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 § 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 1-12, 14-16, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokota et al. (US 2005/0285475) in view of Shimoe et al. (US 2002/0121841).
With respect to claim 1, Yokota et al. discloses an acoustic wave device (Fig 3) comprising: a piezoelectric substrate (item 2); and an IDT electrode (item 3) including an electrode layer (Fig 3); wherein the electrode layer includes a metal element as a main material, and an additive (Paragraphs 94, 99, 139, wherein alloys inherently include metallic materials with other metallic materials as an additive).
Yokota et al. does not disclose an adhesive layer provided on the piezoelectric substrate, wherein the electrode layer is provided on the adhesive layer, wherein the electrode layer and the adhesive layer each include a metal element as a main material, and the additive in the electrode layer and the additive in the adhesive layer are a same element.
Shimoe et al. teaches a piezoelectric acoustic wave device including an adhesive layer (item 8) provided on the piezoelectric substrate, wherein the electrode layer is provided on the adhesive layer (Paragraph 74), wherein the electrode layer and the adhesive layer each include a metal element as a main material (Paragraph 74). IN combination with Yokota et al., the additive in the electrode layer and the additive in the adhesive layer are a same element (Paragraph 74 of Shimoe et al. and Paragraphs 94, 99, and 139 of Yokota et al.).
Before the effective filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the adhesive layer of Shimoe et al. with the acoustic wave device of Yokota et al. for the benefit of improving adhesion between the electrode layer and the substrate (Paragraph 74 of Shimoe et al.).
With respect to claim 2, the combination of Yokota et al. and Shimoe et al. discloses the acoustic wave device according to claim 1. Shimoe et al. discloses that the metal element and the additive in the adhesive layer combine to define a solid solution in which the additive is dissolved in the main material such that a maximum solid solubility limit of the additive in the main material is about 5 wt % or more (Paragraph 74, wherein the claimed range of “about” 5% or more includes substantially any percentage).
With respect to claim 3, the combination of Yokota et al. and Shimoe et al. discloses the acoustic wave device according to claim 1. Shimoe et al. discloses that the metal element of the adhesive layer is Ti (Paragraph 74). Yokota et al. discloses that the additive is one of Ag, Al, Nb, Sn, Ta, V, or Zr (Paragraph 139).
With respect to claim 4, the combination of Yokota et al. and Shimoe et al. discloses the acoustic wave device according to claim 1. Shimoe et al. discloses that the metal element of the adhesive layer is Ni (Paragraph 74)> Yokota et al. discloses that the additive is one of Al, Au, Cu, Cr, Fe, Ga, Mn, Nb, Si, Sn, Ta, or Zn (Paragraph 139).
With respect to claim 5, the combination of Yokota et al. and Shimoe et al. discloses the acoustic wave device according to claim 1. Shimoe et al. discloses that the metal element of the adhesive layer is Cr, and the additive is one of Al, Au, Ce, Co, Fe, Ga, Mn, Mo, Nb, Ni, Si, Sn, Ta, Ti, V, or W (Paragraph 74).
With respect to claim 6, the combination of Yokota et al. and Shimoe et al. discloses the acoustic wave device according to claim 1. Yokota et al. discloses that the metal element of the electrode layer is Cu (Paragraph 139).
With respect to claim 7, the combination of Yokota et al. and Shimoe et al. discloses the acoustic wave device according to claim 1. Yokota et al. discloses that the piezoelectric substrate includes only piezoelectric material (Paragraph 93).
With respect to claim 8, the combination of Yokota et al. and Shimoe et al. discloses the acoustic wave device according to claim 1. Yokota et al. discloses that the piezoelectric substrate is a laminated substrate including a piezoelectric layer (Fig 1).
With respect to claim 9, the combination of Yokota et al. and Shimoe et al. discloses the acoustic wave device according to claim 1. Shimoe et al. discloses reflectors on both sides of the IDS electrode (Fig 10B, wherein the reflectors are situated on both sides of the IDT electrode 42).
With respect to claim 10, the combination of Yokota et al. and Shimoe et al. discloses the acoustic wave device according to claim 1. Yokota et al. discloses that the acoustic wave device is an acoustic wave resonator (Fig 1).
With respect to claim 11, the combination of Yokota et al. and Shimoe et al. discloses the acoustic wave device according to claim 1. Yokota et al. discloses that the acoustic wave device is a filter device (Paragraph 2).
With respect to claim 12, the combination of Yokota et al. and Shimoe et al. discloses the acoustic wave device according to claim 1. Yokota et al. discloses that the acoustic wave device is a multiplexer (Paragraph 52, wherein duplexers are a type of multiplexer).
With respect to claim 14, the combination of Yokota et al. and Shimoe et al. discloses the acoustic wave device according to claim 1. Yokota et al. discloses that the metal element of the electrode layer is Cu (Paragraph 139). Shimoe et al. discloses that the metal element of the adhesive layer is Ti (Paragraph 74).
With respect to claim 15, the combination of Yokota et al. and Shimoe et al. discloses the acoustic wave device according to claim 1. Shimoe et al. discloses that the metal element and the additive of the electrode layer define an alloy (Paragraph 74).
With respect to claim 16, the combination of Yokota et al. and Shimoe et al. discloses the acoustic wave device according to claim 1, the metal element and the additive of the adhesive layer define an alloy (Paragraph 139 of Yokota et al. and Paragraph 74 of Shimoe et al.).
With respect to claim 19, the combination of Yokota et al. and Shimoe et al. discloses the acoustic wave device according to claim 1. Shimoe et al. discloses that the metal element of the adhesive layer is Ni, and the adhesive layer also includes Cr (Paragraph 74).
With respect to claim 20, the combination of Yokota et al. and Shimoe et al. discloses the acoustic wave device according to claim 1. Shimoe et al. discloses that the adhesive layer includes an Ni-Cr alloy (Paragraph 74).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13, 17, and 18 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
The prior art does not disclose or suggest “wherein the additive in the electrode layer and the additive in the adhesive layer are Sn” in combination with the remaining elements of claim 13.
The prior art does not disclose or suggest “wherein the adhesive layer includes P” in combination with the remaining elements of claim 17.
The prior art does not disclose or suggest “wherein the adhesive layer includes an Ni-P alloy” in combination with the remaining elements of claim 18.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Derek John Rosenau whose telephone number is (571)272-8932. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7 am to 5:30 pm Central Time.
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, Dedei Hammond can be reached at (571) 270-7938. 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.
/DEREK J ROSENAU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights