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 .
1. This communication in response to application filed 11/27/2024
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted 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
3. 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.
Claim(s) 21, 23-27, 30, 34-35 and 37-38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhao et al. (Pub.No.: 2022/0078540 A1).
Regarding claim 21. Zhao teaches a MEMS transducer (reads on in-ear device containing transducer section 110 manufactured using MEMS process technology, see [0023-0025] and [0025]. Also, Figs. 1A-1D), comprising:
a carrier (reads on frame 112 provides the carrier/support structure for piezoelectric actuators, see [0025], [0029] and [0032], in addition to Figs. 1B-1D);
at least one piezoelectric element arranged on the carrier (reads on piezoelectric actuators 114 couple to and supported by frame 112, see [0025], [0029-0030], in addition to Figs. 1B-1D) and deflectable in a direction of a stroke axis (reads on each actuator has a fixed end 190 and a free end 192. Free end 192 is placed relative to fixed end 190 toward front-volume section120, see [0030-0031] and Fig.1D), the at least one piezoelectric element having at least one piezoelectric layer (actuators 114 are formed from piezoelectric material, including AIN or AIScN, see [0033-0034]) and at least one carrier layer (the actuator includes a support structure having silicon-oxide layers 811, 812 and silicon layer supporting the metal and piezoelectric layers, see [0064-0065] and [0072], in addition to Figs. 8A-8G), wherein the at least one piezoelectric layer is configured to convert electrical signals and deflections of the at least one piezoelectric element from one into the other (note that Zhao expressly teaches physical displacement of the piezoelectric material in response to an applied electric filed. Conversion of mechanical deflection into an electrical signal is inherent in the disclosed piezoelectric material through the reciprocal piezoelectric effect, see [0033-0035]),
wherein the carrier layer includes at least one metal layer (note that the support/carrier structure includes metal layers 820, 822 and 824 associated with the piezoelectric layers, see [0065] and Fig. 8B) and at least one oxide layer (note that the support/carrier structure includes first and second silicon-oxide layers 811 and 812, see [0064-0065], [0072] and Figs. 8A-8G).
Regarding claim 23, Zhao teaches wherein the at least one metal layer is an aluminum layer, and/or the at least one oxide layer is a silicon oxide layer (reads on aluminum conductive traces/pads and silicon-layers 811 and 812, see [0032] and [0064-0065]).
Regarding claim 24, Zhao teaches wherein the at least one metal layer comprises multiple metal layers and the at least one oxide layer comprises multiple oxide layers, the metal and oxide layers being arranged alternatingly one above the other and/or stacked (reads on multiple metal layers 820, 822, 824 and multiple oxide layers 811, 812 arranged vertically in a stacked structure, see [0064-0065] and Figs. 8A-8B).
Regarding claim 25, Zhao teaches wherein the at least one piezoelectric layer is arranged on the at least one oxide layer (reads on Piezoelectric layer 821 formed over silicon-oxide layer 812, with metal layer 820 interposed, see [0064-0065] and Fig. 8 B).
Regarding claim 26, Zhao teaches wherein the at least one piezoelectric layer is arranged below or above the carrier layer in the direction of the stroke axis (reads on Piezoelectric layers arranged above the carrier/support layer in the actuator’s deflection direction, see [0030-0030], [0065] and [0072] and Figs. 1D and 8G).
Regarding claim 27, Zhao teaches wherein: the at least one piezoelectric layer is arranged on only one side of the carrier layer in the direction of the stroke axis (3) (reads on Piezoelectric layers formed on only one side of the support/carrier structure, leaving its opposite side free of reads on piezoelectric material, see [0064-0065], [0072] and Figs. 8A-8G); and/or
the at least one piezoelectric layer is on one side of the carrier layer in the direction of the stroke axis and an opposite side of the carrier layer is free of the at least one piezoelectric layer.
Regarding claim 30, Zhao teaches wherein: the at least one piezoelectric layer includes between two and six piezoelectric layers (reads on Bimorph actuator with two piezoelectric layers and inverting electrode layers. The first and second Piezoelectric layers 821, 823 and metal electrode layers 820, 822 and 824, see [0034] and [0065]. Also, see Fig. 8B); and/or
the at least one piezoelectric element includes at least one electrode layer; and/or
the at least one piezoelectric element includes at least one insulation layer.
Regarding claim 34, Zhao teaches the use of a carrier layer for a MEMS transducer, wherein the MEMS transducer and/or the carrier layer is designed according to claim 21 (Zhao teaches the use of the metal-and-oxide carrier/support layer in a MEMS piezoelectric transducer, see [0064-0072] and Figs. 8A-8G).
Independent claim 35 that recites “a method for producing a MEMS transducer that includes a carrier and at least one piezoelectric element deflectable in a direction of a stroke axis, the at least one piezoelectric element having at least two piezoelectric layers and at least one carrier layer, wherein the at least two piezoelectric layers are configured to convert electrical signals and deflections of the at least one piezoelectric element from one into the other, the method comprising: forming the at least one carrier layer as at least one metal layer and at least one oxide layer; and arranging the at least one piezoelectric element on the carrier” substantially carries the same transducer limitations addressed above with respect to independent claim 21 and the multiple- piezoelectric-layer limitation addressed with respect to dependent claim 30. Note that Zhao further teaches fabricating the layered MEMS structure and arranging the piezoelectric actuator on the carrier/frame (see [0028], [0065-0072], Figs. 8A-8G and Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 37, Zhao teaches forming the at least two piezoelectric layers on the at least one carrier layer using at least one semiconductor production method (reads on piezoelectric layers formed using semiconductor-production methods, including lithography, deposition, patterning and etching, see [0023], [0028] and [0062-0068]).
Regarding claim 38, Zhao teaches depositing the at least two piezoelectric layers on the at least one oxide layer of the carrier layer (reads on piezoelectric layers deposited over silicon-oxide layer 812 pf the carrier structure, with electrode metal layer 820 interposed, see [0064-0065] and Fig. 8B).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
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) 22, 28 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (Pub.No.: 2022/0078540 A1).
Claim 22 recites “wherein the at least one piezoelectric layer is made of scandium-aluminum nitride, wherein a scandium content is between 30% and 70%”.
Note that Zhao teaches forming the piezoelectric layer from scandium-doped aluminum nitride and recognizes that the characteristics of deposited AIScN affect actuator sensitivity, resonance frequency, and mechanical reliability (see [0033] and [0058]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to optimize the scandium concentration, including selecting a concentration between 30% and 70%, to obtain the desired piezoelectric and mechanical performance.
Claim 28 recites “wherein the at least one piezoelectric layer is arranged, in the direction of the stroke axis, only exclusively between the carrier and the carrier layer”.
Note that Zhao teaches piezoelectric actuator coupled to carrier/frame 112 and having piezoelectric layers supported by a carrier/support layer (see [0025], [0029-0034] and [0064-0072]. Also, see Figs. 1C-1D and 8A-8G)
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to position the piezoelectric layer between the carrier and carrier layer to mechanically support the piezoelectric layer while permitting cantilever deflection.
Claim 29 recites “wherein the at least one piezoelectric element has a length in a longitudinal direction thereof from the carrier to a free end of the at least one piezoelectric element, the length ranging between 0.5 mm and 2 mm”.
Zhao teaches that actuator length affects package size and resonance frequency (see [0037]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a length between 0.5 mm and 2mm to fit the transducer within an in-ear device and obtain the desired resonance response.
Claim(s) 31 and 40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (Pub.No.: 2022/0078540 A1) and further in view of Huffman et al. (Pub.No.: 2012/0270352 A1).
Claim 31 recites “a coupling element that couples the at least one piezoelectric element to a diaphragm”.
Zhao does not specifically teach the limitation as recited in claim 31, however Huffman teaches mechanically coupling a piezoelectric MEMS cantilever to compliant membrane 130, whereby deflection of the cantilever deflects the membrane (see [0036], [0038-0044] and [0058]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Zhao’s piezoelectric element with this coupling arrangement to increase volumetric displacement and acoustic output, as taught by Huffman.
Claim 40 recites “removing at least one region of the at least one piezoelectric element after the at least two piezoelectric layers and/or the carrier layer (6) have/has been formed”.
Zhao does not specifically teach the limitation as recited in claim 40, however Huffman teaches depositing piezoelectric transducing material and subsequently patterning and etching the material so that selected regions are retained and other regions are removed (see [0061] and [0067]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply this conventional patterning step to Zhao’s deposited piezoelectric layers to define the piezoelectric element.
Claim(s) 32 and 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (Pub.No.: 2022/0078540 A1) in view of Huffman et al. (Pub.No.: 2012/0270352 A1) and further in view of Senger et al. (Pub.No.: 2025/0011157 A1).
claim 32 recites “wherein the at least one piezoelectric element and the coupling element are coupled together by at least one spring element, wherein the at least one spring element is arranged between the carrier layer and the coupling element in a longitudinal direction of the at least one piezoelectric element”.
Neither Zhao nor Huffman specifically teach the limitations as recited in claim 32. However, Senger teaches piezoelectric layer 7 arranged on spring structure 11, which mechanically transmits deflection to movable plate 30 (see [0079] and [0081]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use this spring coupling in the Zhao-Huffman device to provide compliant mechanical transmission between the piezoelectric element and membrane coupling element.
Regarding claim 33, the combination of Zhao, Huffman and Senger teaches wherein the spring element is formed by the carrier layer and/or by a polymer (Senger teaches that Polysilicon carrier layer 29 forms spring structure 11 and carrier layer 28, see [0081]).
Claim(s) 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (Pub.No.: 2022/0078540 A1) in view of Huffman et al. (Pub.No.: 2012/0270352 A1) and further in view of Tsai et al. (Pub.No.: 2016/0090300 A1).
Claim 36 recites “wherein the at least one oxide layer is at least one silicon oxide layer, further comprising machining the at least one silicon oxide layer via chemical mechanical polishing”.
Neither Zhao nor Huffman specifically teach the limitations as recited in claim 36. For example, Zhao teaches the method of claim 35 and carrier structure containing silicon-oxide layers (as discussed in [0065] and [0070]), but it does not expressly teach chemical-mechanical polishing of the silicon-dioxide layer before forming the electrode and piezoelectric layer thereon (see [0041])
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Tsai’s CMP process to Zhao’s silicon-oxide layer to provide a planar surface for forming the overlying piezoelectric layers.
Claim(s) 39 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (Pub.No.: 2022/0078540 A1) in view of Huffman et al. (Pub.No.: 2012/0270352 A1) and further in view of Luo et al. (Pub.No.: 2023/0269507 A1)
Claim 39 recites “forming the at least two piezoelectric layers on the carrier layer and/or forming the carrier layer using a chemical vapor deposition”.
Neither Zhao nor Huffman specifically teach the limitations as recited in claim 36. For example, Zhao teaches the method of claim 35, including forming piezoelectric layers on a carrier structure, but does not expressly teach using chemical-vapor disposition. However, Luo teaches forming a piezoelectric active layer by chemical-vapor disposition (see [0079]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Luo’s CVD process to form Zhao’s piezoelectric layers to obtain good piezoelectric crystal quality, as taught by Luo.
Conclusion
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Rasha S. AL-Aubaidi whose telephone number is (571) 272-7481. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:30 am to 5:30 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Ahmad Matar, can be reached on (571) 272-7488.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/RASHA S AL AUBAIDI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2693
Prosecution Insights