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.
Claims 11, 13-14, 17-19 and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Es (US 20200249255 A1) in view of Rothberg (US 20200269280 A1) and in further view of Sun (Sun et al, “Optical Piezoelectric Transducer-Based Nanoultrasonics”, Proceedings of the 7th IEEE International Conference on Nanotechnology, 2007).
Regarding claim 11, Van Es teaches an element (ultra sound transducer 17) of an AFM tool comprising a piezoelectric element (“one or more bodies of piezoelectric material”, [0036]).
Van Es does not teach that the element comprises a coating formed by a multitude of piezoelectric layers stacked in a thickness direction of the coating, wherein adjacent piezoelectric layers have different material compositions.
Rothberg teaches a piezoelectric ultrasonic transducer ([0003]) comprising a coating formed by a multitude of piezoelectric layers stacked in a thickness layer of the coating (layer of thin film piezoelectric micromachined ultrasonic transducers, [0007]; multitude of layers shown in piezoelectric materials 1308a-c in fig. 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art on or before the effective filing date of the invention to use the piezoelectric ultrasonic transducer of Rothberg as a substitute for the transducer of Van Es, as a matter of selecting a known piezoelectric element capable of operating with a high frequency range for shallow or deep ultrasonic imaging of a substrate ([0076]).
Van Es and Rothberg do not teach that the adjacent piezoelectric layers have different material compositions.
Sun teaches an ultrasonic generation layer formed from a semiconductor heterostructure (i.e. adjacent layers having different material compositions), where the multiple individual layers are formed from GaN and InGaN such that the ultrasound generation layer is a quantum well (optical piezoelectric transducer, OPT, formed from InGaN/GaN multiple quantum wells, p. 263 col. 2 paragraph 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art on or before the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the semiconductor heterostructure of Sun for the ultrasonic generation system of Van Es, as Sun teaches that “the role of the OPT is similar to that of the piezoelectric transducer in a typical ultrasonic imaging system” (so that one of ordinary skill would be able to substitute it easily for the piezoelectric transducer of Van Es) and that the OPT of Sun allows ultrasonic imaging with nanometer resolution (p. 263, col. 2 paragraph 3).
Regarding claim 13, Sun teaches that the piezoelectric layers are formed from semiconductor heterostructures (InGaN/GaN multiple quantum wells, p. 263 col. 2 paragraph 3).
Regarding claim 14, Van Es teaches that the element is an ultrasound generation layer (ultrasound transducer 17) that may be provided on a cantilever arm (transducer may be located at an alternate location to excite vibrations via the probe tip, i.e. by being on the probe, [0036]).
Regarding claim 17, Sun teaches that the piezoelectric layers are formed from GaN and InGaN such that the piezoelectric layers form a quantum well.
Regarding claim 18, Rothberg teaches that the piezoelectric is configured in a concentric rings geometry (rings 1102, 1104, fig. 11A) comprising different pillars with spatial separation wherein each pillar (in the combination with Sun, above) comprises multiple piezoelectric layers (pillars 1302, 1304, 1306 have different heights formed by multiple layers, fig. 13).
Regarding claim 19, Rothberg teaches that the pillars have different thickness obtained by different thicknesses of the piezoelectric layers forming the ultrasound generation layer (layers 1308a-c have different thicknesses, fig. 13, [0075]).
Regarding claim 21, Sun teaches that the properties of the piezoelectric layers are selected such that a desired frequency of an acoustic wave is propagated through the coating (setup is frequency-selective, p. 1 col. 2 paragraph 2).
Regarding claim 22, Sun teaches that the properties of the piezoelectric layers prevent one or more other frequencies from propagating through the coating (frequency selection “has excellent S/N ratio” and so suppresses noise, i.e. other frequencies, p. 1 col. 2 paragraph 1).
Regarding claim 23, Sun teaches that the desired frequency is selected based on thickness of the piezoelectric layers (determined by layer periodicity, i.e. thickness, p. 1 col. 1 last paragraph-col. 2 first paragraph).
Regarding claim 24, Sun teaches that the quantum well is configured to provide selective propagation of acoustic wave frequencies (frequency selective, p. 1 col. 2 paragraph 1).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van Es (US 20220091069 A1, hereinafter Van Es 2022) in view of Rothberg and in further view of Sun.
Regarding claim 20, Van Es 2022 teaches a metrology tool for determining information about a target structure formed on a substrate using a lithographic process (imaging of lithographically formed layers, [0005]),
A cantilever probe (30) having a cantilever arm (33, fig. 4) and a probe element (transmission tip 31), the probe element configured to extend from the cantilever arm towards the target structure, the system comprising an element comprising a coating formed by piezoelectric layers (multiple piezoelectric elements of different thicknesses, [0049]);
An ultrasound generation system (signal generator 20 configured to generate ultrasound in cooperation with transmission tip, [0042]) configured to generate ultrasonic waves in the cantilever probe, such that the ultrasonic waves propagate through the probe element into the target structure and reflect back from the target structure into the probe element (receiving acoustic signal from reflections of ultrasound wave, [0042]); and
An ultrasound detection system (reception tip 32 and signal processor 50A) configured to detect the reflected ultrasonic waves (sensing received acoustic signal, [0042]).
Van Es 2022 does not explicitly teach that the piezoelectric element is on the cantilever arm. However in order to efficiently couple the piezoelectric element to the transmission tip 31, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to place the piezoelectric element on the cantilever arm, as a matter of arranging the parts of the invention with no unexpected result.
Van Es 2022 does not teach that the element comprises a coating formed by a multitude of piezoelectric layers stacked in a thickness direction of the coating, wherein adjacent piezoelectric layers have different material compositions.
Rothberg teaches a piezoelectric ultrasonic transducer ([0003]) comprising a coating formed by a multitude of piezoelectric layers stacked in a thickness direction of the coating (layer of thin film piezoelectric micromachined ultrasonic transducers, [0007]; multitude of layers shown in piezoelectric materials 1308a-c in fig. 13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art on or before the effective filing date of the invention to use the piezoelectric ultrasonic transducer of Rothberg as a substitute for the transducer of Van Es 2022, as a matter of selecting a known piezoelectric element capable of operating with a high frequency range for shallow or deep ultrasonic imaging of a substrate ([0076]).
Sun teaches an ultrasonic generation layer formed from a semiconductor heterostructure (i.e. adjacent layers having different material compositions), where the multiple individual layers are formed from GaN and InGaN such that the ultrasound generation layer is a quantum well (optical piezoelectric transducer, OPT, formed from InGaN/GaN multiple quantum wells, p. 263 col. 2 paragraph 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art on or before the effective filing date of the invention to substitute the semiconductor heterostructure of Sun for the ultrasonic generation system of Van Es, as Sun teaches that “the role of the OPT is similar to that of the piezoelectric transducer in a typical ultrasonic imaging system” (so that one of ordinary skill would be able to substitute it easily for the piezoelectric transducer of Van Es) and that the OPT of Sun allows ultrasonic imaging with nanometer resolution (p. 263, col. 2 paragraph 3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 25 is 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 prior art does not disclose or make obvious a piezoelectric actuator with piezoelectric layers are configured in a concentric rings geometry comprising different pillars with spatial separation, wherein each pillar comprises multiple piezoelectric layers wherein the pillars are formed by machining spaces in a direction parallel to the thickness direction of the intervening layers.
Conclusion
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 DAVID E SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-7096. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 8:30 AM-5:00 PM.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at 22293. 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.
/DAVID E SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights