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 statements (IDS) submitted on December 6, 2023 and November 18, 204 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed November 07, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-4 & 8-11 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Specification, Drawings, and Claims have overcome each and every objection, 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) and 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed August 14, 2025, hereafter referred to as the Non-Final Office Action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 7, 2025 have been fully considered. In light of the amendments, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection have been made, and Applicant’s arguments are rendered moot and not persuasive.
In response to applicant's arguments, see pages 6-11 of applicant’s remarks, with respect to the rejection of independent claim 1, under U.S.C. §103, that the prior art references Brunner et al. (US 2022/0187590) and Almeida Loya et al. (US 2022/0066197), as cited by the applicant, fail to disclose or suggest individually or in combination, the amended features of the invention, “electrodes having a comb teeth shape”, which are “not affected by the movement of the actuator”, and “a dummy capacitance section”.
A new ground of rejection is made over Mitsuhiro (JP 2011058819 A, Pub. Date Mar. 24, 2011, hereinafter Mitsuhiro). The examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant’s contentions that Brunner, in view of Almeida, in light of new prior art reference Mitsuhiro, fail to disclose or suggest the amended features of the invention, in particular “electrodes having a comb teeth shape”, which are “not affected by the movement of the actuator”, and “a dummy capacitance section”. Brunner, in view of Almeida, further in view of Mitsuhiro, further disclose the additional limitations that have been amended, and meet these requirements. Therefore, the applicant’s arguments are unconvincing and the rejections of amended independent claim 1, and dependent claims, including claims 2-4 and 8-11, which depend from and incorporate the limitations of claim 1, are respectively maintained. Rejections based on the newly citer prior art reference follows.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 & 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Independent claim 1 recites “wherein the driving section is interposed between the mirror and the outer frame section,” in ll. 10-11, “the fixed electrode and the movable electrode being disposed such that their electrode branches are alternately arranged,” in ll. 15-16, and “a first electrode having a comb teeth shaped formed on the outer frame section and which is not affected by the movement of the driving section, and a second electrode having a comb teeth shape formed on the outer frame section and which is not affected by the movement of the driving section,” in ll. 19-23, where the disclosure provides a diagram with the “first and second electrodes” but fails to provide an enabling disclosure of how to implement the driving section interposed between the mirror and the outer frame section, the electrode branches alternately arranged, and the first electrode with comb teeth not affected by movement of the driving section, and a second electrode with comb teeth being affected by movement of the driving section, that would require undue experimentation on the part of one skilled in the art. Dependent claim 10 recites “a dummy comb-teeth structure section having a fixed portion and a movable portion and arranged opposite the detection section across the mirror,” in ll. 3-4, and “wherein the movable portion has a comb-teeth structure whose position changes in response to movement of the drive section and is arranged opposite the fixed portion”, in ll. 7-9, where the disclosure provides a diagram with “a dummy comb-teeth structure section having a fixed portion and a movable portion”, but fails to provide an enabling disclosure of the arrangement opposite the detection section across the mirror and the arrangement opposite the fixed portion. Dependent claim 11 recites” and a plurality of dummy electrode branches each separated into an island shape and arranged alternately with each electrode branch of the comb-teeth electrode”, in ll. 2-4, where the disclose provides a diagram with the outer frame section with a comb-teeth electrode and a plurality of electrode branches separated into island shapes, but fails to disclose the alternately arrangement with each electrode branch of the comb-teeth electrode. Dependent claims 2-11, which depend on independent claim 1, would also be rejected by virtue of dependency to independent claim 1.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 8 is 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. Dependent claim 8 recites the limitation “the generation of each of the first parasitic capacitance and the second parasitic capacitance” without prior disclosure, in ll. 3-4, resulting in a lack of antecedent basis for this claim. For examination purposes, the examiner interprets “the generation of each of the first…” as “a generation of each of the first parasitic capacitance and the second parasitic capacitance”.
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 1-4 & 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brunner et al. (US 20220187590 A1, Fil. Date Dec. 15, 2020, hereinafter Brunner), in view of Almeida Loya et al (US 20220066197 A1, Fil. Date Sep. 1, 2020, hereinafter Almeida), and further in view of Mitsuhiro et al. (JP 2011058819 A, Pub. Date Mar. 24, 2011, hereinafter Mitsuhiro).
Regarding independent claim 1, Brunner teaches:
An optical scanning apparatus comprising (Fig. 1A; [Abstract], [0079], [0084], & [0089]: LIDAR scanning system 100 is an optical scanning device):
a mirror having a reflective surface (Fig. 1A: [0079], [0084], [0089], [0103], & [0113]-[0114]: MEMS mirror 12);
a driving section that swings the mirror (Fig. 1B; [Abstract], [0006], [0126]-[0127] & [0130]: actuator to provide torque interpreted as driving section);
a detection section (Fig. 4B; [0008], [0164] & [0167]: capacitance-based movement detection, where the sensing circuit interpreted as a detection section) that detects movement of the driving section ([Abstract], [0008], [0157]-0158]: mirror’s rotation position interpreted as the movement of the driving section) by change of a capacitance ([0008] & [0131]-[0158]);
a dummy capacitance section ([0006], [0160]-[0164], [0171]-[0173]: reference side of the differential symmetrical architecture is interpreted as the “dummy capacitance section”, also consist of comb drives with a rotor and stator, where the switching network 55 balances sensing signals; differential measurement (∆V1) cancels noise/parasitics, acting as “dummy reference”) that generates a dummy capacitance (Fig. 4C; [0002]-[0003], [0006], [0015], [0027], [0085]-[0087], [0138], [0141], [0160]-[0164], [0171]-[0173], [0253]-[0255], [0258]-[0259], & [0307]: reference side of the differential symmetrical architecture is interpreted as the “dummy section”, also consist of comb drives with a rotor and stator, where the switching network 55 balances sensing signals; differential measurement (∆V1) cancels noise/parasitics, acting as “dummy “ reference interpreted as a “dummy capacitance”) that is approximately equivalent to the capacitance in an initial state of the detection section (Fig. 4A; [0006], [0160]-[0164]: teaches a symmetrical differential architecture that uses one side (e.g., right comb-drives) as a reference for the other (left comb-drives), due to the symmetry, the initial capacitance is “approximately equivalent”, “The four comb-drives 40TL, 40BL, 40TR, and 40BR are symmetrically situated within the frame 17”, where the symmetry is interpreted as a “dummy section” for differential measurement); and
an outer frame section ([0113]);
wherein the driving section is interposed between the mirror and the outer frame section (Fig. 1B; [0126]: figure illustrates comb drives (40TL, etc.) located between the central mirror body 8 and the surrounding frame 17),
wherein the detection section ([0006] & [0008]) has a movable electrode (Fig. 1D; [0006], [0008], & [0126]-[0127]: rotor comb electrode 41, 42 is interpreted as a movable electrode) having a comb teeth shape (Figs. 1B, 1C, & 4A; [0006], [0008], [0126]-[0127], & [0130]: figures further illustrate the comb teeth shape of the electrodes) whose position changes in relation to the movement of the driving section (Figs. 1B & 1C; [0006], [0126]-[0127] & [0130]) and a fixed electrode (Fig. 1D; [0006], [0008] & [0126]-[0127]: stator comb electrode 43,44 is interpreted as a fixed electrode) whose position does not change in relation to the movement of the driving section ([0006], [0126]-[0127], & [0130]), the fixed electrode and the movable electrode being disposed such that their electrode branches are alternately arranged (Fig. 1B; [0006], [0008], [0126]-[0127], & [0130]: figured illustrates the alternating (interdigitated) arrangement), and the detection section is configured such that the capacitance is generated between the movable electrode and the fixed electrode ([Abstract], [0006], [0008], [0126]-[0127], [0130]-[0131], & [0255]: comb-drives consist of a movable rotor and fixed stator, “each comb-drive includes a rotor comb electrode and a stator comb electrode that form a capacitive element that has a capacitance that depends on the deflection angle of the MEMS scanning structure”),
wherein the movable electrode (Fig. 1D; [0006], [0008], & [0126]-[0127]), the fixed electrode (Fig. 1D; [0006] & [0126]-[0127]), the first electrode ([0006], [0008], & [0126]), and the second electrode ([0006], [0008], & [0126]) are provided in an active layer (Fig. 1B; [0125]-[0127]: mirror body 8 suspended in frame 17 via support beams 18 are interpreted as an active layer) formed in a same semiconductor layer ([0119] & [0226]: teaches the MEMS structure is monolithic, with all components fabricated in the same layer), and are each separated (Fig. 1B; [0119], [0212], [0226], & [0229]: teaches the MEMS structure is monolithic, with all components fabricated in the same layer, the movable electrodes (rotors) and fixed electrodes (stators) for both the detection and the reference “dummy” sides are formed separately),
wherein a first parasitic capacitance (Fig. 4C; [0002]-[0003], [0006], [0015], [0027], [0085]-[0087], [0138], [0141], [0160]-[0164], [0171]-[0173], [0253]-[0255], [0258]-[0259], & [0307]: the symmetrical differential architecture design is interpreted as a first parasitic capacitance, consists of comb drives with a rotor and stator that form a capacitive element, where the fixed electrode (left stators) and the “dummy” first electrode (right stators) are symmetrical, “The four comb-drives 40TL, 40BL, 40TR, and 40BR are symmetrically situated within the frame 17”, where the switching network 55 balances sensing signals; differential measurement (∆V1) cancels noise/parasitics, acting as “dummy “ reference interpreted as a “dummy capacitance”) that occurs between the active layer (Fig. 1B; [0125]-[0127]) provided with the fixed electrode and the supporting layer, and a second parasitic capacitance (Fig. 4C; [0002]-[0003], [0006], [0015], [0027], [0085]-[0087], [0138], [0141], [0160]-[0164], [0171]-[0173], [0253]-[0255], [0258]-[0259], & [0307]: the symmetrical differential architecture design is interpreted as a second parasitic capacitance, consists of a plurality comb drives with a rotor and stator that form a capacitive element, where the second parasitic capacitance would be another set of comb drives, each with a rotor and stator that form a capacitive element, where the fixed electrode (left stators) and the “dummy” first electrode (right stators) are symmetrical, “The four comb-drives 40TL, 40BL, 40TR, and 40BR are symmetrically situated within the frame 17”, where the switching network 55 balances sensing signals; differential measurement (∆V1) cancels noise/parasitics, acting as “dummy “ reference interpreted as a “dummy capacitance”) that occurs between the active layer (Fig. 1B; [0125]-[0127]) provided with the first electrode ([0006], [0008], & [0126]) and the supporting layer ([0094]-[0095]: standard MEMS fabrication process is disclosed), are approximately equivalent (Fig. 4A; [0002]-[0003], [0006], [0015], [0027], [0085]-[0087], [0138], [0141], [0160]-[0164], [0171]-[0173], [0253]-[0255], [0258]-[0259], & [0307]: teaches a symmetrical differential architecture that uses one side (e.g., right comb-drives) as a reference for the other (left comb-drives), due to the symmetry, the initial first and second parasitic capacitances are “approximately equivalent”, “The four comb-drives 40TL, 40BL, 40TR, and 40BR are symmetrically situated within the frame 17”, where the symmetry is interpreted as a “dummy section” for differential measurement), and
wherein the capacitance of the detection section and the first parasitic capacitance are connected in series to form a first signal path (Fig. 4B; [0167]-[0173]: figure illustrates two separate paths, with the capacitance of detection section of the first parasitic capacitance connected in series to form a first signal path, path 1 consists of the left-side comb-drives (detection section) and their inherent parasitics, that generate a current measured by TIA 51, the paths currents are then compared), and the dummy capacitance and the second parasitic capacitance are connected in series to form a second signal path (Fig. 4B; [0167]-[0173]: figure illustrates two separate paths, with the dummy capacitance and the second parasitic capacitance connected in series to form a second signal path, path 2 consists of the right-side “dummy” section comb-drives and their inherent parasitics, that generate a current measured by TIA 52, the path currents are then compared).
Brunner, is silent in regard to:
wherein the active layer is arranged to face a support layer which is a common semiconductor layer, with an insulating layer in between,
However, Almeida, further teaches:
wherein the active layer ([Abstract], [0051], [0070], & [0082]-[0083]: “The process starts with SOI wavers which consist of a Si/SiO2/Si stack…”, where the top Si is the active layer) is arranged to face a support layer ([Abstract], [0006], [0051], [0070], & [0082]-[0083]: “The process starts with SOI wavers which consist of a Si/SiO2/Si stack…”, where the bottom Si is the support layer, Si substrate 322) which is a common semiconductor layer ([0070]: “MEMS mirrors are fabricated using semiconductor fabrication processes…The process starts with SOI wafers which consist of a Si/SiO2/Si stack…”), with an insulating layer in between ([0051], [0070] & [0082]-[0083]: discloses “an oxide layer 320 is below the first and second common terminals and the first and second bias terminals; a substrate 322 is below the oxide layer”, and “The process starts with SOI wavers which consist of a Si/SiO2/Si stack…”, where the top Si is the active layer, SiO2 is the insulating layer, and the bottom Si is the support layer),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the active layer arranged to face a support layer, which is a common semiconductor layer, with an insulating layer in between, of Almeida to Brunner, in order to attain the different layers, which would be a conventional practice in the field of MEMS fabrication, using standard and well-known SOI structures (layers), which are used to achieve a robust, reliable, and cost-effective manufacturing of semiconductor layers, yielding predictable results (KSR).
Brunner, and Almeida, are silent in regard to:
wherein the dummy capacitance section is configured to include a first electrode having a comb teeth shape formed on the outer frame section and which is not affected by the movement of the driving section, and a second electrode having a comb teeth shape formed on the outer frame section and which is not affected by the movement of the driving section, the first electrode and the second electrode being disposed such that their electrode branches are alternately arranged, and the dummy capacitance section is configured to generate the dummy capacitance between the first electrode and the second electrode,
However, Mitsuhiro, further teaches:
wherein the dummy capacitance section is configured to include a first electrode having a comb teeth shape formed on the outer frame section and which is not affected by the movement of the driving section, and a second electrode having a comb teeth shape formed on the outer frame section and which is not affected by the movement of the driving section (Fig 1; [Pgs. 1-2 Solution], [Claim 1], [0012], [0020]-[0022], [0030], [0032]-[0033], [0038], [0045], & [0059]), the first electrode and the second electrode being disposed such that their electrode branches are alternately arranged, and the dummy capacitance section is configured to generate the dummy capacitance between the first electrode and the second electrode (Figs. 1 & 2; [Claim 1], [0012]-[0017], [0019]-[0021], [0027], & [0030]; figures illustrate the dummy section 147 mirrors the structure of the detection section 145 but is static/dummy),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the optical scanning apparatus with mirror, driving sections, and detection combs on the outer frame to mimic an initial detection capacitance of Brunner, Mitsuhiro, teaches a MEMS sensor/actuator with a dummy capacitance section (dummy electrode parts) located on the outer frame (fixed part) designed to generate a capacitance equivalent to the detection section for differential cancellation of environmental effects or parasitics, and Almeida teaches the specific SOI layer structure and analyzes the parasitic capacitances occurring between these layers, combining all three prior art references would provide a motivation to balance or manage the parasitics using the structural layouts taught by Mitsuhiro, and would be obvious to incorporate the dummy comb structures of Mitsuhiro into the MEMS scanning apparatus of Brunner, using the layer structure of Almeida, to achieve precise capacitance detection by cancelling parasitic effects common to the substrate/support layers, yielding predictable results (KSR).
Regarding dependent claim 2, Brunner teaches:
The optical scanning apparatus according to claim 1 (Fig. 1A; [Abstract], [0079], [0080], [0084], [0089], & [0168]: LIDAR scanning system 100 is an optical scanning device), wherein the first signal path (Fig. 4B; [0167]-[0173]) and the second signal path (Fig. 4B; [0167]-[0173]) are connected in parallel (Fig. 4B illustrates signal paths connected in parallel, VI, ∆VI),
Brunner, is silent in regard to:
wherein the active layer and the supporting layer are each a Si layer, wherein the support layer has a pad for inputting a read signal,
wherein the active layer is configured to include a detection pad formed between the capacitance of the detection section on the first signal path and the first parasitic capacitance,
However, Almeida, further teaches:
wherein the active layer ([0009], [0051], [0070], & [0082]-[0083]) and the supporting layer are each a Si layer ([0009], [0051], [0070], & [0082]-[0083]: discloses silicon as the supporting layer and active MEMS layer), wherein the support layer has a pad for inputting a read signal (Fig. 6; [0009] & [0050]-[0054]: ground ring acts as a pad/terminal on the support layer for signal input),
wherein the active layer is configured to include a detection pad formed between the capacitance of the detection section on the first signal path and the first parasitic capacitance (Fig. 5; [0048]-[0050]: sensing node (pad) is between the sensing capacitance (CBC) and parasitic capacitances (CCS, CBS)),
PNG
media_image1.png
818
1109
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the active layer with a detection pad formed between the capacitances of the detection section and a first parasitic capacitance on the first signal path, of Almeida to Brunner, in order to attain and improve the architecture to cancel erroneous system modes caused from parasitic capacitance, by modifying and replacing an active (detection) section with a static reference such as a “dummy capacitance” and a “detection pad”, subject to a similar “first parasitic capacitance”, and allowing for improvement in capacitance cancellation of parasitic effects through differential measurements, and yield predictable results (KSR).
Brunner, and Almeida, are silent in regard to:
wherein the first signal path and the second signal path are connected in parallel via the pad, and
a dummy detection pad formed between the dummy capacitance on the second signal path and the second parasitic capacitance.
However, Mitsuhiro, further teaches:
wherein the first signal path and the second signal path are connected in parallel via the pad (Fig. 1 [0042]-[0045]; figure further illustrates an integrated detection circuit with common connections (pads) linking the signal paths), and
a dummy detection pad formed between the dummy capacitance on the second signal path and the second parasitic capacitance (Figs. 1 & 2; [Pgs. 1-2, Solution], [0012]-[0016], [0045], [0049], [0080]-[0082], [0088], & [0143]).
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 optical scanning apparatus of Brunner with the layer structure of Almeida and the dummy detection features of Mitsuhiro, to improve parasitic capacitance cancellation and signal-to-noise ratio in MEMS sensing, and yield predictable results (KSR).
Regarding dependent claim 3, Brunner, teaches:
The optical scanning apparatus according to claim 1 (Fig. 1A; [Abstract], [0079], [0084], & [0089]: LIDAR scanning system 100 is an optical scanning device),
Brunner, is silent in regard to:
wherein the support layer has read a read signal input pad configured to be exposed on the same side as the reflective surface of the mirror.
However, Almeida, further teaches:
wherein the support layer ([0006], [0070], & [0082]-[0083]: “The process starts with SOI wavers which consist of a Si/SiO2/Si stack…”, where the bottom Si is the support layer) has read a read signal input pad configured to be exposed on the same side as the reflective surface of the mirror (Fig. 7A; [0052]: discloses providing bias voltage to a via through the device layers to create a contact pad for the substrate on the top side of the chip, where the pad is interpreted as a read signal input for an input voltage and on the same side as the mirror’s reflective surface).
PNG
media_image2.png
810
1308
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the support layer with a read signal input pad configured to be exposed on the same side as the reflective surface of the mirror, of Almeida to Brunner, in order to attain and improve, by modifying the optical scanning apparatus, to include the top-side support layer pad to simplify electrical connections and packaging by having all contacts on one surface, and yield predictable results (KSR).
Regarding dependent claim 4, Brunner, teaches:
The optical scanning apparatus according to claim 1 (Fig. 1A; [Abstract], [0079], [0084], & [0089]: LIDAR scanning system 100 is an optical scanning device), wherein the area of the fixed electrode (Fig. 1D; [0006], [0008], & [0126]-[0127]) in a plane view and the area of the first electrode ([0006], [0008], & [0126]) in a plane view are approximately equal (Fig. 4A; [0006] & [0160]-[0164]: discloses symmetrical differential architecture system where the detection section (e.g., left comb-drives 40TL, 40BL) and the dummy section (e.g., right comb-drives 40TR, 40BR) are symmetrical, also illustrated in the figure, the area of the fixed electrode (left stators) and the “dummy” first electrode (right stators) are approximately equal and symmetrical, “The four comb-drives 40TL, 40BL, 40TR, and 40BR are symmetrically situated within the frame 17”).
Regarding dependent claim 9, Brunner, teaches:
An electronic equipment (Figs. 1A & 2; [0079]: discloses that its optical canning apparatus (MEMS mirror 12) is a component of a larger “LIDAR scanning system 100” which is a piece of electronic equipment that also includes a light source, receiver, MEMS driver 25, and system controller 23, “Fig. 1A is a schematic diagram of a LIDAR scanning system 100 in accordance with one or more embodiments. The LIDAR scanning system 100 is an optical scanning device that includes a transmitter, including an illumination unit 10, a transmitter optics 11, and a one-dimensional (1D) microelectromechanical system (MEMS) mirror 12, and a receiver, including a second optical component 14 and a photodetector array 15”) comprising the optical scanning apparatus according to claim 1 (Fig. 1A; [Abstract], [0079], [0084], & [0089]: LIDAR scanning system 100 is an optical scanning device).
PNG
media_image3.png
885
752
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding dependent claim 10, Brunner, teaches:
The optical scanning apparatus according to claim 1 (Fig. 1A; [Abstract], [0079], [0084], & [0089]), further comprising:
Brunner, and Almeida, are silent in regard to:
a dummy comb-teeth structure section having a fixed portion and a movable portion and arranged opposite the detection section across the mirror,
wherein the fixed portion does not have a comb-teeth structure and is integral with the outer frame section, and
wherein the movable portion has a comb-teeth structure whose position changes in response to the movement of the drive section and is arranged opposite the fixed portion.
However, Mitsuhiro, further teaches:
a dummy comb-teeth structure section having a fixed portion and a movable portion (Fig. 1; [Pgs. 1-2, Solution], [0045], [0047], [0054]-[0059], [0093]-[0095], [0098], [0127]: dummy capacitance 147, dummy movable electrode 143, dummy fixed electrode 153, movable weight/mass part/portion 120) and arranged opposite the detection section across the mirror (Fig. 1; [Pgs. 1-2, Solution], [0034]-[0035], [0045], [0047], [0054]-[0059], [0093]-[0095], [0098], [0127]: figure illustrates a visual disclosure with symmetry with detection sections 145 and dummy sections 147 on opposing sides/corners),
wherein the fixed portion does not have a comb-teeth structure (Fig. 1; [Pgs. 1-2, Solution], [0034], [0037], [0054], [0057]-[0059], [0093], [0095], & [0127]: discloses a fixed portion configuration 153 distinct from the interdigitated drive combs where the dummy pads 153 balance the movable combs 143 without creating drive force) and is integral with the outer frame section (Fig. 1 [Pgs. 1-2, Solution], [0045], [0059], [0101], [0125], & [0143]: fixed dummy electrode 153 is structurally connected to the fixed frame 110), and
wherein the movable portion has a comb-teeth structure whose position changes in response to the movement of the drive section and is arranged opposite the fixed portion (Fig. 1; [Pgs. 1-2, Solution], [0012], [0048], & [0054]).
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 MEMS mirror device of Brunner, taking the “dummy” structure concept from Mitsuhiro, implementing it using the fixed/movable damping finger arrangement taught by Brunner and Mitsuhiro, and optionally forming the fixed portion as a more solid-frame-integral structure as show by Almeida or Mitsuhiro for more stability, positioning the dummy damping structure opposite the primary drive/detection comb sections, as taught by Mitsuhiro for symmetrical design, to achieve a balanced damping and mechanical stability, arriving at the claimed invention and yielding predictable results (KSR).
Regarding dependent claim 11, Brunner, teaches:
The optical scanning apparatus according to claim 1 (Fig. 1A; [Abstract], [0079], [0084], & [0089]), wherein the outer frame section comprises a comb-teeth electrode (Fig. 1D; [0006], [0008], & [0126]-[0127])
Brunner, and Almeida, are silent in regard to:
and a plurality of dummy electrode branches each separated into an island shape and arranged alternately with each electrode branch of the comb-teeth electrode.
However, Mitsuhiro, further teaches:
and a plurality of dummy electrode branches (Figs. 1 & 2; [Pgs. 1-2, Solution], [0045], [0047], [0054]-[0059], [0093]-[0095], [0098], [0108], & [0127]: teaches dummy fixed electro parts 153 (dummy branches) provided on the frame) each separated into an island shape (Figs 1-2 & 7-8; [Pgs. 1-2, Solution], [0045], [0047], [0054]-[0059], [0093]-[0095], [0098], [0108], & [0127]: discloses the dummy fixed electrodes 153 formed as distinct, isolated portions (islands) on the frame 110, separate from the main drive electrodes 150) and arranged alternately with each electrode branch of the comb-teeth electrode (Figs. 1-2 & 7-8; [Pgs. 1-2, Solution], [0045], [0047], [0054]-[0059], [0093]-[0095], [0098], [0108], & [0127]: teaches the arrangement of the dummy electrodes 153 adjacent to or interspersed with the active electrode branches 150 to form the dummy capacitance sections 147, arranged alternately).
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 optical scanning apparatus of Brunner, modifying Brunner’s frame to include the dummy electrode islands of Mitsuhiro arranged alternately or adjacent to the active comb teeth, to improve and suppress parasitic capacitance, improve linearity, or prevent pull-in at the ends of the comb arrays by ensuring uniform electric field distribution, which is well-known in the art and taught by the use of dummy capacitance parts 147 of Mitsuhiro, arriving at the claimed invention and yielding predictable results (KSR).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brunner, in view of Almeida, and further in view of Bang et al (US 7185542 B2, Pat. Date Mar. 6, 2007).
Regarding dependent claim 8, Brunner, teaches:
The optical scanning apparatus according to claim 1 (Fig. 1A; [Abstract], [0079], [0084], & [0089]: LIDAR scanning system 100 is an optical scanning device),
Brunner, as modified by Almeida, are both silent in regard to:
wherein the support layer has a plurality of through holes each reaching the insulting layer at a portion related to the generation of each of the first parasitic capacitance and the second parasitic capacitance.
However, Bang, further teaches:
wherein the support layer (Fig. 4; [Col. 13, ll. 47-49] & [Col. 21, ll. 42-50]: base plate 102 interpreted as the support layer, discloses a base plate (support layer), and dielectric structures placed between conductive components to mitigate parasitic capacitance, figure 4 illustrates the substrate as the support layer), has a plurality of through holes each reaching the insulating layer (Figs. 19b, 25, 26a, & 26b; [Col. 13, ll. 27-49], [Col. 14, ll. 4-13], [Col. 21, ll. 3-6 & 42-61], [Col. 23, ll. 15-27], [Col. 24, ll. 4-32]: discloses a base plate (support layer) with multiple conductive leads 104,106 that function as through-holes for electrical connections, and the conductive leads (through-holes) can be separated by a dielectric material, and use of dielectric materials to electrically isolate conductive elements and reduce unintended capacitance (insulating layer), where “stops of dielectric material 518 are located on electrodes 514(a) and 514(b) so as to inhibit mirror 512 from contacting the electrodes”, and also discloses microchannels/voids etches to remove material, creating paths or structural voids, where “probe electrodes 582 and 592, respectively, are located within shields 584 and 594, respectively, until the probe tip is approached at which point the shield is allowed to drop away to allow contact…” ) at a portion related to the generation of each of the first parasitic capacitance and the second parasitic capacitance ([Co. 17, ll. 37-39]: addresses “parasitic capacitance” and suggests modifying the structure to reduce it by suspension of capacitor plates above substrates).
PNG
media_image4.png
834
1408
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
685
957
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
594
925
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
776
979
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
817
669
media_image8.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a read signal input to the support layer, with a plurality of through holes reaching the portion of the insulating layer related to the generation of the first and second parasitic capacitances, of Almeida to Brunner, in order to attain dielectric structures to address parasitic capacitance in microdevices by modifying and combining prior art teachings, to achieve a dielectric material that can improve the reduction and/or cancellation of unintended parasitic capacitance, as well as improve the accuracy of the deflection angle detection, and yield predictable results (KSR).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Tachibana (JP2012024897A) discloses a MEMS device capable of improving S/N ratio of an electric signal take out from a pad. Tsai (US20150185051A1) discloses an angle detection circuit of an electrostatic MEMS scanning mirror. Sugimoto et al. (US11693230B2) discloses an optical device including a base, a movable unit including an optical function unit, a pair of torsion bars connected to the base and the movable unit. Govil et al. (US8386201B2) discloses methods for measurement and characterization of interferometric modulators. Adachi et al. (US8930169B2) discloses a capacitive ultrasonic transducer and endo cavity ultrasonic diagnosis system having the same. Fu et al. (US6769616B2) discloses a bidirectional MEMS scanning mirror with tunable natural frequency. Nishio et al. (US20070217041A1) discloses a deformable mirror with a deformable section on which a reflective surface and a COM electrode are formed. Almeida Loya et al. (US11789253B2) discloses a capacitance sensing in a MEMS mirror structure. Hagelin (TW505614B) discloses an optical mirror system with multi-axis rotational control. Fu et al. (US6769616B2) discloses bidirectional MEMS scanning mirror with tunable natural frequency. Bang et al. (US7185542B2) discloses complex microdevices and apparatus and methods for fabricating such devices.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 HUGO NAVARRO whose telephone number is (571)272-6122. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 08:30-5:00 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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at 571-272-4448. 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.
/HUGO NAVARRO/Examiner, Art Unit 2858 12/29/2025
/EMAN A ALKAFAWI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858 1/2/2026