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 .
Note by the Examiner
For clarity, references to specific claim numbers are presented in bold. Cited claim limitations are presented in bold the first time they are associated with a particular prior art disclosing the cited limitations, and subsequent reference to the already disclosed claim limitations are presented un-bolded. Certain elements from prior art which are not required by the claims are also presented bolded if they are particularly pertinent to understanding how the references are being combined. Item-to-item matching and examiner explanations for 102 &/or 103 rejections are provided in parenthesis.
Information Disclosure Statement
Non-Patent Literature cite number 5, de Bruin et al., has only one page when multiple have been cited, making this citation incomplete and so will not be considered. Also, US patent cite numbers 134 and 137 are duplications of 133 and 136, respectively. Duplications will not be considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: reference number 950 in Figs. 9G and 9H, a. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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 disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in paragraphs [00133] and [00174] "boding process" is misspelled and should be "bonding process". Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 14, and 25 objected to because of the following informalities: in all three claims, "boding" is misspelled and should be "bonding". Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 9 and 10 objected to because of the following informalities: in the fourth line of claim 9, "a" should be included and precede "third stage reflective surface". In the fifth line of claim 10, "a" should be included and precede "third stage reflective surface". In the seventh line of claim 10, "a" should be included and precede "fourth stage reflective surface". 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Adams et al. (Pub. No.: US 20020011759 A1), hereinafter as Adams.
PNG
media_image1.png
679
909
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Image A: closeup of Adams Fig. 7A, showcasing multiple structures.
PNG
media_image2.png
429
868
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Image B: closeup of Adams Fig. 10E, showcasing support webbing and anchor.
With regards to claim 14, Adams teaches a method of fabricating a microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) array (see Adams Fig. 7A, array 700; where Fig. 5A shows a planar view of the structure of a single actuator 500 in detail (see Adams [0094]), and where Figs. 10A-10E show a cross-sectional view of a method of making the structure of a single actuator 500 in detail (see Adams [0043]). Also, see Adams [0078]: “An actuator 500 that includes a mirror on stage 501 is also referred to as a mirror cell or a MEM actuator with a mirror.”), comprising: forming a plurality of mirror structures (see Adams Fig. 7A and Image A, where there is a plurality of mirror cells/actuators 500 in array 700 whose cross-section is Figs. 10A-10E. The mirror characteristic can be seen in Adams Fig. 10B, mirror metalization 1211.) on a first side (see Adams Fig. 10A, new topside surface 1205; Adams [0117]) of a substrate (see Adams Fig. 10A, device wafer 1202; Adams [0116]); forming a plurality of support webbings (see Image B. Because there is a plurality of mirror structures, that would indicate there is a plurality of support webbings as Figs. 10A-10E are a cross-sectional view of only a single mirror structure, so one would duplicate Figs. 10A-10E side-by-side to create a visualization of a cross-section of multiple structures together. Thus there is a plurality of support webbings.) between the mirror structures on a second side (see Image B) of the substrate (see Adams Fig. 10A and Image B); forming a plurality of support anchors (see Image B. Because there is a plurality of mirror structures, that would indicate there is a plurality of support anchors as Figs. 10A-10E are a cross-sectional view of only a single mirror structure, so one would duplicate Figs. 10A-10E side-by-side to create a visualization of a cross-section of multiple structures together. Thus there is a plurality of support anchors.) on a base wafer (see Adams Fig. 10A, base wafer 1203; Adams [0116]); bonding (see Adams [0116]: “A base wafer 1203 is then fusion bonded to the device wafer at the interface 1204.”) the base wafer to the second side of the substrate after forming the support anchors (see Image B), wherein the first side (the top side) of the substrate is opposite to the second side (the bottom side) of the substrate (see Adams Fig. 10A and Image B), wherein the plurality of support webbings includes a first support webbing (see Image B), wherein the plurality of support anchors includes a first support anchor (see Image B), and wherein the first support webbing is overlapping with the first support anchor (see Image B) in a first direction (along the horizontal direction).
With regards to claim 15, Adams teaches the method of claim 14, wherein the first support webbing (see Image B) and the first support anchor (see Image B) are in contact (see Image B).
With regards to claim 16, Adams teaches the method of claim 14, further comprising providing a lid wafer (see Adams Fig. 10E, glass lid 1215; Adams [0119]) to the first side (see Adams Fig. 10A, new topside surface 1205) of the substrate (see Adams Fig. 10A, device wafer 1202).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-13 and 17-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adams et al. (Pub. No.: US 20020011759 A1), hereinafter as Adams, in view of Choo et al. (Pub. No.: US 20050275946 A1), hereinafter as Choo.
PNG
media_image3.png
326
593
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Image C: closeup of Choo Fig. 3, showcasing multiple stage reflective surfaces.
With regards to claim 1, Adams teaches a method of fabricating a microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) array (see Adams Fig. 7A, array 700; where Fig. 5A shows a planar view of the structure of a single actuator 500 in detail (see Adams [0094]), and where Figs. 9A-9K show a cross-sectional view of a method of making the structure of a single actuator 500 in detail (see Adams [0100]). Also, see Adams [0078]: “An actuator 500 that includes a mirror on stage 501 is also referred to as a mirror cell or a MEM actuator with a mirror.”), comprising: forming a plurality of first trenches (see Adams Fig. 9F, isolation trenches 1120; Adams [0103]) on a first side (see Adams Fig. 9A, topside 906; Adams [0102]) of a substrate (see Adams Fig. 9F, silicon wafer 901; Adams [0102]), the first trenches containing dielectric material (see Adams [0103]: “The trenches 1120 are filled with a dielectric material, which for one embodiment is silicon dioxide.”); forming a plurality of vias (see Adams Fig. 9G, vias 909; Adams [0110]) on the first side of the substrate (see Adams Fig. 9G); metalizing (see Adams [0110]: “Metallization on the topside 906 of the wafer then proceeds as in FIG. 9G. In order to make contact to the underlying silicon 908 vias 909 are patterned and etched into the dielectric layer 903 using standard lithography and reactive ion etching. After the vias are etched, metalization 910 is deposited and patterned to form an interconnect 911 and a contact 912 to the silicon 908 through the via 909.”) the first side of the substrate (see Adams Fig. 9G); forming a plurality of reflective surfaces (see Adams Fig. 9G, second metal layer 913; see Adams [0111]: “Deposition of a second metal layer 913 provides a reflective mirror surface.”; and see Adams [0078]: “A reflective element (e.g., a mirror) may be coupled to stage 501 and suspended from movable frame 502 by a pair of flexures 503a and 503b.”) on the first side of the substrate (see Adams Fig. 9G); forming a plurality of second trenches (see Adams Fig. 9H, trenches 916; Adams [0112]) on the first side of the substrate (see Adams Fig. 9H) to define a plurality of structures (see Image A and Adams [0112]: “Second, the mirror structure including frame, mirror, and supports are defined using multiple etches that define trenches 916 separating the structural elements.”); forming a pattern layer (see Adams Fig. 9F, blade pattern 904; Adams [0109]) on a second side (see Adams Fig. 9A, backside 907; Adams [0102]) of the substrate that is opposite to the first side of the substrate (see Adams Fig. 9A); etching (see Adams [0113]: “As shown in FIG. 9I, backside silicon etching transfers the blade pattern 904 into the substrate 908 to obtain the blades 918.”) the second side of the substrate to form a plurality of narrow blades (see Adams Fig. 9I, blades 918; Adams [0113]); bonding (see Adams [0114] : “In order facilitate handling and aid in hermetically sealing the mirror array, a base wafer 921 is bonded to the device wafer 920 to protect the blades after release.”) a base wafer (see Adams Fig. 9J, base wafer 921; Adams [0114]) to the second side of the substrate after forming the narrow blades (see Adams Fig. 9J); and etching (see Adams [0115]: “Final structure release is accomplished on the wafer topside in FIG. 9K using dry etching, which punctures through the trenches 916 to suspend the movable elements of the mirror 924 and the frame 925.”) through the second trenches on the first side of the substrate to release the structures (see Adams Fig. 9K) and to provide electrical isolation (see Adams [0115]: “In addition, the release etch promotes electrical isolation by separating, for example, the silicon of the frame 927 from the silicon of surrounding members 928 and 920.”); wherein the plurality of structures includes a first structure and a second structure (see Image A, where the first and second structures have similar structure, and so use the same reference numbers, as they are an array of Adams actuators 500 (see Adams [0094])), the first structure including a first stage (see Adams Fig. 5A, central stage 501; Adams [0078]), a first frame (see Adams Fig. 5A, movable frame 502; Adams [0078]) pivotally coupled to the first stage (see Adams [0082]: “Flexures 503a and 503b allow central stage 501 to pivot.”, where the flexures are attaches to the moveable frame allowing the central stage to be pivotally coupled to the moveable frame (see Adams Fig. 5A).), and a first stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 5A and Adams [0078]: “A reflective element (e.g., a mirror) may be coupled to stage 501 and suspended from movable frame 502 by a pair of flexures 503a and 503b.”) of the reflective surfaces (see Image A and Adams Fig. 7A), and the second structure including a second stage (see Adams Fig. 5A, central stage 501), a second frame (see Adams Fig. 5A, movable frame 502) pivotally coupled to the second stage (see Adams [0082]), and a second stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 5A and Adams [0078]) of the reflective surface (see Image A and Adams Fig. 7A).
Adams does not teach that the first stage reflective surface has a first resonant frequency, and wherein the second stage reflective surface has a second resonant frequency different from the first resonant frequency.
Choo teaches that a first stage reflective surface (see Choo Fig. 3 and Image C, microlens 304; Choo [0050]) has a first resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 1 which has a resonant frequency of 1.56 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.), and wherein a second stage reflective surface (see Choo Fig. 3 and Image C, microlens 302; Choo [0050]) has a second resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 2 which has a resonant frequency of 1.88 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.) different from the first resonant frequency (1.56 kHz is different from 1.88 kHz.).
By modifying Adams with Choo, the combined device of Adams and Choo teaches that the first stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 5A and Adams [0078]) has a first resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 1 which has a resonant frequency of 1.56 kHz), and wherein the second stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 5A and Adams [0078]) has a second resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 2 which has a resonant frequency of 1.88 kHz) different from the first resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the resonant frequencies be the ones taught by Choo in order to control specific structures in the array without affecting the others (see Choo [0016]: “An oscillating forcing function (which may be imposed by electrostatic means, magnetic means, or any other suitable means) that is applied to all structures in the group will only have appreciable effect on whichever structure or structures have a resonant frequency that is close to or the same as the oscillation frequency of the forcing function.”.).
With regards to claim 2, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 1, wherein the substrate (see Adams Fig. 9F, silicon wafer 901) comprises a silicon wafer (see Adams [0102]).
With regards to claim 3, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 1, wherein the dielectric material (see Adams Fig. 9F, isolation trenches 1120) includes silicon dioxide (see Adams [0103]: “The trenches 1120 are filled with a dielectric material, which for one embodiment is silicon dioxide.”).
With regards to claim 4, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 1, further comprising forming a passivation dielectric layer (see Adams Fig. 9H, passivation dielectric 915; Adams [0112]) on the first side (see Adams Fig. 9A, topside 906) of the substrate (see Adams Fig. 9F, silicon wafer 901) after metalizing (see Adams [0110]) the first side of the substrate (see Adams Fig. 9G).
With regards to claim 5, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 1, further comprising providing a lid wafer (see Adams Fig. 9K, lid wafer 930; Adams [0115]) to the first side (see Adams Fig. 9A, topside 906) of the substrate (see Adams Fig. 9F, silicon wafer 901).
With regards to claim 6, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 5, wherein providing the lid wafer (see Adams Fig. 9K, lid wafer 930) comprises attaching (see Adams [0115]: “To completely seal the mirrors from the outside environment, a lid wafer 930 is bonded to the device wafer 920,”) the lid wafer to the first side (see Adams Fig. 9A, topside 906) of the substrate (see Adams Fig. 9F, silicon wafer 901).
With regards to claim 7, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 5, wherein the lid wafer (see Adams Fig. 9K, lid wafer 930) comprises glass (see Adams [0115]: “The lid wafer 930 is typically glass to allow incoming light to be transmitted with low loss in the mirror cavity 932, reflect off of the mirror surface 913, and transmit out of the mirror cavity.”).
With regards to claim 8, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 1, wherein metalizing (see Adams [0110]) the first side (see Adams Fig. 9A, topside 906) of the substrate (see Adams Fig. 9F, silicon wafer 901) comprises forming a plurality of contacts (see Adams Fig. 9G, contact 912, where there would be multiple due to the fact that there are multiples of this structure in the array; Adams [0110]) and a plurality of interconnects (see Adams Fig. 9G, interconnect 911, where there would be multiple due to the fact that there are multiples of this structure in the array; Adams [0110]).
With regards to claim 9, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of structures (see Image A) includes the first structure (see Image A), the second structure (see Image A), and a third structure (see Image A, where the first, second, and third structures have similar structure, and so use the same reference numbers, as they are an array of Adams actuators 500 (see Adams [0094])), the third structure including a third stage (see Adams Fig. 5A, central stage 501), a third frame (see Adams Fig. 5A, movable frame 502) pivotally coupled to the third stage (see Adams [0082]: “Flexures 503a and 503b allow central stage 501 to pivot.”, where the flexures are attaches to the moveable frame allowing the central stage to be pivotally coupled to the moveable frame (see Adams Fig. 5A).), and a third stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 5A and Adams [0078]: “A reflective element (e.g., a mirror) may be coupled to stage 501 and suspended from movable frame 502 by a pair of flexures 503a and 503b.”) of the reflective surfaces (see Image A and Adams Fig. 7A), wherein the first structure is disposed between the second structure and the third structure (see Image A).
Adams does not teach that the third stage reflective surface has a third resonant frequency.
Choo teaches that a third stage reflective surface (see Choo Fig. 3 and Image C, microlens 306; Choo [0050]) has a third resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 3 which has a resonant frequency of 2.33 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.).
By modifying Adams with Choo, the combined device of Adams and Choo teaches that the third stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 5A and Adams [0078]) has a third resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 3 which has a resonant frequency of 2.33 kHz).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the resonant frequencies be the ones taught by Choo. Since it has been held that wherein the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering optimum or workable ranges involve only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233
PNG
media_image4.png
251
667
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Image D: closeup of Choo Fig. 3, show casing multiple structures.
With regards to claim 10, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of structures (see Image A) includes the first structure (see Image A), the second structure (see Image A), a third structure (see Image A, where the first, second, and third structures have similar structure, and so use the same reference numbers, as they are an array of Adams actuators 500 (see Adams [0094])), wherein the third structure includes a third stage (see Adams Fig. 5A, central stage 501), a third frame (see Adams Fig. 5A, movable frame 502)pivotally coupled to the third stage (see Adams [0082], where the flexures are attaches to the moveable frame allowing the central stage to be pivotally coupled to the moveable frame (see Adams Fig. 5A).), and a third stage reflective surface (see Adams [0078]: “A reflective element (e.g., a mirror) may be coupled to stage 501 and suspended from movable frame 502 by a pair of flexures 503a and 503b.”) of the reflective surfaces (see Image A and Adams Fig. 7A).
Adams does not teach a fourth structure wherein the fourth structure includes a fourth stage, a fourth frame pivotally coupled to the fourth stage, and a fourth stage reflective surface of the reflective surfaces, wherein the third stage reflective surface has a third resonant frequency, wherein the fourth stage reflective surface has a fourth resonant frequency, wherein the third resonant frequency is different from the first resonant frequency, the second resonant frequency, and the fourth resonant frequency, wherein the fourth resonant frequency is different from the first resonant frequency, the second resonant frequency, and the third resonant frequency, and wherein the second structure and the third structure, and the fourth structure are adjacent to the first structure.
Choo teaches an array with a fourth structure (see Image D) and that a third stage reflective surface (see Choo Fig. 3 and Image C, microlens 306; Choo [0050]) has a third resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 3 which has a resonant frequency of 2.33 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.), wherein a fourth stage reflective surface (see Choo Fig. 3 and Image C, microlens 308; Choo [0050]) has a fourth resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 4 which has a resonant frequency of 3.00 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.), and wherein a second structure (see Image D) and a third structure (see Image D), and the fourth structure are adjacent to a first structure (see Image D).
By modifying Adams with Choo, the combined device of Adams and Choo teaches a fourth structure (see Image D, where the first, second, third, and fourth structures have similar structure, and so use the same reference numbers, as they are an array of Adams actuators 500 (see Adams [0094])) wherein the fourth structure includes a fourth stage (see Adams Fig. 5A, central stage 501), a fourth frame (see Adams Fig. 5A, movable frame 502) pivotally coupled to the fourth stage (see Adams [0082]), and a fourth stage reflective surface (see Adams [0078]) of the reflective surfaces (see Image A and Adams Fig. 7A), wherein the third stage reflective surface has a third resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 3 which has a resonant frequency of 2.33 kHz), wherein the fourth stage reflective surface has a fourth resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 4 which has a resonant frequency of 3.00 kHz), wherein the third resonant frequency is different from the first resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 1 which has a resonant frequency of 1.56 kHz), the second resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 2 which has a resonant frequency of 1.88 kHz), and the fourth resonant frequency (3.00 kHz), wherein the fourth resonant frequency is different from the first resonant frequency (1.56 kHz), the second resonant frequency (1.88 kHz), and the third resonant frequency (2.33 kHz), and wherein the second structure and the third structure, and the fourth structure are adjacent to the first structure (see Choo Fig. 3 and Image D).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the resonant frequencies be the ones taught by Choo. Since it has been held that wherein the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering optimum or workable ranges involve only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. It also would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the array configuration of Adams with the array taught by Choo in order to utilize the resonant frequencies taught by Choo and set a definite number of structures in the array.
PNG
media_image5.png
334
722
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Image E: closeup of Adams Fig. 9I, showcasing support webbing.
With regards to claim 11, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 1, wherein etching (see Adams [0113]: “As shown in FIG. 9I, backside silicon etching transfers the blade pattern 904 into the substrate 908 to obtain the blades 918.”) the second side (see Adams Fig. 9A, backside 907) of the substrate (see Adams Fig. 9F, silicon wafer 901) to form the plurality of narrow blades (see Adams Fig. 9I, blades 918; Adams [0113]) including forming a support webbing (see Image E) between the first structure (see Image A) and the second structure (see Image A).
With regards to claim 12, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 11.
Adams and Choo do not teach forming a support anchor on the base wafer, wherein the support anchor is overlapping with the support webbing in a first direction.
However, another embodiment in Adams teaches forming a support anchor (see Image B) on a base wafer (see Adams Fig. 10E, base wafer 1203; Adams [0116]), wherein the support anchor is overlapping with the support webbing (see Image B and Adams Fig. 10E) in a first direction (along the horizontal direction).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify one embodiment of Adams to have support anchors as taught by another embodiment of Adams in order to increase stability of the structure and handling support (see Adams [0116]: “Because thinner wafers are fragile and subject to significant handling loss, the base wafer is used early in the process to provide handling support.”).
With regards to claim 13, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 12, wherein the support webbing (see Image B) and the support anchor (see Image B) are in contact (see Image B).
With regards to claim 17, Adams teaches the method of claim 14, wherein the plurality of mirror structures (see Adams Fig. 7A and Image A) includes a first structure (see Image A , where the first and second structures have similar structure, and so use the same reference numbers, as they are an array of Adams actuators 500 (see Adams [0094])) and a second structure (see Image A), wherein the first structure includes a first stage (see Adams Fig. 5A, central stage 501; Adams [0078]), a first frame (see Adams Fig. 5A, movable frame 502; Adams [0078]) pivotally coupled to the first stage (see Adams [0082]: “Flexures 503a and 503b allow central stage 501 to pivot.”, where the flexures are attaches to the moveable frame allowing the central stage to be pivotally coupled to the moveable frame (see Adams Fig. 5A).), and a first stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 10B, mirror metalization 1211; Adams [0117]), wherein the second structure includes a second stage (see Adams Fig. 5A, central stage 501), a second frame (see Adams Fig. 5A, movable frame 502) pivotally coupled to the second stage (see Adams [0082]), and a second stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 10B, mirror metalization 1211) .
Adams does not teach that the first stage reflective surface has a first resonant frequency, and wherein the second stage reflective surface has a second resonant frequency different from the first resonant frequency.
Choo teaches that a first stage reflective surface (see Choo Fig. 3 and Image C, microlens 304; Choo [0050]) has a first resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 1 which has a resonant frequency of 1.56 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.), and wherein a second stage reflective surface (see Choo Fig. 3 and Image C, microlens 302; Choo [0050]) has a second resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 2 which has a resonant frequency of 1.88 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.) different from the first resonant frequency (1.56 kHz is different from 1.88 kHz.).
By modifying Adams with Choo, the combined device of Adams and Choo teaches that the first stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 10B, mirror metalization 1211) has a first resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 1 which has a resonant frequency of 1.56 kHz), and wherein the second stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 10B, mirror metalization 1211) has a second resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 2 which has a resonant frequency of 1.88 kHz) different from the first resonant frequency (1.56 kHz is different from 1.88 kHz.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the resonant frequencies be the ones taught by Choo in order to control specific structures in the array without affecting the others (see Choo [0016]: “An oscillating forcing function (which may be imposed by electrostatic means, magnetic means, or any other suitable means) that is applied to all structures in the group will only have appreciable effect on whichever structure or structures have a resonant frequency that is close to or the same as the oscillation frequency of the forcing function.”.).
With regards to claim 18, Adams teaches the method of claim 14, wherein the plurality of mirror structures (see Adams Fig. 7A and Image A) includes a first structure (see Image A, where the first, second, and third structures have similar structure, and so use the same reference numbers, as they are an array of Adams actuators 500 (see Adams [0094])), a second structure (see Image A), and a third structure (see Image A), wherein the first structure includes a first stage (see Adams Fig. 5A, central stage 501; Adams [0078]), a first frame (see Adams Fig. 5A, movable frame 502; Adams [0078]) pivotally coupled to the first stage (see Adams [0082]: “Flexures 503a and 503b allow central stage 501 to pivot.”, where the flexures are attaches to the moveable frame allowing the central stage to be pivotally coupled to the moveable frame (see Adams Fig. 5A).), and a first stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 10B, mirror metalization 1211), wherein the second structure includes a second stage (see Adams Fig. 5A, central stage 501), a second frame (see Adams Fig. 5A, movable frame 502) pivotally coupled to the second stage (see Adams [0082]), and a second stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 10B, mirror metalization 1211), wherein the third structure includes a third stage (see Adams Fig. 5A, central stage 501), a third frame (see Adams Fig. 5A, movable frame 502) pivotally coupled to the third stage (see Adams [0082]), and a third stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 10B, mirror metalization 1211) .
Adams does not teach that the first stage reflective surface has a first resonant frequency, wherein the second stage reflective surface has a second resonant frequency, wherein the third stage reflective surface has a third resonant frequency, wherein the first resonant frequency is different from the second resonant frequency and the third resonant frequency, and wherein the second resonant frequency is different from the first resonant frequency and the third resonant frequency.
Choo teaches that a first stage reflective surface (see Choo Fig. 3 and Image C, microlens 304; Choo [0050]) has a first resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 1 which has a resonant frequency of 1.56 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.), wherein a second stage reflective surface (see Choo Fig. 3 and Image C, microlens 302; Choo [0050]) has a second resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 2 which has a resonant frequency of 1.88 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.), wherein a third stage reflective surface (see Choo Fig. 3 and Image C, microlens 306; Choo [0050]) has a third resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 3 which has a resonant frequency of 2.33 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.), wherein the first resonant frequency is different from the second resonant frequency and the third resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1), and wherein the second resonant frequency is different from the first resonant frequency and the third resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1).
By modifying Adams with Choo, the combined device of Adams and Choo teaches that the first stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 10B, mirror metalization 1211) has a first resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 1 which has a resonant frequency of 1.56 kHz), wherein the second stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 10B, mirror metalization 1211) has a second resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 2 which has a resonant frequency of 1.88 kHz), wherein the third stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 10B, mirror metalization 1211) has a third resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 3 which has a resonant frequency of 2.33 kHz), wherein the first resonant frequency is different from the second resonant frequency and the third resonant frequency (1.56 kHz is different from 1.88 kHz and 2.33 kHz.), and wherein the second resonant frequency is different from the first resonant frequency and the third resonant frequency (1.88 kHz is different from 1.56 kHz and 2.33 kHz.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the resonant frequencies be the ones taught by Choo in order to control specific structures in the array without affecting the others (see Choo [0016]: “An oscillating forcing function (which may be imposed by electrostatic means, magnetic means, or any other suitable means) that is applied to all structures in the group will only have appreciable effect on whichever structure or structures have a resonant frequency that is close to or the same as the oscillation frequency of the forcing function.”.).
With regards to claim 19, Adams teaches the method of claim 14, wherein the plurality of mirror structures (see Adams Fig. 7A and Image A) includes a first structure (see Image A, where the first, second, and third structures have similar structure, and so use the same reference numbers, as they are an array of Adams actuators 500 (see Adams [0094])), a second structure (see Image A), and a third structure (see Image A), wherein the first structure includes a first stage (see Adams Fig. 5A, central stage 501; Adams [0078]), a first frame (see Adams Fig. 5A, movable frame 502; Adams [0078]) pivotally coupled to the first stage (see Adams [0082]: “Flexures 503a and 503b allow central stage 501 to pivot.”, where the flexures are attaches to the moveable frame allowing the central stage to be pivotally coupled to the moveable frame (see Adams Fig. 5A).), and a first stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 10B, mirror metalization 1211), wherein the second structure includes a second stage (see Adams Fig. 5A, central stage 501), a second frame (see Adams Fig. 5A, movable frame 502) pivotally coupled to the second stage (see Adams [0082]), and a second stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 10B, mirror metalization 1211), wherein the third structure includes a third stage (see Adams Fig. 5A, central stage 501), a third frame (see Adams Fig. 5A, movable frame 502) pivotally coupled to the third stage (see Adams [0082]), and a third stage reflective surface (see Adams Fig. 10B, mirror metalization 1211) .
Adams does not teach a fourth structure, wherein the fourth structure includes a fourth stage, a fourth frame pivotally coupled to the fourth stage, and a fourth stage reflective surface, wherein the first stage reflective surface has a first resonant frequency, wherein the second stage reflective surface has a second resonant frequency, wherein the third stage reflective surface has a third resonant frequency, wherein the fourth stage reflective surface has a fourth resonant frequency, wherein the first resonant frequency is different from the second resonant frequency, the third resonant frequency, and the fourth resonant frequency, wherein the second resonant frequency is different from the first resonant frequency, the third resonant frequency, and the fourth resonant frequency, and wherein the third resonant frequency is different from the first resonant frequency, the second resonant frequency, and the fourth resonant frequency.
Choo teaches an array with a fourth structure (see Image D) and that a first stage reflective surface (see Choo Fig. 3 and Image C, microlens 304; Choo [0050]) has a first resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 1 which has a resonant frequency of 1.56 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.), wherein a second stage reflective surface (see Choo Fig. 3 and Image C, microlens 302; Choo [0050]) has a second resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 2 which has a resonant frequency of 1.88 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.), wherein a third stage reflective surface (see Choo Fig. 3 and Image C, microlens 306; Choo [0050]) has a third resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 3 which has a resonant frequency of 2.33 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.), wherein a fourth stage reflective surface (see Choo Fig. 3 and Image C, microlens 308; Choo [0050]) has a fourth resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 4 which has a resonant frequency of 3.00 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.), wherein the first resonant frequency is different from the second resonant frequency, the third resonant frequency, and the fourth resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1), wherein the second resonant frequency is different from the first resonant frequency, the third resonant frequency, and the fourth resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1), and wherein the third resonant frequency is different from the first resonant frequency, the second resonant frequency, and the fourth resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1).
By modifying Adams with Choo, the combined device of Adams and Choo teaches a fourth structure (see Image D, where the first, second, third, and fourth structures have similar structure, and so use the same reference numbers, as they are an array of Adams actuators 500 (see Adams [0094])), wherein the fourth structure includes a fourth stage (see Adams Fig. 5A, central stage 501), a fourth frame (see Adams Fig. 5A, movable frame 502) pivotally coupled to the fourth stage (see Adams [0082]), and a fourth stage reflective surface (see Adams [0078]), wherein the first stage reflective surface has a first resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 1 which has a resonant frequency of 1.56 kHz), wherein the second stage reflective surface has a second resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 2 which has a resonant frequency of 1.88 kHz), wherein the third stage reflective surface has a third resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 3 which has a resonant frequency of 2.33 kHz), wherein the fourth stage reflective surface has a fourth resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 4 which has a resonant frequency of 3.00 kHz), wherein the first resonant frequency is different from the second resonant frequency, the third resonant frequency, and the fourth resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1), wherein the second resonant frequency is different from the first resonant frequency, the third resonant frequency, and the fourth resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1), and wherein the third resonant frequency is different from the first resonant frequency, the second resonant frequency, and the fourth resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the resonant frequencies be the ones taught by Choo. Since it has been held that wherein the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering optimum or workable ranges involve only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233. It also would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the array configuration of Adams with the array taught by Choo in order to utilize the resonant frequencies taught by Choo and set a definite number of structures in the array.
With regards to claim 20, Adams teaches a method of fabricating a microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) array, comprising: forming a plurality of mirror structures (see Adams Fig. 10B, mirror metalization 1211; Adams [0117]; and see Image A, where there are a plurality of structures with mirrors integrated into the structures. Because there is a plurality of structures, that would indicate there is a plurality of mirror metalization 1211 as Figs. 10A-10E are a cross-sectional view of only a single structure, so one would duplicate Figs. 10A-10E side-by-side to create a visualization of a cross-section of multiple structures together. Thus there is a plurality of mirror metalization 1211, or mirror structures.) on a first side (see Adams Fig. 10A, new topside surface 1205; Adams [0117]) of a substrate (see Adams Fig. 10A, device wafer 1202; Adams [0116]).
Adams does not teach that the plurality of mirror structures includes a plurality of first mirror structures having a first resonant frequency and a plurality of second mirror structures having a second resonant frequency different from the first resonant frequency.
Choo teaches an array with a plurality of mirror structures (see Image D) includes a plurality of first mirror structures (see Image D) having a first resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 1 which has a resonant frequency of 1.56 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.) and a plurality of second mirror structures (see Image D) having a second resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 2 which has a resonant frequency of 1.88 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.) different from the first resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1).
By modifying Adams with Choo, the combined device of Adams and Choo teaches that the plurality of mirror structures includes a plurality of first mirror structures having a first resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 1 which has a resonant frequency of 1.56 kHz) and a plurality of second mirror structures having a second resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 2 which has a resonant frequency of 1.88 kHz) different from the first resonant frequency (1.56 kHz is different from 1.88 kHz.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have the resonant frequencies be the ones taught by Choo in order to control specific structures in the array without affecting the others (see Choo [0016]: “An oscillating forcing function (which may be imposed by electrostatic means, magnetic means, or any other suitable means) that is applied to all structures in the group will only have appreciable effect on whichever structure or structures have a resonant frequency that is close to or the same as the oscillation frequency of the forcing function.”.).
With regards to claim 21, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 20, wherein the plurality of mirror structures (see Image A) includes the plurality of first mirror structures (see Image D), the plurality of second mirror structures (see Image D), and a plurality of third mirror structures (see Image A and Image D) having a third resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 3 which has a resonant frequency of 2.33 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.) different from the first resonant frequency (1.56 kHz) and the second resonant frequency (2.33 kHz).
PNG
media_image6.png
640
713
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Image F: annotated Choo Fig. 3, showcasing an array configuration with only three frequencies. This configuration follows the rule that structures of the same resonant frequency should not be next to each other in the same row (see Choo [0054]).
With regards to claim 22, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 21, wherein one of the first mirror structures (see Image F) is surrounded by three second mirror structures (see Image F) of the second mirror structures (see Image D) and three third mirror structures (see Image F) of the third mirror structures (see Image D).
With regards to claim 23, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 20, wherein the plurality of mirror structures (see Image A) includes the plurality of first mirror structures (see Image D), the plurality of second mirror structures (see Image D), a plurality of third mirror structures (see Image D) having a third resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 3 which has a resonant frequency of 2.33 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.), and a plurality of fourth mirror structures (see Image D) having a fourth resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, unit 4 which has a resonant frequency of 3.00 kHz, where “Table 1 sets forth device parameters measured from a prototype array that has been fabricated and tested.” (see Choo [0063]) Each unit represents at least one actuator with those parameters in the array.), wherein the first resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, 1.56 kHz) is different from the second resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1, 2.33 kHz), the third resonant frequency, and the fourth resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1), wherein the second resonant frequency is different from the first resonant frequency, the third resonant frequency, and the fourth resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1), and wherein the third resonant frequency is different from the first resonant frequency, the second resonant frequency, and the fourth resonant frequency (see Choo Table 1).
PNG
media_image7.png
640
716
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Image G: annotated Choo Fig. 3, showcasing an array configuration with only four frequencies. This configuration follows the rule that structures of the same resonant frequency should not be next to each other in the same row (see Choo [0054]).
With regards to claim 24, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 23, wherein one of the first mirror structures (see Image G) is surrounded by two second mirror structures (see Image G) of the second mirror structures (see Image D), two third mirror structures (see Image G) of the third mirror structures (see Image D), and two fourth mirror structures (see Image G) of the fourth mirror structures (see Image D).
With regards to claim 25, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 20, further comprising: forming a plurality of support webbings (see Image B. Because there is a plurality of mirror structures, that would indicate there is a plurality of support webbings as Figs. 10A-10E are a cross-sectional view of only a single mirror structure, so one would duplicate Figs. 10A-10E side-by-side to create a visualization of a cross-section of multiple structures together. Thus there is a plurality of support webbings.) between the mirror structures (see Adams Fig. 10B, mirror metalization 1211) on a second side (see Image B) of the substrate (see Image B and Adams Fig. 10A), forming a plurality of support anchors (see Image B. Because there is a plurality of mirror structures, that would indicate there is a plurality of support anchors as Figs. 10A-10E are a cross-sectional view of only a single mirror structure, so one would duplicate Figs. 10A-10E side-by-side to create a visualization of a cross-section of multiple structures together. Thus there is a plurality of support anchors.) on a base wafer (see Adams Fig. 10A, base wafer 1203; Adams [0116]), and bonding (see Adams [0116]: “A base wafer 1203 is then fusion bonded to the device wafer at the interface 1204.”) the base wafer to the second side of the substrate (see Adams Fig. 10A) after forming the support anchors (it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to form support anchors on a base wafer before bonding the base wafer to the substrate as the top surface of the base wafer is more accessible to modify before bonding.), wherein the second side of the substrate is opposite (see Image B) to the first side (see Adams Fig. 10A, new topside surface 1205) of the substrate (see Adams Fig. 10A, device wafer 1202), wherein the plurality of support webbings includes a first support webbing (see Image B), wherein the plurality of support anchors includes a first support anchor (see Image B), and wherein the first support webbing is overlapping with the first support anchor (see Image B) in a first direction (along the horizontal direction).
With regards to claim 26, Adams and Choo teach the method of claim 25, wherein the first support webbing (see Image B) and the first support anchor (see Image B) are in contact (see Image B).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EKATERINA T BIRCH whose telephone number is (571)272-8676. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 8am-4pm ET.
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, Steven Loke can be reached at 5712721657. 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.
/E.T.B./Examiner, Art Unit 2818
/STEVEN H LOKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights