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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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 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.
1. Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Park et al. (US 2015/0028450; hereinafter Park).
Regarding claim 1, Park, in fig. 15B, discloses a semiconductor structure comprising: a first resonator, comprising: a first metallic resonance layer 452A; and a first capping plate (not labeled, same level as 474) having a bottom surface that is a first distance from a distal end of the first metallic resonance layer 452A; and a second resonator comprising: a second metallic resonance layer 452B; and a second capping plate (not labeled, same level as 474) having a bottom surface that is a second distance from a distal end of the second metallic resonance layer 452B, wherein the first distance is different from the second distance.
Regarding claim 2, Park discloses wherein the first capping plate (not labeled, same level as 474) is positioned vertically above the first metallic resonance layer 452A, wherein the second capping plate (not labeled, same level as 474) is positioned vertically above the second metallic resonance layer 452B, and wherein the first capping plate is on a same horizontal plane as the second capping plate (fig. 15B).
Regarding claim 3, Park discloses wherein: the first resonator further comprises a dielectric isolation layer positioned between the first capping plate and the first metallic resonance layer 452A; and the second resonator further comprises the dielectric isolation layer positioned between the second capping plate and the second metallic resonance layer 452B (fig. 15B).
Regarding claim 4, Park discloses further comprising: a third resonator comprising: a third metallic resonance layer 454B; and a third capping plate (not labeled, same level as 474) having a bottom surface that is a third distance from a distal end of the third metallic resonance layer, wherein the third distance is different from the first distance and the second distance (fig. 16).
Regarding claim 5, Park discloses wherein the first metallic resonance layer and the second metallic resonance layer each comprise at least one of tungsten (W), copper (Cu), ruthenium (Ru), molybdenum (Mo), aluminum (Al), aluminum copper (AlCu), or aluminum silicon copper (AlSiCu) ([0174] & [177]).
Regarding claim 6, Park, in fig. 15B, discloses a semiconductor structure comprising: a first resonator, comprising: a first metallic resonance layer 452A; and a first capping plate (not labeled, same level as 474) having a bottom surface that is a first distance from the first metallic resonance layer; and a second resonator comprising: a second metallic resonance layer 452B; and a second capping plate (not labeled, same level as 474) having a bottom surface that is a second distance from the second metallic resonance layer, wherein the first distance is different from the second distance.
Regarding claim 7, Park discloses wherein the first capping plate (not labeled, same level as 474) is positioned vertically above the first metallic resonance layer 452A (fig. 15B).
Regarding claim 8, Park discloses wherein the second capping plate (not labeled, same level as 474) is positioned vertically above the second metallic resonance layer 452B (fig. 15B).
Regarding claim 9, Park discloses wherein the first capping plate is on a same horizontal plane as the second capping plate (fig. 15B).
Regarding claim 10, Park discloses wherein the first resonator further comprises a dielectric isolation layer positioned between the first capping plate and the first metallic resonance layer 452A (fig. 15B).
Regarding claim 11, Park discloses wherein the second resonator further comprises the dielectric isolation layer positioned between the second capping plate and the second metallic resonance layer 452B (fig. 15B).
Regarding claim 12, Park discloses further comprising: a third resonator comprising: a third metallic resonance layer 454B; and a third capping plate (not labeled, same level as 474) (fig. 16).
Regarding claim 13, Park discloses wherein the third capping plate (not labeled, same level as 474) comprises a bottom surface that is a third distance from the third metallic resonance layer 454B, wherein the third distance is different from the first distance and the second distance (fig. 16).
Regarding claim 14, Park discloses wherein the first metallic resonance layer and the second metallic resonance layer each comprise at least one of tungsten (W), copper (Cu), ruthenium (Ru), molybdenum (Mo), aluminum (Al), aluminum copper (AlCu), or aluminum silicon copper (AlSiCu) ([0174] & [177]).
Allowable Subject Matter
2. Claims 15-20 are allowed.
3. The following is an examiner's statement of reason for allowance: the prior art of record, either singularly or in combination, does not disclose or suggest at least the claim limitations of " wherein the first capping plate is spaced apart from the first metallic resonance layer by a first distance, the second capping plate is spaced apart from the second metallic resonance layer by a second distance, and the first distance is greater than the second distance” (claim 15) as instantly claimed and in combination with the remaining elements.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled "Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance".
Conclusion
4. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David Vu whose telephone number is (571) 272-1798. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:00am to 5:00pm. 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 attempt to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Steven Loke H can be reached on (571) 272-1657. 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 VU/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights