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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 19 April 2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In [00118] & [00119], “(as shown in 14A-B)” should be --(as shown in FIGS.14A-B)--. Similarly, in [00120], “(as shown in 13A-B)” should be --(as shown in FIGS.13A-B)--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 7-8, 17-18 & 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Recitation “a biased latch bolt” is vague and indefinite. The phrase refers to element 518, Fig.13B&14B, [0119]. But, it is unclear in what sense the element is “biased” and what structural features are encompassed by the term “bolt”. The “bolt” appears to be a kind of protrusion or hook that engages bolt recess 520 in second latching portion 516; Fig.14B).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 1-4 & 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ng et al. (US Pat.Pub.2015/0341534).
Regarding claim 1, Ng teaches an electrically-conductive, MEMS flexure assembly comprising:
a first MEMS subportion (outer frame) 32 including a first plurality of electrically-conductive pads (support end) 111 ([0060]; [0070]; [0086]);
a second MEMS subportion (inner frame) 34 including a second plurality of electrically-conductive pads (second support end) 112 ([0086]); and
a plurality of MEMS electrically-conductive flexures 113/33 (Figs.1/20A) electrically coupling the first plurality of electrically-conductive pads on the first MEMS subportion 32 and the second plurality of electrically-conductive pads on the second MEMS subportion 34 (flexures 33 route electrical signals from electrical contact pads on outer frame 32 to electrical contact pads on the inner frame 34; [0086]; Figs.1,8&20A).
PNG
media_image1.png
398
231
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
304
423
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the electrically-conductive, MEMS flexure assembly is configured to allow deformation of the plurality of MEMS electrically-conductive flexures 113/33 in two axes (i.e., in x-y plane; [0087]; [0091])
Regarding claim 3, an X-axis displacement assembly (two x-axis comb drives) is configured to allow deformation of the plurality of MEMS electrically-conductive flexures in the X-axis ([0091]).
Regarding claim 4, a Y-axis displacement assembly (two other y-axis comb drives) is configured to allow deformation of the plurality of MEMS electrically-conductive flexures in the Y-axis ([0091]).
Regarding claim 12, Ng teaches an electrically-conductive, MEMS flexure assembly comprising: a first MEMS subportion 32 including a first plurality of electrically-conductive pads 111; a second MEMS subportion including a second plurality of electrically-conductive pads 112; and a plurality of MEMS electrically-conductive flexures 113/33 (Figs.1/20A) electrically coupling the first plurality of electrically-conductive pads on the first MEMS subportion and the second plurality of electrically-conductive pads on the second MEMS subportion (flexures 33 route electrical signals from electrical contact pads on outer frame 32 to electrical contact pads on the inner frame 34; [0086]; Figs.1,8&20A); wherein the electrically-conductive, MEMS flexure assembly is configured to allow deformation of the plurality of MEMS electrically-conductive flexures 113/33 in two axes (i.e., in x-y plane; [0087]; [0091]; Fig.20A).
Regarding claim 13, an X-axis displacement assembly (two x-axis comb drives) is configured to allow deformation of the plurality of MEMS electrically-conductive flexures in the X-axis ([0091]).
Regarding claim 14, a Y-axis displacement assembly (two other y-axis comb drives) is configured to allow deformation of the plurality of MEMS electrically-conductive flexures in the Y-axis ([0091]).
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.
Claims 5-9 & 15-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ng in view of Liu et al. (US 8,855,476).
Regarding claims 5 & 15, Ng does not further teach a latching assembly “configured to couple the first MEMS subportion [32] and the second MEMS subportion [34] in a latched configuration” (the latching assembly described in [0094]-[0100] and Figs.22A-22D, 23A-23D & 24A-24B latches bars of outer frame only). Similarly, with respect to independent claim 19, as noted above with respect to claims 1 & 12, Ng teaches all the features except for a latching assembly “configured to couple the first MEMS subportion [32] and the second MEMS subportion [34] in a latched configuration”
But, Liu teaches a MEMS-based lens actuator and actuation system including a latching assembly 300 configured to couple a first MEMS subportion (outer frame) 125 and a second MEMS subportion (movable portion) 122 in a latched configuration (c.4:61-c.5:29; Figs.1,3&5). Liu’s latching assembly locks or fixes the movable portion in a deployed position, to assist image stabilization (abstract; c.4:61-c.5:45).
PNG
media_image3.png
569
616
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Thus, it would have been obvious to provide Ng with a latching assembly configured to couple the first MEMS subportion and the second MEMS subportion in a latched configuration since Liu teaches a latching means would have been desirable to lock or fix the second MEMS subportion in a deployed position, to assist image stabilization.
Regarding claims 6, 16 & 20, Liu teaches the latching assembly includes: a first latching portion; and a second latching portion (Fig.1).
Regarding claims 7, 17 & 21, Liu’s latching assembly 300 comprises a “biased latch bolt” [sic] (i.e., latch 300 includes flexures 306 and cam surface 312 that engages in a recess in latch (Fig.5).
Regarding claims 8, 18 & 22, Liu’s latching assembly 300 comprises a bolt recess configured to receive the biased latch bolt to couple the first MEMS subportion and the second MEMS subportion in the latched configuration (Fig.5).
Regarding claims 9 & 23, Liu’s biasing assembly is configured to bias the first MEMS subportion and a second MEMS subportion in an unlatched position (i.e., initially, until an acceleration pulse is applied to the movable second MEMS subportion 122, a deployment flexure 310 retains second MEMS subportion 122 away from first MEMS subportion 125; Fig.5).
Claims 10 & 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ng or Ng and Liu, further in view of Gutierrez et al. (US 8,674,460).
Ng teaches a plurality of electrically-conductive pads (support ends) 111/112 ([0070]; [0086]) but they are not “wire-bond” pads, per se. Liu does not remedy this deficiency.
But, Gutierrez teaches a MEMS device including an electrically conductive flexure 705 with an electrically-conductive contact pad 700 metalized and electrically coupled to a suitable connector using conventional techniques such as wire bonding. This is quite advantageous because the resulting electrical contact is very economical to manufacture yet virtually eliminates any mechanical stress from the wire bonding to pad 700 from coupling to MEMS substrate 405(c.8:23-29; Figs.7-8).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to configure the pads of Ng or Ng & Liu as wire-bond pads since Gutierrez teaches wire bonding was a conventional connecting technique that provides economical manufacture and virtually eliminates any mechanical stress.
Claims 11 & 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ng or Ng and Liu, further in view of Gutierrez et al. (US 8,571,405).
Ng teaches a plurality of electrically-conductive pads (support ends) 111/112 ([0070]; [0086]) but they are not “solder” pads, per se. Liu does not remedy this deficiency.
But, Gutierrez teaches a MEMS device with a solder contacts/pads 104 formed thereon, which enables the device to be surface mounted and electrically connected to a circuit board 200 via the solder contacts/pads (abstract; c.3:15-18; c.3:45-53; Figs.1-2).
Thus, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to configure Ng’s pads as solder pads since Gutierrez teaches solder pads were known for surface mounting and electrically connecting a MEMS device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BURTON S MULLINS whose telephone number is (571)272-2029. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5. 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, Tulsidas C Patel can be reached at 571-272-2098. 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.
/BURTON S MULLINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834