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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed on 07/31/2024. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of JP2023-129181 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/31/2024 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
- the limitation in line 11 "a first electrode layer" should be corrected as "the first electrode layer" to avoid lack of antecedent basis issue with similar limitation in line 2.
- the limitation in line 12 "a second electrode layer" should be corrected as "the second electrode layer" to avoid lack of antecedent basis issue with similar limitation in lines 2-3.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-8, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Giusti et al. (US 2021/0078331).
Regarding claim 1, Giusti et al teaches an actuator (3+7 figs.1,16), comprising:
a diaphragm (7 figs.1,16) that has a first face (face of 7 facing 19) and that is provided to be capable of vibrating;
a piezoelectric element (3 figs.1,16) that includes a first electrode layer (19) that is in contact with the first face (face of 7 facing 19), a second electrode layer (18), and a piezoelectric layer (16) that has a first end (left end of 16 in figs.1,16) in a first direction (X) parallel to the first face (face of 7 facing 19) and a second end (right end of 16 in figs.1,16) on an opposite side to the first end, the piezoelectric element (3) being provided on the first face (face of 7 facing 19), with the first electrode layer (19), the piezoelectric layer (16), and the second electrode layer (18) being stacked in that order in a second direction (Z) perpendicular to the first face (face of 7 facing 19);
an electrode member (portion of 25 in contact with 18 figs.1,16) that is connected to the second electrode layer (18) at the first end side (left end of 16 in figs.1,16) of the piezoelectric layer (16); and
a sealing film (17 figs.1,16) that covers at least part of the piezoelectric element (3), and in which a recessed portion (recessed portion of 17) that is recessed in the second direction (Z) is formed between the first end (left end of 16) and the second end (right end of 16), wherein
in the first direction (X figs.1,16), a distance from the second end (right end of 16) of the piezoelectric layer (16) to an end of the recessed portion (recessed portion of 17) on the second end side (right end of 16) is longer than a distance from the first end (left end of 16) of the piezoelectric layer (16) to an end of the recessed portion (recessed portion of 17) on the first end side (left end of 16).
Regarding claim 2, Giusti et al further teaches wherein the first direction (X figs.1,16) is a direction parallel to a longitudinal direction of the piezoelectric element (16 figs.1,16).
Regarding claim 3, Giusti et al further teaches a wiring member (25 figs.1,16) that is connected to the electrode member (portion of 25 in contact with 18), the wiring member being disposed at a position overlapping an end portion at the first end side (left end of 16) of the piezoelectric layer (16) as viewed from the second direction (Z).
Regarding claim 4, Giusti et al further teaches wherein a material and a thickness in the second direction (Z figs.1,16) are the same for the electrode member (portion of 25 in contact with 18) and the wiring member (25).
Regarding claim 6, Giusti et al further teaches further comprising: a second electrode member (portion of 23 in contact with 19 figs.1,16) that, with the electrode member (portion of 25 in contact with 18) being a first electrode member, is connected to the first electrode layer (19), wherein the first electrode layer (19) has an extension region that protrudes extending from the second end (right end of 16 in figs.1,16) of the piezoelectric layer (16) in the first direction (X), and the second electrode member (portion of 23 in contact with 19) is connected to the first electrode layer (19) in the extension region (figs.1,16).
Regarding claim 7, Giusti et al further teaches wherein both end portions of the diaphragm (7 figs.1,16) in the first direction are constraining regions (regions where 7 is fixed constricting its vibration figs.14,15) that are constrained such that vibration is suppressed, and a wiring member (25,23 figs.1,16) connected to the first electrode member (portion of 25 in contact with 18) or the second electrode member (portion of 23 in contact with 19) is disposed at a position that does not overlap the constraining regions as viewed from the second direction (figs.14,15).
Regarding claim 8, Giusti et al further teaches wherein an end portion of the diaphragm (7 figs.1,16) at the first end side (left end of 16) in the first direction is a first constraining region (region on the left side where 7 is fixed constricting its vibration figs.14,15) that is constrained such that vibration is suppressed, an end portion of the diaphragm (7) at the second end side (right end of 16) in the first direction (X) is a second constraining region (region on the right side where 7 is fixed constricting its vibration figs.14,15) that is constrained such that vibration is suppressed, and in the first direction (X), a distance from an end at a side of the second constraining region (region for instance 2 on the right side where 7 is fixed figs.1,14,15) close to the second end, to the second end of the piezoelectric layer (16), is longer than a distance from an end at a side of the first constraining region (region for instance 11 on the right side where 7 is fixed figs.1,14,15) close to the first end, to the first end of the piezoelectric layer (figs.14,15).
Regarding claim 13, Giusti et al further teaches wherein a Young's modulus of the sealing film (17 figs.1,16) is greater than a Young's modulus of the electrode member (portion of 25 in contact with 18 figs.1,16) (paragraphs 0026 teaches 17 is made of dielectric insulation materials such as SiO2, or SiN, or Al2O3 and 25 is made of conductive materials such as aluminum or gold).
Regarding claim 14, Giusti et al teaches an element substrate (figs.1,16), comprising:
a first channel substrate (8 figs.1,16) having a discharge orifice for discharging a liquid; and
a second channel substrate (4,2 figs.1,16) having an actuator (3+7 figs.1,16) disposed at a position overlapping the discharge orifice as viewed from a second direction (Z),
the actuator (3+7 figs.1,16) including
a diaphragm (7 figs.1,16) that has a first face (face of 7 facing 19) and that is provided to be capable of vibrating,
a piezoelectric element (3 figs.1,16) that includes a first electrode layer (19) that is in contact with the first face (face of 7 facing 19), a second electrode layer (18), and a piezoelectric layer (16) that has a first end (left end of 16 in figs.1,16) in a first direction (X) parallel to the first face (face of 7 facing 19) and a second end (right end of 16 in figs.1,16) on an opposite side to the first end, the piezoelectric element (3) being provided on the first face (face of 7 facing 19), with the first electrode layer (19), the piezoelectric layer (16), and the second electrode layer (18) being stacked in that order in a second direction (Z) perpendicular to the first face (face of 7 facing 19);
an electrode member (portion of 25 in contact with 18 figs.1,16) that is connected to the second electrode layer (18) at the first end side (left end of 16 in figs.1,16) of the piezoelectric layer (16); and
a sealing film (17 figs.1,16) that covers at least part of the piezoelectric element (3), and in which a recessed portion (recessed portion of 17) that is recessed in the second direction (Z) is formed between the first end (left end of 16) and the second end (right end of 16), wherein
in the first direction (X figs.1,16), a distance from the second end (right end of 16) of the piezoelectric layer (16) to an end of the recessed portion (recessed portion of 17) on the second end side (right end of 16) is longer than a distance from the first end (left end of 16) of the piezoelectric layer (16) to an end of the recessed portion (recessed portion of 17) on the first end side (left end of 16).
Regarding claim 15, Giusti et al teaches a liquid discharging head (1 figs.1,16) discharging a liquid from a discharge orifice (13) by an actuator (3+7 figs.1,16) being driven by voltage being applied to a first electrode layer (19) and a second electrode layer (18), the liquid discharging head (figs.1,16) comprising:
a first channel substrate (8 figs.1,16) having a discharge orifice for discharging a liquid is formed; and
a second channel substrate (4,2 figs.1,16) having an actuator disposed at a position overlapping the discharge orifice as viewed from a second direction (Z),
the actuator (figs.1,16) including
a diaphragm (7 figs.1,16) that has a first face (face of 7 facing 19) and that is provided to be capable of vibrating,
a piezoelectric element (3 figs.1,16) that includes a first electrode layer (19) that is in contact with the first face (face of 7 facing 19), a second electrode layer (18), and a piezoelectric layer (16) that has a first end (left end of 16 in figs.1,16) in a first direction (X) parallel to the first face (face of 7 facing 19) and a second end (right end of 16 in figs.1,16) on an opposite side to the first end, the piezoelectric element (3) being provided on the first face (face of 7 facing 19), with the first electrode layer (19), the piezoelectric layer (16), and the second electrode layer (18) being stacked in that order in a second direction (Z) perpendicular to the first face (face of 7 facing 19);
an electrode member (portion of 25 in contact with 18 figs.1,16) that is connected to the second electrode layer (18) at the first end side (left end of 16 in figs.1,16) of the piezoelectric layer (16); and
a sealing film (17 figs.1,16) that covers at least part of the piezoelectric element (3), and in which a recessed portion (recessed portion of 17) that is recessed in the second direction (Z) is formed between the first end (left end of 16) and the second end (right end of 16), wherein
in the first direction (X figs.1,16), a distance from the second end (right end of 16) of the piezoelectric layer (16) to an end of the recessed portion (recessed portion of 17) on the second end side (right end of 16) is longer than a distance from the first end (left end of 16) of the piezoelectric layer (16) to an end of the recessed portion (recessed portion of 17) on the first end side (left end of 16).
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 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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giusti et al. (US 2021/0078331).
Regarding claim 5, Giusti et al further teaches wherein the distance from the second end (right end of 16 figs.1,16) of the piezoelectric layer (16) to the end of the recessed portion (recessed portion of 17) on the second end side (right end of 16) is a length that is longer than the distance from the first end (left end of 16) of the piezoelectric layer (16) to the end of the recessed portion (recessed portion of 17) on the first end side (left end of 16).
Giusti et al does not explicitly teaches wherein the length longer specifically at least 1.5 times and not more than 2.5 times.
However, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to make the length longer by at least 1.5 times and not more than 2.5 times based on the design of a printhead for instance based on size and/or locations of inlet, chamber, nozzles, etc. in the printhead, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claims 9, 10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giusti et al. (US 2021/0078331) in view of Yazaki (US 2007/0091149).
Regarding claim 9, Giusti et al further teaches wherein the recessed portion (recessed portion defined by 17,50 in figs.1,16) is rectangular as viewed from the first direction (X).
Giusti et al at least in the figures does not explicitly shows wherein the recessed portion is rectangular as viewed from the second direction.
However, Yazaki teaches similar actuator including a sealing film (100 figs.1-4) that covers at least part of a piezoelectric element (300) and in which a recessed portion (101 figs.2-4) is formed, wherein the recessed portion (101 figs.2-4) is rectangular as viewed from the second direction (figs.2,4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to form the recessed portion of the sealing film in different forms/shape including in rectangle shape in Giusti et al based on the teachings of Yazaki for instance to simplify manufacturing step.
Regarding claim 10, Giusti et al further teaches wherein a width of the recessed portion (recessed portion defined by 17,50 in figs.1,16 of Giusti et al; 101 figs.2-4 of Yazaki) in a third direction that is orthogonal to the first direction and the second direction has a portion that becomes smaller toward the second end side (figs.1,16 of Giusti et al; figs.2-4 of Yazaki).
Regarding claim 12, Giusti et al further teaches wherein the recessed portion (recessed portion defined by 17,50 in figs.1,16 of Giusti et al; 101 figs.2-4 of Yazaki) is a portion in which the sealing film is completely removed opening.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Giusti et al. (US 2021/0078331) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Giusti et al. (US 2021/0078331) in view of Tanaka et al. (US 2020/0061996).
Regarding claim 11, Giusti et al further teaches wherein the recessed portion is a portion in which a thickness is thinner as compared to other portions (recessed portion defined by 17 in fig.1; recessed portion defined by 17,50 in figs.16 teaches where the recessed portion in figs.16 has thinner portion 50 compared to other portions14,50 figs.16).
In case applicant argued that Giusti et al does not teach wherein the recessed portion is a portion in which a thickness is thinner as compared to other portions.
In the alternatives, Tanaka et al teaches a sealing film (36,34 fig.4) that covers at least part of the piezoelectric element (40) and a recessed portion (portion defined by 34a,36a) that is recessed is formed; wherein the recessed portion (portion defined by 34a,36a) is a portion in which a thickness is thinner as compared to other portions (the recessed portion has thinner sealing film portion 34 compared to other portions 34,36).
Therefore, in the alternatives, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use such recessed portion in Giusti et al based on the teachings of Tanaka et al for instance to provide insulation on the recessed portion of the actuator.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENOK D LEGESSE whose telephone number is (571)270-1615. The examiner can normally be reached General Schedule 9:00 am- 5:00 pm, IFP.
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.
/HENOK D LEGESSE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853