type claim and has similar limitations as of claim 1 above. Therefore, it is rejected under the same rationale as of claim 1 above.
Claims 4, 8, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Montrose in view of Liu.
Regarding claim 4, Montrose in view of Liu teaches all the limitation of claim 3. Montrose does not specifically teach that a material composition and a layout geometry of the test circuit are configured to maintain parasitic inductance below a predetermined inductance threshold and maintain parasitic capacitance below a predetermined capacitance threshold.
However, Montrose teaches circuitry and methodology for substantially eliminating hot-switching and parasitic capacitance discharges in MEMS switching devices (see para. [0020]). Therefore, the claimed feature would be an obvious variation of such method because a person having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to use Montrose’s eliminating hot-switching and parasitic capacitance discharges in MEMS switching devices in order to maintain parasitic inductance below a predetermined inductance threshold (see MPEP 2143: “Obvious To Try”-choosing from a finite number of predictable solution).
Regarding claim 8, Montrose in view of Liu teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Montrose teaches that the operational status (paras. [0018], [0027]) comprises:
the MEMS switch being open when a control signal indicates that the MEMS switch should be open, and the MEMS switch being closed when a control signal indicates that the MEMS switch should be closed (para. [0018]: when the switch of device 20 is closed, it passes a constant current, and when the switch is open, a limited voltage is present across the contacts 28, 30 (FIG. 1)… Since the activation waveform 56 is a pulse train of a predetermined length, each switch driver 54 also includes a digital counter indicated generally with arrow 66 used to count the actual number of closures of the switch contacts 28, 30; para. [0027]: The pull-in and drop-out voltages can be determined at each readout time by processing the data using a contact resistance criterion) and
an on-resistance of the MEMS switch being within a specified range when the control signal indicates that the MEMS switch should be closed, and the on-resistance of the MEMS switch being within a specified range when the control signal indicates that the MEMS switch should be open (para. [0018]: when the switch of device 20 is closed, it passes a constant current, and when the switch is open, a limited voltage is present across the contacts 28, 30 (FIG. 1) … Since the activation waveform 56 is a pulse train of a predetermined length, each switch driver 54 also includes a digital counter indicated generally with arrow 66 used to count the actual number of closures of the switch contacts 28, 30; para. [0027]: The pull-in and drop-out voltages can be determined at each readout time by processing the data using a contact resistance criterion. This will create a table of pull-in voltage as a function of the number of switch actions. When the pull-in voltage exceeds predetermined limits, the end of life of the device has been reached, note that since Montrose teaches operation of switching device, predetermined limits in switching action (see paras. [0018],[0027]), the feature of “an on-resistance of the MEMS switch being within a specified range when the control signal indicates that the MEMS switch should be closed, and the on-resistance of the MEMS switch being within a specified range when the control signal indicates that the MEMS switch should be open” is obvious variation of such method).
Regarding claim 13, Montrose in view of Liu teaches all the limitations of claim 1, in addition, Montrose teaches that the computer code instructions are further configured to cause the system (Fig. 2, computer 40, computer system 50) to:
apply a known first voltage through a load resistor to an input of the MEMS switch (para. [0008]: the system is capable of providing stress (e.g., high activation voltage, switch load, temperature, etc.), measuring performance parameters (e.g., pull-in voltage, drop-out voltage, etc.); para. [0016]: contact resistance; para. [0020]: The activation driver provides the voltage (DC) or the pulse train (AC) required to operate and/or stress the MEMS device 20);
measure a second voltage at the input of the MEMS switch (para. [0026]: Readout data is accumulated by periodically interrupting stress and measuring device performance); compare a reference voltage that is greater than zero volts and less than the known first voltage to the second voltage (para. [0027]: The pull-in and drop-out voltages can be determined at each readout time by processing the data using a contact resistance criterion. This will create a table of pull-in voltage as a function of the number of switch actions. When the pull-in voltage exceeds predetermined limits, the end of life of the device has been reached); and
indicate that the MEMS switch is open when a comparison shows the second voltage is above the known first voltage, or the MEMS switch is closed when the second voltage is below the known first known voltage, based on the comparison of the known first voltage and the second voltage (para. [0026]: Readout data is accumulated by periodically interrupting stress and measuring device performance; para. [0027]: The pull-in and drop-out voltages can be determined at each readout time by processing the data using a contact resistance criterion. This will create a table of pull-in voltage as a function of the number of switch actions. When the pull-in voltage exceeds predetermined limits, the end of life of the device has been reached, note that Montrose teaches the switching operation measurement with predetermined limits (see paras. [0026]-[0027]), indicating that the MEMS switch is open when a comparison shows the second voltage is above the known first voltage, or the MEMS switch is closed when the second voltage is below the known first known voltage, based on the comparison of the known first voltage and the second voltage such as is described above would be an obvious variation of such methods).
Regarding claim 14, Montrose in view of Liu teaches all the limitations of claim 1, in addition, Montrose teaches that the system is further configured to adjust a frequency of the cyclical open and cyclical close of the MEMS switch based on electrical characteristics of an electrical load (para. [0018]: when the switch of device 20 is closed, it passes a constant current, and when the switch is open, a limited voltage is present across the contacts 28, 30 (FIG. 1) … Since the activation waveform 56 is a pulse train of a predetermined length, each switch driver 54 also includes a digital counter indicated generally with arrow 66 used to count the actual number of closures of the switch contacts 28, 30, note that Montrose teaches the switching operation measurement with digital counter (see paras. [0018]), adjusting a frequency of the cyclical open and cyclical close of the MEMS switch based on electrical characteristics of an electrical load switch such as is described above would be an obvious variation of such methods).
Regarding claim 15, Montrose in view of Liu teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Montrose teaches that the system is further configured to adjust a duty cycle of the cyclical open and cyclical close of the MEMS switch based on electrical characteristics of an electrical load (para. [0018]: when the switch of device 20 is closed, it passes a constant current, and when the switch is open, a limited voltage is present across the contacts 28, 30 (FIG. 1) … Since the activation waveform 56 is a pulse train of a predetermined length, each switch driver 54 also includes a digital counter indicated generally with arrow 66 used to count the actual number of closures of the switch contacts 28, 30, note that Montrose teaches the switching operation measurement with digital counter (see paras. [0018]), adjusting a duty cycle of the cyclical open and cyclical close of the MEMS switch based on electrical characteristics of an electrical load such as is described above would be an obvious variation of such methods).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Montrose in view of Liu and Li et al. (CN 113074930 A, hereinafter referred to as “Li”).
Regarding claim 11, Montrose in view of Liu teaches all the limitation of claim 8. Montrose and Liu do not specifically teach that if the operational status is not met, the system returns a failure state.
However, Li teaches that if the operational status is not met, the system returns a failure state (page 3, lines 31-33: when at least two micro-electromechanical devices in a group of micro-electromechanical devices are damaged, the test of the group of micro-electromechanical devices is finished, and the damage rate of the group of micro-electromechanical devices when the damaged micro-electromechanical devices are damaged and the failure time of the damaged micro-electromechanical devices are obtained).
Montrose and Li are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of testing of micro-electromechanical system (MEMS) device. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the operational status such as is described in Li into Montrose, in order to overcome the defects of the prior art and provides a method for predicting the service life of microelectromechanical
Device (Li, page 3, lines 22-23).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Montrose in view of Liu and Hussey et al. (US 2017/0038453 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Hussey”) and Norimatsu (US 5,252,936, hereinafter referred to as “Norimatsu”).
Regarding claim 16, , Montrose in view of Liu teaches all the limitation of claim 3. Montrose and Liu do not specifically teach further comprising a reed relay matrix configured to selectively couple one or more test instruments to the MEMS switch.
However, Hussey teaches that a reed relay matrix configured to selectively couple one or more test instruments to the MEMS switch (Abstract: A relay matrix assembly comprising a plurality of microelectromechanical (MEM) switches may be used to connect a plurality of tester channels to analyzer calibration instrument rapidly without requiring serial, robotic probing of the test channels; para. [0034]: One example of a MEM relay that may be used in a relay matrix assembly is the model RMSW260-SP6T MEMS switch available from RadantMEMS located in Stow, Mass.).
Montrose and Hussey are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of testing MEMS switch. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the relay matrix configured to selectively couple one or more test instruments to the MEMS switch such as is described in Hussey into Montrose, in order to provide the accuracy required for calibration, in accordance with some embodiments, characteristics of the MEMS-based, relay matrix assembly may be measured (Hussey, para. [0010]).
Montrose, Liu, and Hussey do not specifically teach a reed relay matrix. However, Norimatsu teaches a reed relay matrix (col. 5, lines 31-33: FIG. 7 is a circuit diagram of an embodiment of the switch matrix device using the reed relay as shown in FIG. 6).
Montrose and Norimatsu are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of switching operation. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the reed relay matrix such as is described in Norimatsu into Montrose, in order to allow the leak current occurring in the reed relay to be prevented by equalizing the potentials of the signal line and the guard pipe of each reed relay. For this purpose, lines constituting the grid of the switch matrix are classified into two groups; one is a signal line group, and the other is a guard line group for connecting the guard terminals to the guard pipes of each reed relay (col. 1 lines 63-66).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Subramanian et al. (CN 101425409 A) teaches that A system that includes micro-electromechanical system switching circuitry, such as may be made up of a plurality of micro-electromechanical switches, is provided. The plurality of micro-electromechanical switches may generally operate in a closed switching condition during system operation. A controller is coupled to the electromechanical switching circuitry. The controller may be configured to actuate at least one of the micro-electromechanical switches to a temporary open switching condition while a remainder of micro-electromechanical switches remains in the closed switching condition to conduct a load current and avoid interrupting system operation. The temporary open switching condition of the switch is useful to avoid a tendency of switch contacts to stick to one another.
Martens et al. (US 7,965,084 B2) teaches methods and apparatus for switching electrical signals are provided herein. In some embodiments a smart switch is provided, the smart switch may include a switch having a wipe capability; a monitor coupled to the switch for monitoring a performance characteristic thereof; and a controller configured to provide a stepped change in wipe applied by the switch between closing cycles thereof in response to the monitored performance characteristic.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANGKYUNG LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3669. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, LEE RODAK can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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.
/SANGKYUNG LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/CHRISTOPHER P MCANDREW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights