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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I (Claims 1-11) in the reply filed on 1/20/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the first structure" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Furuya et al. (2011/0109704) (hereinafter Furuya et al.).
Regarding Claim 1, Furuya et al. teaches an inkjet printhead (300, Fig. 1) [Paragraph 0044] comprising: a first actuator substrate (see Fig. 1) having one or more cavities (see Fig. 1) for fluid routing and include an actuator cavity (21, Fig. 1) [Paragraphs 0045, 0047, and 0049]; an actuator stack (50, Fig. 1) coupled to the first structure (20, Fig. 1) and positioned at least partially over the actuator cavity (21), the actuator stack (50) comprising a membrane (10, Fig. 1) an actuator (52, Fig. 2) coupled to a first side of the membrane (10) [Paragraphs 0045 and 0051], and a tented structure (60, Figs. 1-2) coupled to the actuator substrate (see Fig. 1) to create an enclosed cavity (69, Figs. 1-2) large enough to enable the membrane (10) in the cavity (21) to bow without contacting the tented structure (60) [Paragraphs 0045, 0047-0049, 0051, and 0063].
Regarding Claim 2, Furuya et al. teaches the inkjet printhead (300), wherein the tented structure (60) comprises one or more layers of dry film (61, 66, Fig. 2) [Paragraphs 0067 and 0072].
Regarding Claim 3, Furuya et al. teaches the inkjet printhead (300), wherein at least one of the one or more layers of dry film comprises a photosensitive polymer [Paragraph 0067].
Regarding Claim 4, Furuya et al. teaches the inkjet printhead (300), wherein the tented structure comprises: a first dry film layer (61) coupled to the first side of the membrane (10) with an area in the first dry film layer over the membrane (10) being open [Paragraph 0064, see Fig. 2], and a second dry film layer (66) having a first surface coupled to the first dry film layer (61) to cover the area that is open in the first dry film layer (61) over the membrane (10) and to seal the enclosed cavity (69) over the membrane [Paragraphs 0063-0064].
Regarding Claim 5, Furuya et al. teaches the inkjet printhead (300), wherein the area in the first dry film layer (61) over the membrane (10) being open as a result of a portion of the first dry film being remove during fabrication [Paragraph 0095, see also Fig. 5D].
Regarding Claim 6, Furuya et al. teaches the inkjet printhead (300), wherein the first and second dry film layers (61, 66) have different properties [Paragraphs 0067 and 0072].
Regarding Claim 7, Furuya et al. teaches the inkjet printhead (300), further comprising one or more electrical lines routed on one or more of a second surface of the second dry film layer (66), the second surface of the second dry film layer (66) being on an opposite side of the second dry film layer (66) from the first surface [Paragraphs 0069-0070]; the first dry film layer (61) [Paragraph 0064]; and the membrane (10) [Paragraph 0064].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-11 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 primary reason for the allowance of claim(s) 8-10 is the inclusion of the limitation of an inkjet printhead that includes an interposer coupled to one or more layers of dry film. It is this limitation found in the claims, as it is claimed in the combination, that has not been found, taught, or suggested by the prior art of record, which makes these claims allowable over the prior art.
The primary reason for the allowance of claim(s) 11 is the inclusion of the limitation an inkjet printhead that includes an interposer, wherein a tented structure comprises a first dry film layer on a first side of a membrane with an area in the first dry film layer over the membrane is open, and wherein the interposer is on the first dry film layer covering the area that is open in the first dry film layer over the membrane and sealing an enclosed cavity over the membrane. It is these limitations found in the claims, as it is claimed in the combination, that has not been found, taught, or suggested by the prior art of record, which makes these claims allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LISA SOLOMON whose telephone number is (571)272-1701. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:30am -6pm, 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, Douglas Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 431-0716. 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.
/LISA SOLOMON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853