DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-8 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Orcutt et al., US 2007/0053086 A1.
Regarding Claim 1, Orcutt discloses: A mirror device comprising (the Office notes that the term “comprising” is an open-ended transitional phrase which permits additional elements or features):
a support portion (support anchors 16a, 16b; FIG. 8B of Orcutt);
a movable portion including a body portion including a first surface and a second surface opposite to the first surface, a mirror surface being formed on the first surface and a rib portion being formed on the second surface (center support member 20 includes a mirror structure 12 [mirror plate 72] at one side and a hinge plate 10, 10a [hinge plate 74] at an opposite side; paragraphs [0007], [0034], [0035] and FIGS. 1A, 1B, 4, 7, 8A, 8B of Orcutt); and
a coupling portion that couples the movable portion to the support portion such that the movable portion is swingable around a predetermined axis (torsional hinges 18a and 18b extending from support anchors 16a and 16b to center support member 20; paragraphs [0007], [0031] and FIGS. 1A, 1B, 4, 7, 8A, 8B of Orcutt);
wherein the rib portion includes an extending portion extending along an outer edge of the body portion when viewed in a direction perpendicular to the second surface (hinge plate 10, 10a, 74 may include perimeter ridges 70a-70d which have portions extending from a main body along an outer edge when viewed in a direction perpendicular to the major surface of hinge plate 10, 10a, 74; paragraph [0035] and FIG. 7 of Orcutt); and
the extending portion includes a protrusion portion protruding outward from the outer edge of the body portion and extending along the outer edge of the body portion when viewed in the direction perpendicular to the second surface (the curved tips of perimeter ridges 70a-70d may be identified as the claimed “protrusion portion”, and such curved tips of perimeter ridges 70a-70d extend along an outer edge when viewed in a direction perpendicular to the major surface of hinge plate 10, 10a, 74; paragraph [0035] and FIG. 7 of Orcutt).
Regarding Claim 2, Orcutt discloses the limitations of Claim 1 and further discloses: wherein when a direction parallel to the axis is a first direction, and a direction perpendicular to both the first direction and the direction perpendicular to the second surface is a second direction, a length of the protrusion portion along the outer edge of the body portion is larger than a minimum width of the coupling portion in the second direction (when a majority of the length of the curved tips of perimeter ridges 70a-70d is identified as the claimed “protrusion portion”, the length of the curved tips of perimeter ridges 70a-70d is larger than a smallest width of the torsional hinges 18a and 18b in a hinge-plate-thickness direction; FIGS. 7, 8B of Orcutt).
Regarding Claim 3, Orcutt discloses the limitations of Claim 1 and further discloses: wherein when a direction parallel to the axis is a first direction, and a direction perpendicular to both the first direction and the direction perpendicular to the second surface is a second direction, a protrusion length of the protrusion portion from the outer edge of the body portion is smaller than a minimum width of the coupling portion in the second direction (when a very small portion [e.g., 5%] at the ends of the curved tips of perimeter ridges 70a-70d is identified as the claimed “protrusion portion”, the length of the curved tips of perimeter ridges 70a-70d is smaller than a smallest width of the torsional hinges 18a and 18b in a hinge-plate-thickness direction; FIGS. 7, 8B of Orcutt).
Regarding Claim 4, Orcutt discloses the limitations of Claim 1 and further discloses: wherein when viewed in the direction perpendicular to the second surface, the rib portion includes a pair of first portions extending from a side of a reference position toward one side in a predetermined direction and facing each other in a direction perpendicular to the predetermined direction, a first connecting portion connected to the pair of first portions, a pair of second portions extending from the side of the reference position toward the other side in the predetermined direction and facing each other in the direction perpendicular to the predetermined direction, and a second connecting portion connected to the pair of second portions, and the extending portion is formed of the first connecting portion and the second connecting portion (perimeter ridges 70a-70d are formed in pairs which extend along a first direction [i.e., along a vertical direction, in opposite directions away from a central reference position] and face each other along a second direction which is perpendicular to the first direction, wherein the central protrusions [and the regions which they protrude from] which are located between such pairs 70a, 70b and 70c, 70d may be identified as the claimed “connecting portions”; FIG. 7 of Orcutt).
Regarding Claim 5, Orcutt discloses the limitations of Claim 4 and further discloses: wherein a width of the first connecting portion is wider than a width of each of the pair of first portions, and a width of the second connecting portion is wider than a width of each of the pair of second portions (at its base, the width of each central protrusion [located between pairs of perimeter ridges 70a, 70b and 70c, 70d] is wider than each of the perimeter ridges 70a-70d; FIG. 7 of Orcutt; see annotated FIG. 7 of Orcutt below, provided for Applicant’s convenience).
PNG
media_image1.png
414
376
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 6, Orcutt discloses the limitations of Claim 4 and further discloses: wherein the pair of first portions are connected to each other on the side of the reference position, and the pair of second portions are connected to each other on the side of the reference position (perimeter ridges 70a, 70b are connected to each other at an upper side of the central reference position [e.g., the torsional axis] and perimeter ridges 70c, 70d are connected to each other at the lower side of the central reference position; FIG. 7 of Orcutt).
Regarding Claim 7, Orcutt discloses the limitations of Claim 6 and further discloses: wherein when viewed in the direction perpendicular to the second surface, inner edges of the pair of first portions are smoothly connected to each other, and inner edges of the pair of second portions are smoothly connected to each other (when viewed perpendicular to the major surface of hinge plate 10, 10a, 74, the inner edges of perimeter ridges 70a, 70b are smoothly connected to each other, and the inner edges of perimeter ridges 70c, 70d are smoothly connected to each other; FIG. 7 of Orcutt).
Regarding Claim 8, Orcutt discloses the limitations of Claim 4 and further discloses: wherein the reference position coincides with a center of the body portion when viewed in the direction perpendicular to the second surface (when viewed perpendicular to the major surface of hinge plate 10, 10a, 74, the central reference position may correspond to a line along the center of hinge plate 10, 10a, 74 [e.g., the torsional axis]; see, e.g., the dashed line extending horizontally across the center of hinge plate 10a in FIG. 7 of Orcutt).
Regarding Claim 20, Orcutt discloses the limitations of Claim 1 and further discloses: wherein the protrusion portion is not in contact with portions other than the body portion (curved tips of perimeter ridges 70a-70d are not in contact with portions other than the main body [central region] of hinge plate 10, 10a, 74; FIG. 7 of Orcutt).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-19 and 21 are objected to as being dependent upon rejected base claims, but would be allowable if rewritten to include 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.
With respect to Claim 9, although the prior art discloses various mirror devices, including:
PNG
media_image2.png
240
510
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
208
512
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
330
508
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The prior art does not appear to disclose or suggest the above combination of features further comprising:
PNG
media_image5.png
238
510
media_image5.png
Greyscale
With respect to Claim 11, although the prior art discloses various mirror devices, including:
PNG
media_image2.png
240
510
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
208
512
media_image3.png
Greyscale
The prior art does not appear to disclose or suggest the above combination of features further comprising:
PNG
media_image6.png
148
510
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
88
506
media_image7.png
Greyscale
With respect to Claim 21, although the prior art discloses various mirror devices, including:
PNG
media_image2.png
240
510
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
208
512
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
58
510
media_image8.png
Greyscale
The prior art does not appear to disclose or suggest the above combination of features further comprising:
PNG
media_image9.png
118
508
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
118
508
media_image10.png
Greyscale
With respect to Claims 10 and 12-19, these claims each depend from either Claim 9 or Claim 11, and are therefore allowable for at least the reasons stated above.
Examiner Note – Consider Entirety of Reference
Although various text and figures of the cited reference have been specifically cited in this Office Action to show disclosures and teachings which correspond to specific claim language, Applicant is advised to consider the complete disclosure of the reference, including portions which have not been specifically cited by the Examiner.
Related Art
The following references are cited to show examples of mirror device or MEMS device having a double-silicon-on-insulator (“double SOI” or “DSOI”; insulator sandwiched between silicon layers) type of configuration, but which do not appear to otherwise disclose or suggest the presently-allowable claims: U.S. Patent Nos. 10,437,046 and 11,372,234 and 11,726,312 of Godil et al.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN S DUNNING whose telephone number is 571-272-4879. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 10:30AM to 7:00PM Eastern Time Zone. 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, BUMSUK WON can be reached at 571-272-2713. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/RYAN S DUNNING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2872