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 § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Independent claims 1, 11, & 19 are amended to include language requiring “at least one contact pad is attached directly to at least one of the BOX layer and the substrate,” “the at least one contact pad is in an opening that extends at least through the piezoelectric layer and is attached directly to at least one of the electrically isolating layer and the substrate,” or “the at least one contact pad is in an opening that extends at least through the piezoelectric layer and is attached directly to at least one of the BOX layer and the substrate.” Each claim features such an amendment in addition to the limitation of “an electrically isolating layer between the at least one contact pad and the surface of the substrate.” The specification provides in Figs. 5B & 8A-C the descriptions of the invention with embodiments featuring “an electrically isolating layer between the at least one contact pad and the surface of the substrate,” however none of these embodiments meet the limitations specifying direct contact between the contact pad and the substrate, the electrically isolating layer, or the BOX layer. All embodiments featuring the electrically isolating layer maintain a separation between the contact pad (582, 584 in Fig. 5B) and the BOX layer, the electrically isolating layer, and the substrate through the IDT layer (580). The specification further does not provide language that supports the requirement of being attached directly to the BOX layer, the electrically isolating layer, or the substrate, with or without the presence of the electrically isolating layer, merely noting that the contact pads are formed on the IDT, which may be directly contact with the electrically isolating layers ([0075] and Fig. 5B) or the BOX layer (Fig. 5A). As such, the combination of limitations in claims 1, 11, & 19 lack written description in the application.
Claims 2-10, 12-18, & 20 are rejected as being dependent upon claim claims 1, 11, & 19, respectively.
For examination purposes, claims 1, 11, & 19 will be interpreted as not featuring the amendments of 07/29/2026.
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) 1-5, 8, 10-12, & 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Iwamoto (US PGPub 20100107388).
As per claim 1:
Iwamoto discloses in Fig. 4A-B:
A bulk acoustic resonator (lamb wave device, [0064], wherein lamb waves are a type of bulk wave) comprising:
a substrate (mother substrate 301B) having a surface (top);
a piezoelectric layer (1, labeled in related Fig. 2A) attached to the surface of the substrate via a bonding oxide (BOX) layer (adhesive layer 30A, formed of SiO2, [0049]) over the surface of the substrate;
a conductor pattern ([0036]) including an interdigital transducer (IDT) (60) that has interleaved fingers on a surface of the piezoelectric layer (as seen in Fig. 4B);
at least one contact pad (bump pad 61B) disposed at a selected location over the surface of the substrate and that is electrically connected to the IDT (through electrode pattern 50, through hole electrodes 91 and wiring electrode 61A); and
an electrically isolating layer (supporting layer 302B, [0050]) between the at least one contact pad and the surface of the substrate,
wherein at least a portion of the piezoelectric layer is absent between the at least one contact pad and the surface of the substrate (areas of through hole electrodes 91, as seen in Fig. 4A).
As per claims 2 & 13:
Iwamoto discloses in Fig. 4A-B:
at least a portion of the BOX layer is absent between the at least one contact pad and the surface of the substrate (areas of through hole electrodes 91, as seen in Fig. 4A).
As per claims 3 & 14:
Iwamoto discloses in Fig. 4A-B:
the piezoelectric layer includes a portion forming a diaphragm that is over a cavity (depletion layer 80) of the bulk acoustic resonator, and the interleaved fingers of the IDT are on the diaphragm (as seen in Fig. 4B).
As per claims 4 & 15:
Iwamoto discloses in Fig. 4A-B:
the at least one contact pad is configured to provide an electrical connection between the IDT and a contact bump to be attached to the at least one contact pad ([0067]).
As per claim 5:
Iwamoto discloses in Fig. 4A-B:
the portion of the piezoelectric layer that is absent between the at least one contact pad and the surface of the substrate provides a lower thermal resistance between the contact bump and the substrate (by replacing a piezoelectric substrate with an electrode).
As per claim 8:
Iwamoto discloses in Fig. 4A-B:
At least one thermal via (through hole electrode 91) is formed where the portion of the piezoelectric layer is absent between the at least one contact pad and the surface of the substrate, the at least one thermal via extending from the at least one contact pad to the electrically isolating layer.
As per claim 10:
Iwamoto discloses in Fig. 4A-B:
the BOX layer comprises at least one of silicon dioxide or aluminum oxide ([0049]).
As per claim 11:
Iwamoto discloses in Fig. 4A-B:
A bulk acoustic resonator (lamb wave device, [0064], wherein lamb waves are a type of bulk wave) comprising:
a substrate (mother substrate 301B) having a surface (top);
a piezoelectric layer (1, labeled in related Fig. 2A) attached to the surface of the substrate via a bonding oxide (BOX) layer (adhesive layer 30A, formed of SiO2, [0049]) over the surface of the substrate;
a conductor pattern ([0036]) including an interdigital transducer (IDT) (60) that has interleaved fingers on a surface of the piezoelectric layer (as seen in Fig. 4B);
at least one contact pad (bump pad 61B) disposed at a selected location over the surface of the substrate and that is electrically connected to the IDT (through electrode pattern 50, through hole electrodes 91 and wiring electrode 61A); and
an electrically isolating layer (supporting layer 302B, [0050]) between the at least one contact pad and the surface of the substrate, and
at least one thermal via (through hole electrode 91) that extends from the at least one contact pad towards the substrate and through at least a portion of the piezoelectric layer.
As per claim 12:
Iwamoto discloses in Fig. 4A-B:
wherein at least a portion of the piezoelectric layer is absent between the at least one contact pad and the surface of the substrate (areas of through hole electrodes 91, as seen in Fig. 4A), and the at least one thermal via extends from the at least one contact pad to the electrically isolating layer through the portion of the piezoelectric layer that is absent between the at least one contact pad and the surface of the substrate (as seen in Fig. 4A).
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) 5 (in an alternative interpretation)-7 & 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwamoto (US PGPub 20100107388)
As per claim 5 (in an alternative interpretation):
Iwamoto et al. discloses the use of Aluminum for electrodes ([0036, 0049]).
Iwamoto et al. does not disclose:
the portion of the piezoelectric layer that is absent between the at least one contact pad and the surface of the substrate provides a lower thermal resistance between the contact bump and the substrate.
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the electrodes (including through hole electrodes 91) of Iwamoto et al. of aluminum, as a known material in the art for forming electrodes, as disclosed by Iwamoto ([0036, 0049]).
As a consequence of the combination, the portion of the piezoelectric layer that is absent between the at least one contact pad and the surface of the substrate provides a lower thermal resistance between the contact bump and the substrate (aluminum having a higher conductivity than cited piezoelectric materials [0048]).
As per claims 6 & 16:
Iwamoto et al. discloses the use of Aluminum for electrodes ([0036, 0049]).
Iwamoto et al. does not disclose:
the at least one contact pad comprises a metal layer attached to a surface of the conductor pattern.
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the contact pad of Iwamoto et al. of aluminum, as a known material in the art for forming electrodes, as disclosed by Iwamoto ([0036, 0049]).
As a consequence of the combination, the at least one contact pad comprises a metal layer attached to a surface of the conductor pattern.
As per claims 7 & 17:
Iwamoto et al. discloses the use of Aluminum for electrodes ([0036, 0049]) and the interleaved fingers are two sets of fingers and the IDT further comprises a pair of busbars with the two sets of fingers extending therefrom (as seen in Fig. 4B), and the at least one contact pad is electrically connected to the busbars (through electrode pattern 50, through hole electrodes 91 and wiring electrode 61A).
Iwamoto et al. does not disclose:
a metal layer of the at least one contact pad is electrically connected to the busbars.
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to form the contact pad of Iwamoto et al. of aluminum, as a known material in the art for forming electrodes, as disclosed by Iwamoto ([0036, 0049]).
As a consequence of the combination, the combination discloses a metal layer of the at least one contact pad is electrically connected to the busbars.
Claim(s) 9 & 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwamoto (US PGPub 20100107388) in view of the 2019 publication of Plessky et al.
As per claims 9 & 18:
Iwamoto et al. discloses the IDT is configured such that a radio frequency signal applied to the IDT excites a lamb wave acoustic mode in the piezoelectric layer ([0064]).
Iwamoto et al. does not disclose:
the IDT is configured such that a radio frequency signal applied to the IDT excites a primary shear acoustic mode in the piezoelectric layer, the primary shear acoustic mode being a bulk shear mode where acoustic energy propagates in a direction predominantly orthogonal to the surface of the piezoelectric layer and transverse to a direction of an electric field created by the interleaved fingers of the IDT that is predominantly lateral to the surface of the piezoelectric layer.
Plessky et al. discloses a lamb wave resonator wherein an IDT is configured such that a radio frequency signal applied to the IDT excites a primary shear acoustic mode in a piezoelectric layer (col. 1 paragraph 2, page 1), the primary shear acoustic mode being a bulk shear mode where acoustic energy propagates in a direction predominantly orthogonal to the surface of the piezoelectric layer and transverse to a direction of an electric field created by the interleaved fingers of the IDT that is predominantly lateral to the surface of the piezoelectric layer (Fig. 1 and last paragraph of col. 2, page 1).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the primary shear acoustic mode of Plessky et al. to provide the benefit of low-loss, wideband RF filters in the 3-6 GHz range, as taught by Plessky et al. (abstract)
As a consequence of the combination, the IDT is configured such that a radio frequency signal applied to the IDT excites a primary shear acoustic mode in the piezoelectric layer, the primary shear acoustic mode being a bulk shear mode where acoustic energy propagates in a direction predominantly orthogonal to the surface of the piezoelectric layer and transverse to a direction of an electric field created by the interleaved fingers of the IDT that is predominantly lateral to the surface of the piezoelectric layer.
Claim(s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Iwamoto (US PGPub 20100107388) in view of Onda et al. (US PGPub 20130271238)
As per claim 19:
Iwamoto discloses in Fig. 4A-B:
A bulk acoustic resonator (lamb wave device, [0064], wherein lamb waves are a type of bulk wave) comprising:
a substrate (mother substrate 301B) having a surface (top);
a piezoelectric layer (1, labeled in related Fig. 2A) attached to the surface of the substrate via a bonding oxide (BOX) layer (adhesive layer 30A, formed of SiO2, [0049]) over the surface of the substrate;
a conductor pattern ([0036]) including an interdigital transducer (IDT) (60) that has interleaved fingers on a surface of the piezoelectric layer (as seen in Fig. 4B);
at least one contact pad (bump pad 61B) disposed at a selected location over the surface of the substrate and that is electrically connected to the IDT (through electrode pattern 50, through hole electrodes 91 and wiring electrode 61A); and
an electrically isolating layer (supporting layer 302B, [0050]) between the at least one contact pad and the surface of the substrate, and
at least one thermal via (through hole electrode 91) that extends from the at least one contact pad towards the substrate and through at least a portion of the piezoelectric layer.
Iwamoto et al. does not disclose a filter device comprising a plurality of bulk acoustic resonators, at least one of the plurality of bulk acoustic resonators comprising the bulk acoustic resonator as per Iwamoto et al. above.
Onda et al. discloses in Figs. 2 & 4:
A filter device comprising a plurality of bulk acoustic resonators ([0098]) comprising at least one lamb wave resonator (abstract).
At the time of filing, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the lamb wave resonator of Iwamoto et al. as at least one of a resonator of a filter device comprising a plurality of bulk acoustic wave filters as a specific example of a resonator able to be used for the generic resonators of Onda et al., and able to provide the same function as is well understood in the art.
As per claim 20:
Iwamoto discloses in Fig. 4A-B:
wherein for the at least one of the plurality of bulk acoustic resonators, at least a portion of the piezoelectric layer is absent between the at least one contact pad and the surface of the substrate (areas of through hole electrodes 91, as seen in Fig. 4A), and the at least one thermal via extends from the at least one contact pad to the electrically isolating layer through the portion of the piezoelectric layer that is absent between the at least one contact pad and the surface of the substrate (as seen in Fig. 4A).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The amendments of independent claims 1, 11, & 19 would overcome the prior art references, however they raise further 112 issues due to a lack of written description, and as such are rejected as above. The applicant has asserted that no new matter has been added, but the arguments have provided no support in the application of the combination of limitations in amended claims 1, 11, & 19.
For examination purposes, the independent claims must be examined without the disputed amendments, and as such the previous rejections are maintained.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMUEL S OUTTEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7123. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30AM-6:00PM.
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) 272-1988. 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.
/Samuel S Outten/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights