DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim 26-45 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over applicant own submitted prior art Wu “Flexible Dome and Bump Shape Piezoelectric Tactile Sensors Using PVDF-TrFE Copolymer” in view of applicant own submitted prior art Akkerman EP3733310 (but using US PG-Pub 2022/0193723 as equivalent).
Regarding claim 26, Wu teaches a piezoelectric substrate having an array of piezoelectric microstructures, electrical terminal, wherein the piezoelectric substrate comprises protrusions that form the piezoelectric microstructures (Fig. 1 & Fig. 2 & Fig. 4: having a piezoelectric substrate made of PVDF-TrFE which has bumps with top/bottom electrode in a array pattern).
Wu failed to explicitly teach wherein at least some of the piezoelectric microstructures have at least one electrical terminal.
However, Akkerman teaches wherein at least some of the piezoelectric microstructures have at least one electrical terminal (Fig. 7A & [0051]: each piezoelectric microstructure have at least one electrical terminal for being able to be selected individually).
Wu and Akkerman are analogous art because they are both in the same field of endeavor, namely piezoelectric devices. Therefore, 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, because being able to individually select each piezoelectric helps to use the array to perform beamforming.
Regarding claim 33, Wu teaches a piezoelectric substrate having an array of piezoelectric microstructures (Fig. 1 & Fig. 2 & Fig. 4: having a piezoelectric substrate made of PVDF-TrFE which has bumps with top/bottom electrode in a array pattern).
Wu failed to teach each piezoelectric microstructure having at least one electrical terminal.
However, Akkerman teaches each piezoelectric microstructure having at least one electrical terminal (Fig. 7A & [0051]: each piezoelectric microstructure have at least one electrical terminal for being able to be selected individually).
Wu and Akkerman are analogous art because they are both in the same field of endeavor, namely piezoelectric devices. Therefore, 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, because being able to individually select each piezoelectric helps to use the array to perform beamforming.
Regarding claim 42, Wu teaches providing an active acoustic surface, comprising a piezoelectric substrate having an array of piezoelectric microstructures, wherein the piezoelectric substrate comprises protrusions that form the piezoelectric microstructures, wherein the protrusions are configured to act as sensing elements (Fig. 1 & Fig. 2 & Fig. 4: having a piezoelectric substrate made of PVDF-TrFE which has bumps with top/bottom electrode in a array pattern).
Wu failed to teach wherein the protrusions are configured to act as actuating elements.
However, Akkerman teaches wherein the protrusions are configured to act as actuating elements (Title: Acoustic Piezoelectric transducer).
Wu and Akkerman are analogous art because they are both in the same field of endeavor, namely piezoelectric devices. Therefore, 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, because a transducer can turn vibration into electrical signal or electrical signal into vibrations.
Regarding claim 27 and 38, Wu teaches wherein the piezoelectric substrate comprises at least one of: a piezoelectric polymer; a piezoelectric composite; a piezoelectric ceramic; and/or a piezoelectric single-crystal material (Abstract: piezoelectric polymer).
Regarding claim 28, Wu teaches wherein at least one of the protrusions is dome-shaped (Fig. 1 & Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 29, Wu teaches wherein at least one of the protrusions has a concave surface (Fig. 1 & Fig. 2: concave bump).
Regarding claim 30 and 39, Akkerman teaches a circuit coupled to at least one of the at least one electrical terminal, wherein one or more piezoelectric microstructures in the array of piezoelectric microstructures are responsive to signals from the circuit (Fig. 5B & Fig. 7A & [0051]: using 12a/12b to selectively actuate the individual acoustic transducer 10a/10b). Therefore, 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, because being able to individually select each piezoelectric helps to use the array to perform beamforming.
Regarding claim 31, 41 and 45, Wu teaches a circuit coupled to at least one of the at least one electrical terminal, wherein the circuit is coupled to receive a voltage signal from at least one of the piezoelectric microstructures to detect external environment vibrations (Fig. 6 & Fig. 8a: a circuit [charge amplifier and oscilloscope] as the oscillating input is detected, the sensor output oscillating signal from the vibrations).
Wu failed to explicitly teach an acoustic sound from an acoustic source in an external environment.
However, Akkerman transducer that can output/input acoustic sound from an acoustic source in an external environment (Fig. 7A & [0051]: each piezoelectric microstructure have at least one electrical terminal for being able to be selected individually; it being a transducer which can input/output sound).
Wu and Akkerman are analogous art because they are both in the same field of endeavor, namely piezoelectric devices. Therefore, 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, because a transducer can turn vibration into electrical signal or electrical signal into vibrations.
Regarding claim 32, Wu teaches a circuit coupled to at least one of the at least one electrical terminal, wherein the piezoelectric substrate comprises two or more conductive traces, each coupled to one or more piezoelectric microstructures (Fig. 1 & Fig. 2: a bottom and top trace for the electrical signal).
Wu failed to teach circuit is configured to address individual piezoelectric microstructures by activating at least two of the conductive traces.
However, Akkerman teaches circuit is configured to address individual piezoelectric microstructures by activating at least two of the conductive traces (Fig. 7A & [0051]: each piezoelectric microstructure have at least one electrical terminal for being able to be selected individually).
Wu and Akkerman are analogous art because they are both in the same field of endeavor, namely piezoelectric devices. Therefore, 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, because being able to individually select each piezoelectric helps to use the array to perform beamforming.
Regarding claim 34, Akkerman teaches a protective layer disposed on one side of the piezoelectric substrate, the protective layer comprising an array of through holes, each through hole in the array of through holes positioned over a piezoelectric microstructure of the array of piezoelectric microstructures (Fig. 7A-14). Therefore, 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, because the top layer will help protect the piezoelectric material from getting damage, while still allowing acoustic sounds to be gather or generated by the piezoelectric material.
Regarding claim 35, Akkerman teaches an encapsulation layer disposed on one side of the piezoelectric substrate (Fig. 7A-14). Therefore, 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, because the top layer will help protect the piezoelectric material from getting damage, while still allowing acoustic sounds to be gather or generated by the piezoelectric material.
Regarding claim 36, Wu teaches wherein the piezoelectric substrate is flexible (Title: Flexible Dome and Bump Shape Piezoelectric).
Regarding claim 37, Wu teaches wherein the piezoelectric substrate is rigid (pg 334 col. 2: the most common design among piezoelectric involves bonding PVDF film on rigid substrate, then bonding bump structures of silicon or glass).
Regarding claim 40, Wu teaches a circuit coupled to at least one of the at least one electrical terminal (Fig. 6 & Fig. 8a: a circuit [charge amplifier and oscilloscope] as the oscillating input is detected, the sensor output oscillating signal from the vibrations).
Wu failed to explicitly teach wherein in response to an AC voltage provided by the circuit, at least one of the piezoelectric microstructures produces an acoustic sound.
However, Akkerman wherein in response to an AC voltage provided by the circuit, at least one of the piezoelectric microstructures produces an acoustic sound (Fig. 7A & [0044]: each piezoelectric microstructure have at least one electrical terminal for being able to be selected individually; it being a transducer which can input/output sound, like output the wave W).
Wu and Akkerman are analogous art because they are both in the same field of endeavor, namely piezoelectric devices. Therefore, 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, because a transducer can turn vibration into electrical signal or electrical signal into vibrations.
Regarding claim 43, Wu teaches wherein providing an active acoustic surface further comprises providing an active acoustic surface having at least some piezoelectric microstructures with at least one electrical terminal (Fig. 1 & Fig. 2 & Fig. 4: having a piezoelectric substrate made of PVDF-TrFE which has bumps with top/bottom electrode for two electrical terminals).
Regarding claim 44, Akkerman teaches driving an AC voltage across at least one of the piezoelectric microstructures to cause the piezoelectric microstructures to produce an acoustic sound (Fig. 7A & [0044]: each piezoelectric microstructure have at least one electrical terminal for being able to be selected individually; it being a transducer which can input/output sound, like output the wave W). Therefore, 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, because a transducer can turn vibration into electrical signal or electrical signal into vibrations.
Conclusion
Applicant's submission of an information disclosure statement under 37 CFR 1.97(c) with the timing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p) on 8/11/2025 prompted the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 609.04(b). 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 WILLIAM A JEREZ LORA whose telephone number is (571)270-5519. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7am-9am and 11am-6pm.
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, Vivian Chin can be reached at 571-272-7848. 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.
/WILLIAM A JEREZ LORA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Prosecution Insights