DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-13 in the reply filed on 2/4/26 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 14-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse dated 2/4/26.
An OA on the merits of claims 1-13 as follows:
Priority
Since the related parent Application 17/376,937 (under the title) has been fully matured into patent, therefore the applications should be updated to: --"now U.S. Patent No. 12,029,131 “--
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claimed subject matter such as (a plurality of array elements, curing an adhesive between the top surface of the transducer stack and the bottom surface of the lens assembly to form the ultrasound matching layer) (see claim 1, lines 4-5, 9-10), and “and “a lens and second matching layer forming the bottom surface of the lens assembly “(see claim 2, line2) and “claim 5 entirely” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Note that while these elements are cited in the specification and they are described in the methodology claims, no numerical reference is provided to them in any of the figures. This is needed for clarity. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing (see MPEP § 608.02(d))
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Abstract should be updated to reflect the making of an ultrasound matching layer
The specification is objected to because it directed to the claims (see ¶ [0124]) which directed to the claim and the term “claim “should be deleted and/or replace with the subject matter of the claim instead.
A number of US Publication cited in ¶ [0044] under general description of a transducer should be updated to patent numbers. Also, it should be under the background invention instead.
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. Further, the specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-13 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
At first it is uncertain as to exactly what method claim Applicant(s) intend to pursue since the scope of the claims clearly drawn to “A method of forming an ultrasound matching layer” (see preamble of the claims, about lines 1-2). However, the body of the claims appears to be directed to “an ultrasound transducer” connectively attached to “a lens assembly” by at least a matching layer (as an adhesive between them). Therefore, it is not known as to exactly what method Applicant(s) intend to claim. Appropriate correction is required.
In formulate the rejection on the merits the Examiner presumes that the claims directed to the making of “an ultrasound matching layer” and claims will be rejected accordingly.
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 1-13 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 enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. In this case, the subject matter as indicated in claim 1 entirely which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to make and use the invention. At the best ¶ [0044] and ¶ [0124] discloses the method invention but lacking of details and description as to how the method is done since, not enough details as to how the method of forming an ultrasound matching layer (in single layer) is formed, also the Drawing does not show the process steps as claimed in claims 1-13 of the disclosed invention.
Limitations of claims 2-13 are also rejected to for same rationale as set forth in base claim 1 above because to claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains.
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.
Claims 1-13 are 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.
The scope of the claims directed to “a method of forming an ultrasound matching layer” which does not in line with the body of the claim which made scope of the claim unclear. It appears that the claims directed to “a method for connecting an array transducer and a lens assembly by a matching layer “base on the cited features from the body of the claim (see claim 1, entirely).
It is unclear as to how step “curing an adhesive between the top surface of the transducer stack and the bottom surface of the lens assembly to form the ultrasound matching layer,” (claim 1, line 9-10) can be proceed, since missing /lacking of step” applying an electrical conductive adhesive between the top surface of the transducer stack and the bottom surface of the lens assembly” prior to the curing”.
Also, the recites “a distance between the top surface of the transducer stack and the bottom surface of the lens assembly resulting from the plurality of spacers being an appropriate wavelength thickness for the ultrasound matching layer” (claim 1, line 12-14) is unclear and confusing in that it is not known as to exactly what distance associated with the process in order to obtain a proper wavelength thickness for the formed ultrasound matching layer. Whether or not the distance (as regarded above) should be proceeded before or after the curing process.
Claims 2, 5 directed to the lens assembly entity which does not seem to further limit the ultrasound matching layer. Also, it is not known as to whether the second matching layer as in claim 2 and 5 directed to “the ultrasound matching layer “as result found in claim 1, line 10?
Claim 3-4 directed to material structure no method inventive features existed therefrom.
“the transducer stack” (claim 6, line 1; claim 8, line 1) lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claims 6-10 directed to the transducer structure configurations which do not further limit the making of the “ultrasound matching layer” as claimed which made scope of the claims above unclear.
It is unclear as to how the “lapping” process of claim 11 can be practiced since the “ultrasound matching layer” already formed as result of curing in claim 1 and at this stage of the process it is not known as to how the “lapping” can be done because no access to the spacers after the “curing” process set forth in line 9 of claim 1.
“are employed” (claim 12, line 1) is not positive method limitation.
Claim 13 directed to the functionally intended use does not further limit the claimed method and should be delete.
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-13 as best understood is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Chaggares et al (US 20070205698).
Chaggares et al discloses the broadly claimed method of forming an ultrasound matching layer, the method comprising:
providing an acoustic array transducer stack comprising a piezoelectric layer and having a top surface and a plurality of array elements, the top surface comprising a plurality of spacers not disposed over the plurality of array elements (see Figs. 3-4 and discussed under the abstract);
providing a lens assembly (TPX lens) having a top surface and a bottom surface (see Figs. 3-4);
contacting the bottom surface of the lens assembly with the plurality of spacers (as gaps between TPX lens and crystal); and
curing an adhesive (as electrode layer) between the top surface of the transducer stack and the bottom surface of the lens assembly to form the ultrasound matching layer (see related process embodiment of Fig. 5 ,step 510 discloses the curing process to form the ultrasound matching layer).
PNG
media_image1.png
423
741
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding to the recites of:” the adhesive configured to bond to the bottom surface of the lens assembly and to the top surface of the transducer stack, a distance between the top surface of the transducer stack and the bottom surface of the lens assembly resulting from the plurality of spacers being an appropriate wavelength thickness for the ultrasound matching layer (claim 1, lines 11-14) is functionally intended use directed to the adhesive which do not further limit the method and it appears that the applied prior art adhesive in form of (metal electrode layer which is bonded between the top surface of the transducer stack and the bottom surface of the lens assembly ) would equally performed the bonding similar to the above.
Note: It has been held that the recitation that an element is "configured to” perform a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform. It does not constitute a limitation in any patentable sense. In re Hutchison, 69 USPQ 138.
As applied to claim 2, refer to Fig. 2 which depicts a 2nd matching layer formed on the bottom of the lens TPX lens.
As applied to claim 3 refer to Fig. 4 where the lens is TPX lens (or polymethylpentene).
PNG
media_image2.png
508
694
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As applied to claims 4-5, epoxy in form of CA (or cyanoacrylate) is known in the art in fact the substrate CA discloses by the 3rd matching layer of the applied prior art (see Fig. 4) can be substitute for the 2nd matching layer base on the application specifications requirement as common general knowledge without exercising any inventive skills.
Claims 6-10 appears to be directed to the transducer entity rather than the “ultrasound matching layer” because at this point of the process no further method inventive features directed to the “ultrasound matching layer” method wise existed in the above claim (see under section of 112 above).
As applied to claim 11 refer to Fig. 5, step 512 of the applied reference to Chaggares et al.
As applied to claims 12 appears to meet by in light of the modification of Fig. 1, 110, 108 Since, materials selection is base on the application intended purpose as common general knowledge without exercising any inventive skills.
As applied to claim 13, appears to meet by the applied prior art since the recites of” wherein the plurality of array elements operate at a center frequency of at least 20 megahertz” directed to the operate frequency of the associated entity of” the array elements” is not a inventive method feature.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MINH N TRINH whose telephone number is (571)272-4569. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH ~5:00-3:30.
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, Thomas J Hong can be reached at 571-272-0993. 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.
/MINH N TRINH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729 mt