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 .
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claims status: amended claims: the claims are the same as previously presented.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/13/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues in pg.4 of the remarks that Xue et al. do not teach the pyroelectric substrate has an active area where the pyroelectric substrate is thinned. The examiner respectfully disagrees because Xue et al. teach in para. [0004] “high-sensitivity infrared pyroelectric sensors require ultra-thin lithium tantalate crystals of 5-60 μm”. Additionally, Xue et al. teach in para. [0026] ultrathin wafers in the range of 2-8um. In pg.5 of the remarks applicant asserts that the combination of Ito et al. and Xue et al. do not teach all the limitations of claim 1.
Ito et al. & Xue et al. teach all the limitations of claim 1. Ito et al. disclose: A pyroelectric infrared detector device comprising an arrangement of a plurality of pyroelectric elements integrated on a pyroelectric substrate and electrically coupled in series each with a same polarization direction (fig.6 pyroelectric elements are arranged in series with a same polarization), wherein the plurality of the pyroelectric elements share a single pyroelectric substrate and wherein each pyroelectric element has a pair of opposing electrodes arranged on a front side and a back side of the active area (Abstract, fig.5, electrodes 111 - 118 of pyroelectric elements are arranged on opposite sides of the substrate). Xue et al. disclose: the pyroelectric substrate has an active area where the pyroelectric substrate is thinned, and wherein each pyroelectric element has a pair of opposing electrodes arranged on a front side and a back side of the active area (para. [0004], [0026]) motivated by the benefits for a highly sensitive infrared detector (Xue et al. para. [0004]). Ito et al. was not referred to teach a thinned substrate. In 1st para. of pg.6 of the remarks applicant the final wafer is thicker that the target wafer. In para. [0004] Xue et al. teach a pyroelectric wafer used for IR detectors having a thickness of 5-60um and para. [0026]- [0027] teach the final wafer has a thickness of 2-80um. The thicknesses as taught in para. [0004] & [0026]- [0027]] are similar and are ultra-thin. Finally, applicant argues in part B. of the additional references do not cure the deficiencies of the combination of Ito et al. & Xue et al. Ito et al. & Xue et al. are not deficient in teaching an ultra-thin wafer used for IR pyroelectric detectors. Therefore, the rejection is maintained and made final.
Please see some relevant arts that teach ultra-thin pyroelectric: CN 2128738 Y, CN 108565333 A, CN 109065508 A, CN 109671801 A, CN 106784290 B.
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 (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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 5-6, 8-9, 11-12, 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. (4,598,163; pub. Jul. 1, 1986) in view of Xue et al. (CN109065508A; pub. Dec. 21, 2018).
Regarding claim 1, Ito et al. disclose: A pyroelectric infrared detector device comprising an arrangement of a plurality of pyroelectric elements integrated on a pyroelectric substrate and electrically coupled in series each with a same polarization direction (fig.6 pyroelectric elements are arranged in series with a same polarization), wherein the plurality of the pyroelectric elements share a single pyroelectric substrate and wherein each pyroelectric element has a pair of opposing electrodes arranged on a front side and a back side of the active area (Abstract, fig.5, electrodes 111 – 118 of pyroelectric elements are arranged on opposite sides of the substrate).
Ito et al. are silent about: the pyroelectric substrate has an active area where the pyroelectric substrate is thinned.
In a similar field of endeavor, Xue et al. disclose: the pyroelectric substrate has an active area where the pyroelectric substrate is thinned, and wherein each pyroelectric element has a pair of opposing electrodes arranged on a front side and a back side of the active area (para. [0004], [0009], [0026]- [0027]) motivated by the benefits for a highly sensitive infrared detector (Xue et al. para. [0004]).
In light of the benefits for a highly sensitive infrared detector as taught by Xue et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Yoshizaki with the teachings of Xue et al.
Regarding claim 5, Xue et al. disclose: the single pyroelectric substrate is monocrystalline (para. [0004], [0009]) motivated by the benefits for a highly sensitive infrared detector (Xue et al. para. [0004]).
Regarding claim 6, Xue et al. disclose: the single pyroelectric substrate comprises lithium tantalate (para. [0004], [0009]) motivated by the benefits for a highly sensitive infrared detector (Xue et al. para. [0004]).
Regarding claim 8, Xue et al. disclose: the pyroelectric substrate has a thickness of between 10 -50 um and/or wherein the active area has a thickness of 1-10 um (para. [0004], [0009]) motivated by the benefits for a highly sensitive infrared detector (Xue et al. para. [0004]).
Regarding claim 9, Ito et al. disclose: at least one of the front side electrode and/or at least one of the back side electrode are extended to an area of the pyroelectric substrate neighboring the active area (fig.4)
Regarding claim 11, Ito et al. disclose: the electrodes of the pyroelectric elements cover a rectangular area on the active area, and wherein each of the pyroelectric elements is shaped as a part of the rectangular area (fig.12).
Regarding claim 12, Ito et al. disclose: the electrical coupling of the pyroelectric elements in series comprises at least one bond wire connecting one of the at least one front side electrodes and contacting one of the at least one back side electrodes and which is fed around an edge of the pyroelectric substrate (fig5 & fig.6).
Regarding claim 15, Xue et al. disclose: the active area has a thickness of between 1-6 pm (para. [0004], [0009]) motivated by the benefits for a highly sensitive infrared detector (Xue et al. para. [0004]).
Regarding claim 16, Xue et al. disclose: the active area has a thickness of between 1-2 pm (para. [0004], [0009]) motivated by the benefits for a highly sensitive infrared detector (Xue et al. para. [0004]).
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. (4,598,163; pub. Jul. 1, 1986) in view of Xue et al. (CN109065508A; pub. Dec. 21, 2018) and further in view of Binzaid et al. (US 2016/0238452 A1; pub. Aug. 18, 2016).
Regarding claim 2, the combined references are silent about: a pre-amplification circuit configured to operate the arrangement of the plurality of pyroelectric elements to generate an output voltage.
In a similar field of endeavor Binzaid et al. disclose: a pre-amplification circuit configured to operate the arrangement of the plurality of pyroelectric elements to generate an output voltage (para. [0060]-[0062], [0064], [0069]) motivated by the benefits for high integrated gain (Binzaid et al. para. [0064]).
In light of the benefits for high integrated gain as taught by Binzaid et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Ito et al. and Xue et al. with the teachings of Binzaid et al.
Regarding claim 3, Binzaid et al. disclose: the pre-amplification circuit is configured to operate the arrangement of the plurality of pyroelectric elements in voltage mode (para. [0060]-[0062], [0064], [0069]) motivated by the benefits for high integrated gain (Binzaid et al. para. [0064]).
Regarding claim 4, Binzaid et al. disclose: the pre-amplification circuit is configured to operate the arrangement of the plurality of pyroelectric elements in current mode (para. [0060]-[0062], [0064], [0069]) motivated by the benefits for high integrated gain (Binzaid et al. para. [0064]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. (4,598,163; pub. Jul. 1, 1986) in view of Xue et al. (CN109065508A; pub. Dec. 21, 2018) and further in view of Watabe et al. (US 2015/0369668 A1; pub. Dec. 24, 2015).
Regarding claim 10, the combined references are silent about: the electrodes of the pyroelectric elements cover a circular area on the active area, and wherein each of the pyroelectric elements is shaped as an annular segment.
In a similar field of endeavor Watabe et al. disclose: the electrodes of the pyroelectric elements cover a circular area on the active area, and wherein each of the pyroelectric elements is shaped as an annular segment (para. [0310], fig.37) motivated by the benefits for higher sensitivity infrared detector (Watabe et al. para. [0062]).
In light of the benefits for high integrated gain as taught by Watabe et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Ito et al. and Xue et al. with the teachings of Watabe et al.
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito et al. (4,598,163; pub. Jul. 1, 1986) in view of Xue et al. (CN109065508A; pub. Dec. 21, 2018) in view of Binzaid et al. (US 2016/0238452 A1; pub. Aug. 18, 2016) and further in view of Klee et al. (US 2010/0277040 A1; pub. Nov. 4, 2010).
Regarding claim 13, the combined references are silent about: the pyroelectric substrate is attached to a carrier substrate, wherein electronic components of the pre-amplification circuit are attached on one main surface of the carrier substrate, particularly on a surface of the carrier substrate opposite to the surface on/above which the pyroelectric substrate is attached.
In a similar field of endeavor Klee et al. disclose: the pyroelectric substrate is attached to a carrier substrate, wherein electronic components of the pre-amplification circuit are attached on one main surface of the carrier substrate, particularly on a surface of the carrier substrate opposite to the surface on/above which the pyroelectric substrate is attached (para. [0105], [0114]) motivated by the benefits for a scalable detector (Klee et al. para. [0020]).
In light of the benefits for a scalable detector as taught by Klee et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Ito et al. and Xue et al. and Binzaid et al. with the teachings of Klee et al.
Regarding claim 14, Klee et al. disclose: the pyroelectric substrate is embedded in a package, wherein electronic components of the pre-amplification circuit are provided on a PCB external to the package and coupled to the arrangement of serially coupled pyroelectric elements (para. [0105], [0114]) motivated by the benefits for a scalable detector (Klee et al. para. [0020]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
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, Uzma Alam can be reached at 571-272-3995995. 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.
/MAMADOU FAYE/Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights