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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 10-14, 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burak (PG Pub) 20130106248) and in view of Kodama (PG Pub 20200106420).
Considering claim 1, Burak (Figure 2A) teaches an acoustic wave device comprising: a substrate (203 + paragraph 0047); and a stack (212 + 209 + 210 + 207 + 208 + paragraphs 0047-0048) including at least: a first piezoelectric layer having a first piezoelectric axis orientation (207 + 208 + paragraph 0050); and a second piezoelectric layer (209 + 210 + paragraph 0050) acoustically coupled with the first piezoelectric layer, in which the second piezoelectric layer has a second piezoelectric axis orientation that substantially opposes the first piezoelectric axis orientation (paragraph 0050) of the first piezoelectric layer.
However, Burak does not teach a first temperature compensating layer and in which the first and second piezoelectric layers have respective thicknesses so that the acoustic wave device has a main resonant frequency that is in an Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) band in one of a Ku band, a K band, a Ka band, a V band and a W band.
Kodama (Figure 1A) teaches a first temperature compensating layer (18 + paragraph 0052) and in which the first and second piezoelectric layers have respective thicknesses so that the acoustic wave device has a main resonant frequency that is in an Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) band in one of a Ku band, a K band, a Ka band, a V band (paragraph 0093) and a W band.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include a first temperature compensating layer and in which the first and second piezoelectric layers have respective thicknesses so that the acoustic wave device has a main resonant frequency that is in an Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) band in one of a Ku band, a K band, a Ka band, a V band and a W band into Burak’s device for the benefit of improving reliability of the device.
Considering claim 2, Burak (Figure 2A) in view of Kodama (Figure 1A) teaches in which the first temperature compensating layer (18 + paragraph 0052 of Kodama) is coupled between the first piezoelectric layer (207 + 208 + paragraph 0050) and the second piezoelectric layer (209 + 210 + paragraph 0050).
Considering claim 3, Burak (Figure 2A) teaches at least an acoustic reflector electrode (212 + 205 + paragraphs 0053-0054), in which the acoustic reflector electrodes includes at least a first metallic electrode layer (212 + paragraph 0053) and a second metallic electrode layer (205 + paragraph 0054), and in which the first metallic electrode layer and the second metallic electrode layer are electrically and acoustically with the first and second piezoelectric layer to excite the main resonant frequency of the acoustic wave device (paragraph 0030).
Considering claim 4, Burak (Figure 2A) in view of Kodama teaches including at least an acoustic reflector electrode (212 + 205 + paragraphs 0053-0054), in which the acoustic reflector electrodes includes at least a first metallic electrode layer (212 + paragraphs 0053-0054) and a second metallic electrode layer (205 + paragraphs 0029-0030), and in which the first metallic electrode layer is electrically and acoustically coupled with the first temperature compensating layer (28 + paragraph 0050 of Kodama substituting into the temperature compensating would lead the claimed limitation).
Considering claim 5, Burak (Figure 2A) in view of Kodama teaches at least an acoustic reflector electrode (212 + 205 + paragraphs 0053-0054), in which the acoustic reflector includes at least a first metallic electrode layer (212) and a second metallic layer (205), and in which the first temperature compensating layer is coupled between the first metallic electrode layer and the first electrode layer (28 + paragraph 0050 of Kodama substituting into the temperature compensating would lead the claimed limitation).
Considering claim 10, Burak (Figure 2A) teaches in which a first mesa structure comprises the stack (210 + 209 + 208 + 207 + paragraphs 0049-0050), and a second mesa structure comprises the bottom acoustic reflector electrode (205 + paragraphs 0053-0054) and a third mesa structure comprises the top reflector electrode (212 + paragraphs 0053-0054).
Considering claim 11, Burak (Figure 2A) in view of Kodama in which the first piezoelectric layer including at least a first pair of piezoelectric sublayers (207 + 208 + paragraph 0049-0050) having the first piezoelectric axis orientation, in which the first temperature compensating layer is coupled between first and second members of the first pair of the piezoelectric layers (28 + paragraph 0050 of Kodama substituting into the temperature compensating would lead the claimed limitation).
Considering claim 12, Burak (Figure 2A) in view of Kodama teaches at least a first electrode (205) and a second electrode (212 + paragraphs 0053-0054), in which the first temperature compensating layer, the first piezoelectric layer (207 + 208 + 209 + 210 + paragraphs 0049-0050), and the second piezoelectric layer are coupled between the first electrode and the second electrode (28 + paragraph 0050 of Kodama substituting into the temperature compensating would lead the claimed limitation).
Considering claim 13, Burak discloses the claimed invention except in which the stack includes at least a second temperature compensating layer. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to include a second temperature compensating layer, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Considering claim 14, Burak (Figure 2A) teaches a second pair of piezoelectric sublayers having the second piezoelectric axis orientation (209 + 210 + paragraph 0050).
Furthermore Burak does not teach in which the stack includes at least a second temperature compensating layer. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to include a second temperature compensating layer, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Considering claim 16, Burak teaches in which the acoustic wave device is a bulk acoustic wave resonator (paragraph 0029).
Considering claim 17, Burak (Figure 2A) teaches an electrical filter, comprising a plurality of acoustic wave devices over a substrate, in which a first acoustic wave device of the plurality of acoustic wave devices includes at least a stack, and in which the stack includes at least: a first piezoelectric layer having a first piezoelectric axis orientation (207 + 208 + paragraph 0050); a second piezoelectric layer (209 + 210 + paragraph 0050) acoustically coupled with the first piezoelectric layer, in which: the second piezoelectric layer has a second piezoelectric axis orientation that substantially opposes the first piezoelectric axis orientation of the first piezoelectric layer (paragraphs 0049-0050).
However, Burak does not teach a first temperature compensating layer and the first and second piezoelectric layers have respective thicknesses so that the first acoustic wave device has a main resonant frequency that is in an Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) band in one of a Ku band, a K band, a Ka band, a V band and a W band.
Kodama (Figure 1A) teaches a first temperature compensating layer (18 + paragraph 0052) and in which the first and second piezoelectric layers have respective thicknesses so that the acoustic wave device has a main resonant frequency that is in an Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) band in one of a Ku band, a K band, a Ka band, a V band (paragraph 0093) and a W band.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include a first temperature compensating layer and in which the first and second piezoelectric layers have respective thicknesses so that the acoustic wave device has a main resonant frequency that is in an Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) band in one of a Ku band, a K band, a Ka band, a V band and a W band into Burak’s device for the benefit of improving reliability of the device.
Considering claims 18 and 20, Burak (Figure 2A) in view of Kodama teaches at least an acoustic reflector electrode (212 + 205 + paragraphs 0053-0054), in which the acoustic reflector includes at least a first metallic electrode layer (212) and a second metallic layer (205), and in which the first temperature compensating layer is coupled between the first metallic electrode layer and the first electrode layer (28 + paragraph 0050 of Kodama substituting into the temperature compensating would lead the claimed limitation).
Considering claim 19, Burak (Figure 2A) teaches an electrical oscillator, comprising: the acoustic wave device includes at least a stack, and the stack includes at least: a first piezoelectric layer (207 + 208 + paragraph 0050) and a second piezoelectric layer (209 + 210 + paragraph 0050).
However, Burak does not teach electrical oscillator circuitry; an acoustic wave device coupled with the electrical oscillator circuitry to excite electrical oscillations in the acoustic wave device at a main resonant frequency of the acoustic wave device is in an Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) band in one of a Ku band, a K band, a Ka band, a V band and a W band.
Kodama (Figure 1A) teaches an acoustic wave device coupled with the electrical oscillator circuitry to excite electrical oscillating in the acoustic wave device has a main resonant frequency that is in an Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) band in one of a Ku band, a K band, a Ka band, a V band (paragraph 0093) and a W band.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to an acoustic wave device coupled with the electrical oscillator circuitry to excite electrical oscillating in the acoustic wave device has a main resonant frequency that is in an Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) band in one of a Ku band, a K band, a Ka band, a V band and a W band into Burak’s device for the benefit of improving reliability of the device.
Claim(s) 6-9 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burak (PG Pub) 20130106248), in view of Kodama (PG Pub 20200106420) and in view of Bradley (PG Pub 20190326873).
Considering claim 15, Burak in view of Kodama teaches the acoustic wave device as described above.
However, Burak in view Kodama does not teach the acoustic reflector electrode includes at least a first metallic electrode layer, a second metallic electrode layer, a third metallic electrode layer and a fourth metallic electrode layer; the first metallic electrode, the second metallic electrode layer, the third metallic electrode layer and the fourth metallic electrode layer are electrically and acoustically coupled with the first and second piezoelectric layers to excite the main resonant frequency; and the first metallic electrode layer, the second metallic electrode layer, the third metallic electrode layer and the fourth metallic electrode layer have respective acoustic impedance in an alternating arrangement to provide a plurality of acoustic impedance mismatches.
Bradley (Figure 1B) teaches the acoustic reflector electrode includes at least a first metallic electrode layer (120 + paragraph 0036)), a second metallic electrode layer (121 + paragraph 0036), a third metallic electrode layer (122 + paragraph 0037) and a fourth metallic electrode layer (123 + paragraph 0037); the first metallic electrode, the second metallic electrode layer, the third metallic electrode layer and the fourth metallic electrode layer are electrically and acoustically coupled with the first and second piezoelectric layers to excite the main resonant frequency (paragraph 0038); and the first metallic electrode layer, the second metallic electrode layer, the third metallic electrode layer and the fourth metallic electrode layer have respective acoustic impedance in an alternating arrangement to provide a plurality of acoustic impedance mismatches (paragraphs 0037-0038).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to include teach the acoustic reflector electrode includes at least a first metallic electrode layer, a second metallic electrode layer, a third metallic electrode layer and a fourth metallic electrode layer; the first metallic electrode, the second metallic electrode layer, the third metallic electrode layer and the fourth metallic electrode layer are electrically and acoustically coupled with the first and second piezoelectric layers to excite the main resonant frequency; and the first metallic electrode layer, the second metallic electrode layer, the third metallic electrode layer and the fourth metallic electrode layer have respective acoustic impedance in an alternating arrangement to provide a plurality of acoustic impedance mismatches into Burak’s device for the benefit of meeting enhance performance parameters of the resonator.
Considering claim 6, Bradley (Figure 1B) teaches in which: the acoustic reflector electrode is a bottom acoustic reflector electrode; the first metallic electrode layer (102 + paragraph 0036) is a first bottom metallic electrode layer (120 + paragraph 0037); and the second metallic electrode layer is a second bottom metallic electrode layer (121 + paragraph 0037).
Considering claim 7, Bradley (Figure 1B) teaches in which: the acoustic reflector is a top acoustic reflector electrode (104 + paragraph 0037); the first metallic electrode layer is a first top metallic electrode layer (123 + paragraph 0037) and the second metallic electrode layer is a second top metallic electrode layer (122 + paragraph 0037).
Considering claim 8, Bradley (Figure 1B) teaches the top acoustic reflector electrode (104 + paragraph 0037) comprises a connection portion of the top acoustic reflector electrode and a gap (108 + paragraph 0033) is formed beneath the connection portion of the top acoustic reflector electrode adjacent to an etched edge region extending through the first piezoelectric layer; and the gap is filled with at least one of air and a dielectric material (paragraph 0033).
Considering claim 9, Bradley (Figure 1B) teaches at least a bottom acoustic reflector electrode, in which the bottom acoustic reflector includes at least a first pair of bottom metallic electrode layers (120 + 121 + paragraph 0037).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRYAN P GORDON whose telephone number is (571)272-5394. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 a.m. - 4:30 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, Dedei K 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.
/BRYAN P GORDON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights