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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/26/2024 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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) 1-3, 15 and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kando et al US 9,748,923.
Kando et al an elastic wave device , comprising: a support including a support substrate 2a; a piezoelectric layer 4 provided in a first direction of the support being a thickness direction of the support substrate; at least one functional electrode 5 (IDT) provided in the first direction of the piezoelectric layer; and a reinforcement film (dielectric film 3) provided in the first direction of the piezoelectric layer; wherein the support includes a space portion (recess) that opens on a side of the piezoelectric layer in the first direction, and an extended passage extending farther toward an outer side than an edge of the space portion in a second direction intersecting the first direction; at least one through-hole (opening 6 7) is provided at a position not overlapping the at least one functional electrode in plain view in the first direction, communicates with the extended passage, and penetrates into or through the piezoelectric layer; and the reinforcement film is provided in a region between the through-hole and the space portion and overlaps at least a portion of a region where the piezoelectric layer and the extended passage overlap each other in plain view in the first direction.
PNG
media_image1.png
578
444
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With regards to claim 2, the at least one functional electrode is an interdigital transducer (IDT) electrode including a plurality of first electrode fingers extending in the second direction and a plurality of second electrode fingers opposed to any one of the plurality of first electrode fingers in a third direction intersecting the second direction and extending in the second direction; and the reinforcement film includes a metal layer (The dielectric film 3 can preferably be made of an appropriate dielectric material, such as, for example, silicon oxide, silicon nitride, or aluminum nitride.) thicker than thicknesses of the first electrode finger and the second electrode finger in the first direction.
With regards to claim 3, the IDT electrode further includes a first busbar electrically connecting the plurality of first electrode fingers and a second busbar electrically connecting the plurality of second electrode fingers; and the reinforcement film includes a metal layer overlapping a portion of the first busbar and a portion of the second busbar.
With regards to claim 15, a thickness of the piezoelectric layer is about 50 nm or more and about 1000 nm or less. Paragraph [0016]
With regards to claim 17, the support 2 includes an intermediate layer between the support substrate 2a and the piezoelectric layer 3. (figure 70)
With regards to claim 18, the intermediate layer includes silicon oxide. (The support layer 2 can preferably be made of an appropriate dielectric, such as, for example, silicon oxide, aluminum nitride, or alumina, or of a high-resistance Si wafer. LiTaO3 has a negative temperature coefficient of resonant frequency TCF. Paragraph [0097])
With regards to claim 19, wherein the support substrate includes Si.( The support wafer 2A is not limited to the LiTaO3 wafer, and it may alternatively be, e.g., a dielectric ceramic wafer or a high-resistance Si wafer. Paragraph [0180])
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.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kando et al US 9,748,923 in view of Shimomura et al US2018/0294402 .
The above 35 U.S.C 102 rejection discusses the Kando et al reference.
Thus, Kando et al is shown to teach al the limitation of the claim with the exception of the plurality of first and second electrode fingers being in the range from about 150nm to about 1000 nm.
Shimomura et al states in paragraph [0021] that the piezoelectric substrate 10 is, for example, a lithium tantalate substrate or a lithium niobate substrate. The metal film 12 is, for example, an aluminum film or a copper film. A metal film such as a titanium film or a chrome film may be located between the aluminum film or the copper film and the piezoelectric substrate 10. The metal film 12 has a film thickness of, for example, 50 nm to 500 nm, the electrode finger 21 has a width in the X direction of 200 nm to 1500 nm, and the pitch of the electrode fingers 21 is, for example, from 500 nm to 2500 nm.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to replace the IDT of Kando et al with the IDT of Shimomura et al.
The motivation of the modification would the substitution of equivalent interdigital transducers.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kando et al US 9,748,923 in view of Jin CN 117478096 .
The above 35 U.S.C 102 rejection discusses the Kando et al reference.
Thus, Kando et al is shown to teach al the limitation of the claim with the exception ofthe Si has a resistivity of about 4 kΩ or more.
Jin states the resistivity of the common silicon substrate is low, by doping metal particles in the initial second part, the deep impurities of the metal particles can compensate the charge carriers in the substrate 100, which can reduce the background carrier concentration contributed by the shallow donor and the acceptor, so that the resistivity of the formed substrate is greater than or equal to 7 kiloohms per centimeter. The preparation technique of the substrate is simple, the technical coverage is wide and the resistance value is stable, the resistance value of the substrate is adjusted by adjusting the concentration and energy of the metal particles when injecting the particles, so the substrate is suitable for the application of different resistance values.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to replace the general high resistance silicon of Kando et al with the silicon as taught by Jin.
The motivation for this modification would have been substitution of equivalent high resistance silicon.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLY E GLENN whose telephone number is (571)272-1761. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM-5:00 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Andrea Lindgren Baltzell can be reached at 571-272-5918. 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.
February 20, 2026
/K.E.G/Examiner, Art Unit 2843
/ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2843