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 .
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang (U.S. Publication No. 20100255623) in view of Yu et al. (“Design and measurement of a piezoresistive ultrasonic sensor based on MEMS”, published in 2013, see attached publication) and Gainey et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6313519).
Regarding claim 1, Huang teaches an ultrasound transducer (Paragraphs 3-5) comprising: a printed circuit board (PCB) (Paragraphs 6-7); a transducer array comprising: a substrate (Fig.1, 120); an array of elements (Fig.1, 110) supported by the substrate (Fig.1, 120).
Huang is silent about the elements are Piezo resistive elements.
Yu teaches the elements are Piezo resistive elements (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to replace Huang’s capacitive element with Yu’s piezoresistive element because piezoresistive ultrasonic sensor has small size, high sensitivity, high yield and an easily realized detection circuit as taught by Yu.
The combination of Huang and Yu is silent about at least one connector footing supported by the substrate; electrically conductive lines connected to the elements; and an array of connectors electrically connected to the printed circuit board and to the electrically conductive lines, wherein the at least one connector footing supports the array of connectors.
Gainey teaches at least one connector footing (Fig.4, 38) supported by the substrate (Fig.4, 32); electrically conductive lines (Fig.4, 36) connected to the elements (Fig.4, 30); and an array of connectors (Fig.4, 36c) electrically connected to the printed circuit board (Fig.4 and column 1, lines 13-24, lead fingers 34 are on a printed circuit board) and to the electrically conductive lines (Fig.4, 36), wherein the at least one connector footing (Fig.4, 38) supports the array of connectors (Fig.4, 36c).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate Gainey’s support means 38 into Huang’s transducer package because the length of the bond wires can be doubled, and the lead fingers can be commensurately further from the die, while avoiding the problems associated with long bond wires as taught by Gainey.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, Gainey further teaches wherein the array of connectors comprise electrical contact pads (Fig.4, 36c).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey is silent about wherein the at least one connector footing is at least partially received within a recess formed in the substrate.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to make the at least one connector footing at least partially received within a recess formed in the substrate, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, Gainey further teaches wherein the at least one connector footing (Fig.4, 38) extends along an outer edge of the substrate (Fig.4, 32).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey is silent about wherein the array of Piezo resistive elements has an upper surface and wherein the at least one connector footing has a top footing surface coplanar with the upper surface.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to make the at least one connector footing has a top footing surface coplanar with the upper surface of the array of Piezo resistive elements, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, Gainey further teaches wherein the connector footing (Fig.4, 38) comprises a frame (Figs. 3-4 and Column 5, lines 1-32).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, Yu further teaches wherein the substrate is formed from a Piezo resistive material (Page 6, “4. Fabrication process”).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 5 as outlined above, Yu further teaches wherein the array appears in resistive elements are integrally formed as part of a single unitary body with the substrate (Page 6, “4. Fabrication process”).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey is silent about wherein the at least one connector footing is formed from a material selected from a group of materials consisting of: glass reinforced epoxy, Borosilicate glass, Alumina nitride, Alumina, Boron Nitride, lead zirconate titanate (PZT) and lead magnesium niobate-lead titanate (PMN-PT).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to make the at least one connector footing from a material selected from a group of materials consisting of: glass reinforced epoxy, Borosilicate glass, Alumina nitride, Alumina, Boron Nitride, lead zirconate titanate (PZT) and lead magnesium niobate-lead titanate (PMN-PT), since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey is silent about wherein the at least one connector footing has a stiffness of at least 25 GPa.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to make the at least one connector footing has a stiffness of at least 25 GPa, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, Yu further teaches wherein the substrate is etched to form the array of Piezo resistive elements (Page 6, “4. Fabrication process”).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey is silent about wherein the array of Piezo resistive elements has a density of at least 5 elements per mm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to make the array of Piezo resistive elements has a density of at least 5 elements per mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey is silent about wherein the connector footing and the piezo-resistive elements are formed from a same material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to make the connector footing and the piezo-resistive elements formed from a same material, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, Yu further teaches wherein the substrate is formed from a Piezo resistive material (Page 6, “4. Fabrication process”).
Gainey further teaches wherein the connector footing is formed from an electrically insulative material (Column 2, lines 60-63).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 1 as outlined above, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey is silent about wherein the connector footing has a thermal conductivity of at least 750 W/mk.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to make the connector footing has a thermal conductivity of at least 750 W/mk, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 16, the claim is commensurate in scope with the above claim 1, and is rejected for the same reasons as set forth above.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 16 as outlined above, Yu further teaches wherein the forming of the array of piezo- resistive elements on the substrate comprises removing material from the substrate (Page 6, “4. Fabrication process”).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 17 as outlined above, Yu further teaches wherein the material is removed from the substrate by etching (Page 6, “4. Fabrication process”).
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 16 as outlined above, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey is silent about wherein forming the at least one connector footing on the substrate comprises: forming a recess in the substrate; and positioning the at least one connector footing at least partially within the recess.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to form a recess in the substrate; and positioning the at least one connector footing at least partially within the recess, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to apply a known technique to a known device (method, or product) ready for improvement to yield predictable results is obvious. KSR International Co. v Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Huang, Yu and Gainey teaches all the features of claim 16 as outlined above, Huang further teaches overlaying an electrically conductive sheet on top of the array of elements and selectively removing portions of the electrically conductive sheet (Paragraphs 64-65).
Huang is silent about the elements are Piezo resistive elements.
Yu teaches the elements are Piezo resistive elements (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to replace Huang’s capacitive element with Yu’s piezoresistive element because piezoresistive ultrasonic sensor has small size, high sensitivity, high yield and an easily realized detection circuit as taught by Yu.
The combination of Huang and Yu is silent about the at least one connector footing.
Gainey teaches at least one connector footing (Fig.4, 38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate Gainey’s support means 38 into Huang’s transducer package because the length of the bond wires can be doubled, and the lead fingers can be commensurately further from the die, while avoiding the problems associated with long bond wires as taught by Gainey.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XIN Y ZHONG whose telephone number is (571)272-3798. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 a.m. - 6 p.m..
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, Kristina Deherrera can be reached at 303-297-4237. 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.
/XIN Y ZHONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights