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
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 6, 11, 12 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yu et al. (US 20230223913).
As to claim 1, Yu et al.’s figures 2 and 6 show a piezoelectric bulk wave device comprising: a support (201 or 601-602) that includes a support substrate (201 or 601); a piezoelectric layer (204 or 606) including a first main surface on a support side and a second main surface opposite from the first main surface; and at least one functional electrode (203, 206 or 605, 607) at least a portion of which is on at least one of the first main surface and the second main surface of the piezoelectric layer; wherein the at least one functional electrode is supported by the support and includes a functional electrode including a portion on the first main surface of the piezoelectric layer; a cavity portion (202, 603) is provided in the support, the cavity portion is superposed on a portion of the functional electrode and an entirety or substantially an entirety of the piezoelectric layer in plan view; and the piezoelectric layer is supported by the functional electrode supported by the support.
As to claim 2, Yu et al.’s figure 6 show that the support includes an insulating layer (602) on the support substrate (601); and a portion of the functional electrode is on the insulating layer.
As to claim 6, Kimura et al.’s figures show that the piezoelectric bulk wave device structured to generate a bulk wave in a thickness slip mode (intended use).
As to claim 11, Yu et al.’s figures show that the functional electrode includes a lower electrode (203 or 605) including a portion on the first main surface of the piezoelectric layer and another portion on the support, and an upper electrode (205 or 607) on the second main surface; and the upper electrode and the lower electrode are opposite to each other with the piezoelectric layer interposed therebetween.
As to claim 12, Yu et al.’s figure 2 shows that the piezoelectric layer is supported only by the functional electrode.
As to claim 19, Yu et al.’s figures show that the functional electrode supported by the support includes a supported portion on the support, a support portion on the first main surface of the piezoelectric layer and supporting the piezoelectric layer, and a connection portion positioned between the support portion and the supported portion; and the connection portion does not include an irregularity in either of a thickness direction or a direction perpendicular or substantially perpendicular to the thickness direction.
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kimura et al. (US 20190068155).
Kimura et al.’s figures 2A-4C show a method for manufacturing a piezoelectric bulk wave device, the method comprising: providing an interdigital transducer electrode (5 in figures 1B and 2A) and including a pair of busbars (see figure 1B) and a plurality of electrode fingers on a third main surface (lower surface) of a piezoelectric substrate (4) including the third main surface and a fourth main surface (4A) opposite from each other; forming a multilayer body (2 and 3 in figure 3A) including the piezoelectric substrate and a support (2 and 3) including a support substrate (3); forming a piezoelectric layer (4) including a first main surface corresponding to the third main surface and a second main surface opposite from the first main surface by grinding a fourth main surface side of the piezoelectric substrate so as to reduce a thickness of the piezoelectric substrate (figure 3B); and forming a cavity portion (9 in figure 4A) in the support; wherein in plan view, the piezoelectric substrate includes a first portion superposed on a portion of the support in which the cavity portion is provided and a second portion not superposed on the portion of the support in which the cavity portion is provided; and in the forming of the piezoelectric layer, at least an entirety or substantially an entirety of the second portion (in 11 and 12) of the piezoelectric substrate is removed.
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(s) 1-10 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimura et al. (US 20190068155) in view of Plesski et al. (US 10491192).
As to claim 1, Kimura et al.’s figures fail to show that the interdigital transducer electrode arranged overlapping the support. However, Plesski et al.’s figure 1 shows a similar device that its interdigital transducer electrode arranged overlapping its support (120). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to arrange Kimura et al.’s interdigital transducer electrode to overlap its support for the purpose of ensuring optimum performance. Therefore, the modified Kimura et al.’s figures show: a piezoelectric bulk wave device comprising: a support (2 and 3) that includes a support substrate (3); a piezoelectric layer (4) including a first main surface on a support side and a second main surface opposite from the first main surface; and at least one functional electrode (5) at least a portion of which is on at least one of the first main surface and the second main surface of the piezoelectric layer; wherein the at least one functional electrode is supported by the support and includes a functional electrode including a portion on the first main surface of the piezoelectric layer; a cavity portion (9) is provided in the support, the cavity portion is superposed on a portion of the functional electrode and an entirety or substantially an entirety of the piezoelectric layer in plan view; and the piezoelectric layer is supported by the functional electrode supported by the support.
As to claim 2, Kimura et al.’s figures show that the support includes an insulating layer (2) on the support substrate (2); and a portion of the functional electrode is on the insulating layer.
As to claim 3, Kimura et al.’s figures show that the functional electrode supported by the support is an interdigital transducer electrode that includes a pair of busbars and a plurality of electrode fingers (Kimura’s figure 1B).
As to claim 4, Kimura et al.’s figures show that the pair of busbars include a supported portion on the support (Plesski’s figure 1 shows that its bus bars 132 and 134 overlap its support 120) and a support portion on the first main surface of the piezoelectric layer to support the piezoelectric layer.
As to claim 5, Plessli teaches that its the piezoelectric layer is a lithium tantalate layer or a lithium niobate layer (col. 3, lines 30-35). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use the above material for Kimura et al.’s piezoelectric layer for the purpose of ensuring optimum performance.
As to claim 6, Kimura et al.’s figures show that the piezoelectric bulk wave device structured to generate a bulk wave in a thickness slip mode (intended use).
As to claims 7-10, selecting the dimension or value relationship as claimed is seen as an obvious design preference to ensure optimum performance, MPEP 2144.05.
As to claim 20, Kimura et al.’s figures show a frequency adjustment film (8 or 19) on the second main surface of the piezoelectric layer and superposed on the functional electrode in plan view.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-18, 22 and 23 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Yu et al.’s figure 3 or 6 shows that the cavity portion 202 or 603 are arranged on the surface of functional electrode 203 or 605. Therefore, Yu et al.’s figure shows that “the cavity portion (202 or 603) is superposed on a portion of the functional electrode (203 pr 605)”. The figure shows that the cavity portion also arranged (directly or indirectly) on piezoelectric layer 204 or 606. Therefore, the figure also shows that “the cavity portion is superposed on …an entirely or substantially an entirety of the piezoelectric layer in plan view”. Note that “substantially” is a relative term. Any area of the piezoelectric layer can be considered as a substantially an entirely area of the piezoelectric layer. The figure shows that the piezoelectric layer is arranged in the other surface of functional electrode 203 or 605. Therefore, the figure also shows that “the piezoelectric layer is supported by the functional electrode”. The figure shows that a portion of the functional electrode (at 605b) is arranged on the support (601 and 602). Therefore, the figure also shows that “the functional electrode is supported by the support”. The figure shows that the cavity is within the support (201 or 602). Therefore, the figure shows that the cavity is provided in the support.
Similarly, Kimura et al.’s figure 4C shows that cavity 9 is arranged on the surfaces of electrodes 5 and arranged (directly or indirectly) on the surface of piezoelectric layer 4. Therefore, the figure shows that “the cavity portion (9) is superposed on a portion of the functional electrode (5) and an entirety or substantially entirety of the piezoelectric layer in plan view. Plesski figures show that its electrodes are arranged on support substrate 110. Therefore, the combination of Kimura et al. and Plesski reference shows that “the piezoelectric layer is supported by the functional electrode (since the functional electrode is on a surface of the piezoelectric layer) supported by the support (see Plesski’s figure 1). The figure shows that the cavity 9 is within the support (2 and 3). Therefore, the figure shows that the cavity is provided in the support.
Plesski’s figure shows that the electrode is arranged on the support to ensure that it is supportive and non-floating, thereby ensuring optimum performance. Therefore, one skilled in the art would have motivated to arranged Kimura et al.’s electrode on the support in order to ensure optimum performance.
In response to the arguments that Kimura does not teach or suggest the features and steps of “in plan view, the piezoelectric substrate includes a first portion superposed on a portion of the support in which the cavity portion is provided and a second portion not superposed on the portion of the support on the portion in which the cavity portion is provided”, page 9:
Kimura’s figures 2A-4C are viewed from the busbar to electrodes (view in up and down direction of the IDT shown in figure 1B) which equivalent view shown in Plesski et al.’s section A-A of figure 1. The view from left to right direction or from the top of the IDT, which is show in Plesski et al.’s section B-B and top left figure, show that “the piezoelectric substrate includes a first portion superposed on a portion of the support in which the cavity portion is provided and a second portion not superposed on the portion of the support on the portion in which the cavity portion is provided.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANH-QUAN TRA whose telephone number is (571)272-1755. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri from 8:00 A.M.-5:00 P.M.
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, Andrea Lindgren Baltzell can be reached at 571-272-5918. 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.
/QUAN TRA/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2843