Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 16, 2026
Application No. 18/536,305

ACOUSTIC WAVE DEVICE

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 12, 2023
Priority
Feb 13, 2023 — JP 2023-019942
Examiner
WON, BUMSUK
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Murata Manufacturing Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
7m
Est. Remaining
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allowance Rate
282 granted / 455 resolved
+2.0% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 3m
Avg Prosecution
12 currently pending
Career history
461
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
57.2%
+17.2% vs TC avg
§102
20.9%
-19.1% vs TC avg
§112
17.6%
-22.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 455 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION 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. Claim(s) 1-3 and 7-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kando (US 20080106354) in view of Oono (US 20180188214). Regarding claim 1, Kando discloses an acoustic wave device, in figures 1 and 8, comprising: a support substrate 51; a piezoelectric layer 2 on the support substrate and including a first principal surface 2a and a second principal surface 2b opposing each other; a first IDT electrode 3 on the first principal surface 2a of the piezoelectric layer 2, and a second IDT electrode 4 on the second principal surface 2b of the piezoelectric layer 2; and wherein the piezoelectric layer 2 includes one of Li, Ta, and O or Li, Nb, and 0 [0037: “LiNbO3”]. Kando does not disclose a dielectric film at least provided at one of a position between the first principal surface of the piezoelectric layer and the first IDT electrode and a position between the second principal surface of the piezoelectric layer and the second IDT electrode; the dielectric film includes one of Li, Ta, and O or Li, Nb, and 0 and at least one of a polarization direction, an element included in a material, and a composition of the material is different between the dielectric film and the piezoelectric layer. Oono discloses a piezoelectric device, in figure 9, having a dielectric film 43 at least provided at one of a position between the first principal surface of the piezoelectric layer 44 and the first electrode 49 and a position between the second principal surface of the piezoelectric layer 44 and the second electrode 42; at least one of a polarization direction, an element included in a material, and a composition of the material is different between the dielectric film and the piezoelectric layer [0042]. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have a dielectric film at least provided at one of a position between the first principal surface of the piezoelectric layer and the first IDT electrode and a position between the second principal surface of the piezoelectric layer and the second IDT electrode; the dielectric film includes one of Li, Ta, and O or Li, Nb, and 0 and at least one of a polarization direction, an element included in a material, and a composition of the material is different between the dielectric film and the piezoelectric layer as disclosed by Oono in the device disclosed by Kando, for the purpose of improving versatility of the device. Kando in view of Oono does not disclose the dielectric film includes one of Li, Ta, and O or Li, Nb, and 0. However, it is well known in the art to use the dielectric film includes one of Li, Ta, and O or Li, Nb, and 01, for the purpose of improving SAW performance and its excellence chemical and mechanical reliability. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the dielectric film includes one of Li, Ta, and O or Li, Nb, and 0 in the device disclosed by Kando in view of Oono, for the purpose of improving SAW performance and its excellence chemical and mechanical reliability. Regarding claim 2, Oono further discloses the dielectric film includes a first dielectric film 45 and a second dielectric film 43; and the first dielectric film 45 is between the first principal surface of the piezoelectric layer 44 and the first electrode 49, and the second dielectric film 43 is between the second principal surface and the second electrode 42. The reason for combining is same as above. Regarding claim 3, Oono further discloses a polarization direction of at least one of the first dielectric film and the second dielectric film is opposite to a polarization direction of the piezoelectric layer [0073]. The reason for combining is same as above. Regarding claim 7, Kando further discloses an intermediate layer 36/38 between the support substrate 51 and the piezoelectric layer 32. Regarding claim 8, Kando further discloses the intermediate layer 36/38 includes a layer including silicon oxide [0074]. Regarding claim 9, Kando further discloses the piezoelectric layer includes a piezoelectric single crystal [0037]. Regarding claim 10, Kando futher disclose the intermediate layer 36/38 includes a first layer 38 on the support substrate, and a second layer 36 on the first layer. Regarding claims 11 and 12, Kando in view of Oono does not disclose the support substrate includes silicon, or a plane orientation of the silicon is (100). However, it is well known in the art to have a piezoelectric device having the support substrate includes silicon, and the plane orientation of the silicon being (100)2, for the purpose of maximizing piezoelectric coefficients and lowering activation energy for crystal growth. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the support substrate includes silicon, and the plane orientation of the silicon being (100) in the device disclosed by Kando in view of Oono, for the purpose of maximizing piezoelectric coefficients and lowering activation energy for crystal growth. Regarding claim 13, Kando in view of Oono does not disclose the first layer includes silicon nitride, and the second layer includes silicon oxide. However, it is well known in the art to have a piezoelectric device having layers on support substrate with the first layer includes silicon nitride, and the second layer includes silicon oxide3. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the first layer includes silicon nitride, and the second layer includes silicon oxide in the device disclosed by Kando in view of Oono, for the purpose of effectively trapping acoustic energy in the device. Regarding claim 14, Kando in view of Oono does not disclose the dielectric film includes lithium niobate. However, it is well known in the art to use the dielectric film includes one of Li, Ta, and O or Li, Nb, and 04, for the purpose of improving SAW performance and its excellence chemical and mechanical reliability. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the dielectric film includes lithium niobate in the device disclosed by Kando in view of Oono, for the purpose of improving SAW performance and its excellence chemical and mechanical reliability. Regarding claim 15, Kando in view of Oono further discloses a protective film 35 (Kando) on the dielectric film and covering the first IDT electrode 33a (Kando). Regarding claim 16, Kando further discloses the protective film includes at least one of silicon oxide, silicon nitride, or silicon oxynitride [0074]. Regarding claim 17, Kando further discloses, in figure 7A, the first IDT electrode 33a/33b includes: a first busbar; a second busbar; a plurality of first electrode fingers; and a plurality of second electrode fingers; wherein one end of each of the plurality of first electrode fingers is connected to the first busbar; one end of each of the plurality of second electrode fingers is connected to the second busbar; and the plurality of first electrode fingers and the plurality of second electrode fingers are interdigitated with each other. Regarding claim 18, Kando further discloses, in figure 7B, the second IDT electrode 34a/34b includes: a first busbar; a second busbar; a plurality of first electrode fingers; and a plurality of second electrode fingers; wherein one end of each of the plurality of first electrode fingers is connected to the first busbar; one end of each of the plurality of second electrode fingers is connected to the second busbar; and the plurality of first electrode fingers and the plurality of second electrode fingers are interdigitated with each other. Regarding claim 19, Kando further discloses a pair of reflectors 33c/33d on both sides of the first IDT electrode in an acoustic wave propagation direction. Regarding claim 20, Kando further discloses a pair of reflectors 34c/34d on both sides of the second IDT electrode in an acoustic wave propagation direction. Claim(s) 1-3, 11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nagatomo (WO 2022/202917, machine translation) in view of Oono (US 20180188214). Regarding claim 1, Nagatomo discloses an acoustic wave device, in figure 29, comprising: a support substrate 3; a piezoelectric layer 6 on the support substrate and including a first principal surface 6a and a second principal surface 6b opposing each other; a first IDT electrode 7A on the first principal surface of the piezoelectric layer, and a second IDT electrode 7B on the second principal surface of the piezoelectric layer; and wherein the piezoelectric layer 6 includes one of Li, Ta, and O or Li, Nb, and 0 (page 5). Nagatomo does not disclose a dielectric film at least provided at one of a position between the first principal surface of the piezoelectric layer and the first IDT electrode and a position between the second principal surface of the piezoelectric layer and the second IDT electrode; the dielectric film includes one of Li, Ta, and O or Li, Nb, and 0 and at least one of a polarization direction, an element included in a material, and a composition of the material is different between the dielectric film and the piezoelectric layer. Oono discloses a piezoelectric device, in figure 9, having a dielectric film 43 at least provided at one of a position between the first principal surface of the piezoelectric layer 44 and the first electrode 49 and a position between the second principal surface of the piezoelectric layer 44 and the second electrode 42; at least one of a polarization direction, an element included in a material, and a composition of the material is different between the dielectric film and the piezoelectric layer [0042]. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have a dielectric film at least provided at one of a position between the first principal surface of the piezoelectric layer and the first IDT electrode and a position between the second principal surface of the piezoelectric layer and the second IDT electrode; the dielectric film includes one of Li, Ta, and O or Li, Nb, and 0 and at least one of a polarization direction, an element included in a material, and a composition of the material is different between the dielectric film and the piezoelectric layer as disclosed by Oono in the device disclosed by Nagatomo, for the purpose of improving versatility of the device. Nagatomo in view of Oono does not disclose the dielectric film includes one of Li, Ta, and O or Li, Nb, and 0. However, it is well known in the art to use the dielectric film includes one of Li, Ta, and O or Li, Nb, and 05, for the purpose of improving SAW performance and its excellence chemical and mechanical reliability. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the dielectric film includes one of Li, Ta, and O or Li, Nb, and 0 in the device disclosed by Nagatomo in view of Oono, for the purpose of improving SAW performance and its excellence chemical and mechanical reliability. Regarding claim 2, Oono further discloses the dielectric film includes a first dielectric film 45 and a second dielectric film 43; and the first dielectric film 45 is between the first principal surface of the piezoelectric layer 44 and the first electrode 49, and the second dielectric film 43 is between the second principal surface and the second electrode 42. The reason for combining is same as above. Regarding claim 3, Oono further discloses a polarization direction of at least one of the first dielectric film and the second dielectric film is opposite to a polarization direction of the piezoelectric layer [0073]. The reason for combining is same as above. Regarding claims 11 and 12, Nagatomo further disclose the support substrate 3 includes silicon, or a plane orientation of the silicon is (100) (page 4). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4-6 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. Regarding claim 4, the prior art does not disclose or render obvious an acoustic wave device having both of the polarization directions of the first dielectric film and the second dielectric film are opposite to the polarization direction of the piezoelectric layer, along with other claim limitations. Regarding claim 5, the prior art does not disclose or render obvious an acoustic wave device having degree of dipole orientation of at least one of the first dielectric film and the second dielectric film is different from a degree of dipole orientation of the piezoelectric layer, along with other claim limitations. Claim 6 is objected to due to claim dependency. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Taniguchi (WO 2022202916) and Bhattacharjee (US 20160182007) disclose an acoustic wave device having piezoelectric layer with first and second IDT electrodes on both sides. Ouchi (US 20230318563), Nagamoto (US 20240048118), and Okunaga (US 20240171151) disclose an acoustic wave device having piezoelectric layer with first and second IDT electrodes on both sides. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BUMSUK WON whose telephone number is (571)272-2713. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 7 AM - 5 PM EST. 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, Allana L Bidder can be reached at (571) 272-5560. 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. /BUMSUK WON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872 1 At least Sepulveda (US 20210242606) and Klein (US 20210111082) disclose use of LiTaO and LiNbO as piezoelectric material. 2 At least Iwashita (US 20090322186) discloses silicon substrate with orientation of (100). 3 At least Daimon (US 20210399712) discloses layers with silicon nitride and silicon oxide. 4 At least Sepulveda (US 20210242606) and Klein (US 20210111082) disclose use of LiTaO and LiNbO as piezoelectric material. 5 At least Sepulveda (US 20210242606) and Klein (US 20210111082) disclose use of LiTaO and LiNbO as piezoelectric material.
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 12, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12690393
FILM STRUCTURE AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING THE SAME
3y 8m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12690392
PIEZOELECTRIC SPEAKERS
3y 5m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12684909
Light-Emitting Diode and Light-Emitting Device Including the Same
3y 10m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12684966
DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY APPARATUS
3y 3m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12671277
ELECTRICAL MACHINE
2y 8m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+24.2%)
3y 3m (~7m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 455 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month