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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the features of claim 2 drawn to: “a first layer surface and a second layer surface that is located on an opposite side to the first layer surface and partly exposed through the second accommodation opening, and the support is partly in contact with the second layer surface” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
2
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites the phrase “wherein the absorption layer has a first layer surface and a second layer surface that is located on an opposite side to the first layer surface and partly exposed through the second accommodation opening, and the support is partly in contact with the second layer surface.” The claim phrase appears to specify the absorption layer comprising a plurality of layers (i.e. first and second layers). However, the specification and drawings fail to disclose these features in a way that makes it clear the absorption layer is comprising more than one layer, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be apprised of the scope of the claim. For the purposes of rejection, the claim will be interpreted such that the absorption layer is one layer with two surfaces.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 10 and 12-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by WATANABE et al. (JP 2008082791 A).
Regarding claims 1 and 17, WATANABE discloses an electronic device comprising a detection element (FIG 2a-b, second embodiment) comprising:
an absorption layer configured to receive an electromagnetic wave included in at least a part of a wavelength range from 100 µm to 3000 µm to generate heat (IR absorption unit 40 includes p-type polycrystalline silicon, which absorbs some radiation in the 100-3000 µm range, with increased absorption towards the 3000 µm range; [0023-0027]);
a thermoelectric element configured to generate current corresponding to the heat generated by the absorption layer (thermoelectric beam portions 20 is n-type polycrystalline silicon; [0023]); and
a support having an accommodation space in which the absorption layer is positioned (absorption unit 40 is positioned in an accommodating space of the temperature detection part 35; FIG 2b; [0020, 0023]),
the accommodation space having a first accommodation opening located on a side on which the electromagnetic wave is incident (radiation receiving side of absorption unit 40; FIG 2a), and
a second accommodation opening located on an opposite side to the first accommodation opening (cavity side of absorption unit 40),
the absorption layer exposed through the second accommodation opening having an area smaller than the first accommodation opening does (second side of 40 within cavity area is smaller than radiation absorbing side; FIG 2a).
Regarding claim 2, WATANABE discloses wherein the absorption layer has a first layer surface and a second layer surface that is located on an opposite side to the first layer surface and partly exposed through the second accommodation opening, and the support is partly in contact with the second layer surface (absorption unit 40 has a first and second surface on opposing sides, where the support 35 is partly in contact with the second surface; FIG 2; [0023]).
Regarding claims 5 and 6, WATANABE discloses the absorption layer having a linear expansion coefficient greater than the support does (noble metals such as gold black are used as the IR absorption material (14.2 ppm/K), whereas the support 35 is polycrystalline silicon (2.6ppm/K), leading to a large difference absorption coefficient greater than 6 ppm/K).
Regarding claim 7, WATANABE discloses the second accommodation opening has a polygonal planar shape (FIG 2).
Regarding claim 10, WATANABE discloses wherein the support 35 has a stepped surface that partitions the accommodation space and is in contact with the absorption layer 40 (FIG 2a-b).
Regarding claim 12, WATANABE discloses wherein the first layer surface has a plurality of step-shaped portions (each contact portion o the support 35 with the absorption unit 40 is a step shaped portion; FIG 2).
Regarding claim 13, WATANABE disclose a part of the absorption layer exposed through the second accommodation opening curves toward the first accommodation opening as the temperature of the absorption layer rises. It is noted that where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Regarding claim 14, WATANABE discloses the support has an opening partition that extends in a direction perpendicular to the stacking direction in which the absorption layer and the support are stacked on each other and partitions the second accommodation opening, at least a part of the absorption layer is located on the opening partition, and the opening partition curves toward the first accommodation opening as the temperature rises (FIG 2). It is noted that where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977).
Regarding claim 15, WATANABE disclose a structural member opposed to a part of the absorption layer exposed through the second accommodation opening (base substrate 10; FIG 2).
Regarding claim 16, WATANABE discloses wherein the support has an insulating property (support thermally isolates from the substrate; FIG 2).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WATANABE et al. (JP 2008082791 A).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, WATANABE discloses the second accommodation opening has an area which is a proportion of a projected area of the first layer surface with respect to a stacking direction in which the absorption layer and the support are stacked on each other of a certain percentage (FIG 2), but does not specify the proportion as at least 10%. However, selecting the optimal proportion of a projected area of a first layer to that of the area in which the absorption layer and support are stacked it would have been an obvious design choice based on the application at hand. One of ordinary skill would understand the benefits and tradeoffs of increasing or decreasing the proportion on performance, and it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to select at least 10% and at most 75%.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WATANABE et al. (JP 2008082791 A) in view of KUBO (JP 2001330511 A).
Regarding claim 8, WATANABE discloses a polygon geometry but does not specify wherein the second accommodation opening has a circular or oval planar shape. In the same field of endeavor, KUBO discloses it is known in the art to select a circular geometry for a diaphragm 14 and absorbing film 24 (FIG 4). In light of the teachings of KUBO, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine with the teachings of WATANABE.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WATANABE et al. (JP 2008082791 A) in view of AWAI et al. (JP 06307925 A).
Regarding claim 9, WATANABE does not disclose the second accommodation opening has a plurality of partial openings that are separated from each other. In the same field of endeavor, AWAI discloses an infrared detection element 1 comprising a substrate 2 partially cut off by etching, a thermal insulation film 3 formed across the cut off part of the substrate 2, and a thin film sensor 4 and IR absorbing film 7 formed thereon, wherein the IR absorbing film 7 is split into two or more by means of slits 9 (FIG 2; abstract). In light of the reduced warping provided by the plurality of partial openings disclosed by AWAI, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine with the teachings of WATANABE.
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WATANABE et al. (JP 2008082791 A) in view of OTA (JP 2006138747 A).
Regarding claim 11, WATANABE discloses a stepped support by does not specify wherein the absorption layer has a plurality of steps. In the same field of endeavor, OTA discloses an infrared radiation detector comprising an absorption layer 202 that has a plurality of steps (FIG 12), with the benefit of improved sensitivity (see tech-solution). In light of the teachings of OTA, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to combine with the teachings of WATANABE.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CASEY BRYANT whose telephone number is (571)270-7329. The examiner can normally be reached M-F // 7-3P EST.
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, UZMA ALAM can be reached at 571-272-3995. 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.
CASEY BRYANT
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2884
/CASEY BRYANT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884