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 Objections
Claims 7 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 7 recites the limitation “the group consisting of … and at least one selected from the group …” should read “a group consisting of … and at least one selected from a group …”.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “the group consisting of …” should read “a group consisting of …”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-7, 9, and 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Oliver et al. (US 2005/0225211).
Regarding claim 1, Oliver teaches a resin composition being a precursor of an acoustic matching layer for an ultrasound transducer element included in an ultrasound transducer element unit having an array transducer element including a piezoelectric body and an electrode (paras. 0015 and 0017; The transducer element 12 is a piezoelectric, capacitive membrane or other now known or later developed structure for transducing between acoustic and electrical energies. The transducer element 12 corresponds to a single element within a multi-element array or is a slab of material for later dicing to form individual elements of an array. The acoustic matching layers 16, 18 and 20 are positioned adjacent to the transducer element 12, such as being stacked on top of the transducer element 12. The acoustic impedance matching layers 16, 18 and 20 are formed from the same or different materials. For example each of the acoustic matching layers 16, 18 and 20 include a same resin, but different filler materials. Alternatively, different resins are used for one or more of the matching layers 16, 18 and 20 or a same filler material is used for more than one of the matching layers 16, 18 and 20.),
wherein the resin composition includes resin and inorganic material particles (paras. 0018-19; One of the matching layers, such as the intermediate matching layer 18, includes a hafnium filler, such as hafnia, represented at 22. The matching layer 18 includes a resin. In one embodiment, the resin is an epoxy.),
while satisfying 2.3 ≤ Z/√ρ ≤ 3.4 (paras. 0020-0021; Hafnia powder is non-hazardous, inert, refractory, dense (9.8 g/cm.sup.3). The particle size is selected to provide a desired thickness of the matching layer 18 throughout a range of densities in the matching layer with a strip acoustic impedance of 3 to 8 MRayls. Particle size affects composite density by limiting the maximum practical loading and therefore the maximum density and impedance of the composite. The examiner notes that the density of the material effects the impedance of the matching layer, therefore a material with density of 9.8 would result in impedance of 8 MRayls which satisfies 2.3 ≤ 8/√9.8 ≤ 3.4.),
where Z denotes an acoustic impedance of the acoustic matching layer, whereas ρ denotes a density of the inorganic material particles (paras. 0020-0021; Hafnia powder is non-hazardous, inert, refractory, dense (9.8 g/cm.sup.3). The particle size is selected to provide a desired thickness of the matching layer 18 throughout a range of densities in the matching layer with a strip acoustic impedance of 3 to 8 MRayls.).
Regarding claim 2, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 1, wherein the inorganic material particles are ceramics particles (para. 0020; the hafnium filler 22 is a hafnium compound, such as hafnia, another hafnium oxide, hafnium carbide, hafnium nitride, hafnium phosphide, or other now known or later developed hafnium compounds. The examiner notes that the inorganic material particles can be ceramic particles such as hafnium oxide, hafnium carbide, hafnium nitride, or hafnium phosphide).
Regarding claim 3, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 1, wherein Z is in a range of 3.0 MRayl to 15 MRayl, inclusive (para. 0021; The particle size is selected to provide a desired thickness of the matching layer 18 throughout a range of densities in the matching layer with a strip acoustic impedance of 3 to 8 MRayls.).
Regarding claim 4, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 2, wherein a particle diameter distribution of an average particle diameter of the ceramics particles is a unimodal distribution (para. 0021; Hafnia particles of less than 7 microns in a maximum dimension are provided, but greater or lesser sizes may be used. The particle size is selected to provide a desired thickness of the matching layer 18 throughout a range of densities in the matching layer with a strip acoustic impedance of 3 to 8 MRayls. Particle size affects composite density by limiting the maximum practical loading and therefore the maximum density and impedance of the composite. By seeking to formulate composites with filler loadings near the practical maximum, materials are provided that do not tend to settle, or develop other unwanted gradients in constituent concentrations and therefore density. For example, hafnia particles of less than one micron are used for lower loadings (.about.20% V/V) or densities and associated acoustic impedances, and larger particle sizes, such as greater than 5 microns, are provided for higher loadings (.about.40% V/V) and densities, and thereby their associated acoustic impedances. Using particles less than one micron may allow for an acoustic impedance of about 4 MRayl or less.).
Regarding claim 5, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 2, wherein a content amount of the ceramics particles in the resin composition is in a range of 20% by volume to 40% by volume, inclusive (para. 0022; For example, hafnia filler 22 is 10 to 40 percent by volume of the matching layer 18 or matching layer mix. As another example, the hafnia filler 22 is 15 to 25 percent by volume of the matching layer 18 or matching mix. As yet a further example, the hafnia filler 22 is about 20 percent by volume of the matching layer 18 or matching layer mix.).
Regarding claim 6, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 2, wherein an average particle diameter of the ceramics particles is in a range of 0.3 μm to 2 μm, inclusive (para. 0021; For example, hafnia particles of less than one micron are used for lower loadings (.about.20% V/V) or densities and associated acoustic impedances).
Regarding claim 7, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 2, wherein the ceramics particles contain a substance comprising at least one selected from the group consisting of Mg, Ca, Ba, B, Al, Y, Hf, Ce, Ti, W, and Si and at least one selected from the group consisting of O, C, N, and S (para. 0020; The hafnium filler 22 is a hafnium compound, such as hafnia, another hafnium oxide, hafnium carbide, hafnium nitride, hafnium phosphide, or other now known or later developed hafnium compounds. The examiner notes HfO3 is used as the inorganic material particles.).
Regarding claim 9, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 1, wherein the resin is epoxy resin (para. 0019; The matching layer 18 includes a resin. In one embodiment, the resin is an epoxy.).
Regarding claim 13, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 1, resin composition according to claim 1, wherein the inorganic material particles are metal particles (paras. 0020 and 0025; a method of manufacturing an ultrasound transducer with acoustic matching layer(s) using a resin and hafnia filler or hafnium compound. The examiner notes that the inorganic material particle are metal particles of hafnia Hf)
satisfying 2.3 ≤ Z/√ρ ≤ 2.9 (paras. 0020-0021; Hafnia powder is non-hazardous, inert, refractory, dense (9.8 g/cm.sup.3). The particle size is selected to provide a desired thickness of the matching layer 18 throughout a range of densities in the matching layer with a strip acoustic impedance of 3 to 8 MRayls. Particle size affects composite density by limiting the maximum practical loading and therefore the maximum density and impedance of the composite. The examiner notes that the density of the material effects the impedance of the matching layer, therefore a material with density of 9.8 would result in impedance of 8 MRayls which satisfies 2.3 ≤ 8/√9.8 ≤ 3.4.),
where Z denotes an acoustic impedance of the acoustic matching layer, whereas ρ denotes a density of the metal particles (paras. 0020-0021; Hafnia powder is non-hazardous, inert, refractory, dense (9.8 g/cm.sup.3). The particle size is selected to provide a desired thickness of the matching layer 18 throughout a range of densities in the matching layer with a strip acoustic impedance of 3 to 8 MRayls.).
Regarding claim 14, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 13, wherein a particle diameter distribution of an average particle diameter of the metal particles is a unimodal distribution (para. 0021; Hafnia particles of less than 7 microns in a maximum dimension are provided, but greater or lesser sizes may be used. The particle size is selected to provide a desired thickness of the matching layer 18 throughout a range of densities in the matching layer with a strip acoustic impedance of 3 to 8 MRayls. Particle size affects composite density by limiting the maximum practical loading and therefore the maximum density and impedance of the composite. By seeking to formulate composites with filler loadings near the practical maximum, materials are provided that do not tend to settle, or develop other unwanted gradients in constituent concentrations and therefore density. For example, hafnia particles of less than one micron are used for lower loadings (.about.20% V/V) or densities and associated acoustic impedances, and larger particle sizes, such as greater than 5 microns, are provided for higher loadings (.about.40% V/V) and densities, and thereby their associated acoustic impedances. Using particles less than one micron may allow for an acoustic impedance of about 4 MRayl or less.).
Regarding claim 15, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 13, wherein a content amount of the metal particles in the resin composition is in a range of 20% by volume to 40% by volume, inclusive (para. 0022; For example, hafnia filler 22 is 10 to 40 percent by volume of the matching layer 18 or matching layer mix. As another example, the hafnia filler 22 is 15 to 25 percent by volume of the matching layer 18 or matching mix. As yet a further example, the hafnia filler 22 is about 20 percent by volume of the matching layer 18 or matching layer mix.).
Regarding claim 16, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 13, wherein an average particle diameter of the metal particles is in a range of 1.0 μm to 4 μm, inclusive (para. 0021; Hafnia particles of less than 7 microns in a maximum dimension are provided, but greater or lesser sizes may be used.).
Regarding claim 17, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 13, wherein the metal particles contain a substance comprising at least one selected from the group consisting of Au, Ag, Pt, Cu, Cr, Zr, Zn, Ta, Ti, Mg, Ni, Ca, Ba, Al, Y, Hf, Ce, Mo, W, Si, Pd, Ir, Sn, Fe, Pb, Pd, and Nd (paras. 0020 and 0025; a method of manufacturing an ultrasound transducer with acoustic matching layer(s) using a resin and hafnia filler or hafnium compound. The examiner notes that the inorganic material particle are metal particles of hafnia Hf).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 8, 11, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oliver et al. (US 2005/0225211) in the view of Chaggares et al. (US 2007/00205697).
Regarding claim 8, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 2, however, fails to explicitly teach wherein the ceramics particles include, in an amount of 5% by volume or less, particles of which particles diameters are in a range of 2.0 μm to 0.005 μm, inclusive.
Chaggares, in the same field of endeavor, disclose ceramics particles include, in an amount of 5% by volume or less, particles of which particles diameters are in a range of 2.0 μm to 0.005 μm, inclusive (paras. 0072-0073; the second light particles comprise micron-sized or nano-sized particles selected from the group consisting of silicon carbite particles and alumina particles or a mixture thereof. About 5.5% of the composite material by volume comprises a plurality of nano-sized light particles.).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled in the art before the invention was made to modify the amount of fine sized particles of Oliver with the amount of nanoparticles of Chaggares to provide resin composition comprising 5% by volume or less, particles of which particles diameters are in a range of 2.0 μm to 0.005 μm because mixture of nano-particles with larger particles allows for high density loaded powders with both high volumetric fractions of the loading powder and excellent control over settling. Settling is controlled by adjusting the amount of nano-particles to control the viscosity and thixotropic index of the resulting paste. In addition, using an amount of nano-particles would prevent large areas of epoxy between large particles as disclosed within Chaggares in para. 0088.
Regarding claim 11, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 2, however, fails to explicitly teach wherein the ceramics particles are realized with oxide aluminum.
Chaggares, in the same field of endeavor, disclose the ceramics particles are realized with oxide aluminum (para. 0072; the second light particles comprise micron-sized or nano-sized particles selected from the group consisting of silicon carbite particles and alumina particles or a mixture thereof. The examiner notes that the ceramic particle consist of alumina (aluminum oxide).).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled in the art before the invention was made to modify the type of ceramic particles of Oliver with the alumina particles of Chaggares to provide ceramics particles realized with oxide aluminum because it will solve problems of wetting, viscosity, and thixotropic index to achieve a given acoustic impedance as disclosed within Chaggares in para. 0091.
Regarding claim 18, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 13, however, fails to explicitly teach wherein the metal particles include, in an amount of 5% by volume or less, particles of which particles diameters are in a range of 2.0 μm to 0.005 μm, inclusive.
Chaggares, in the same field of endeavor, disclose metal particles include, in an amount of 5% by volume or less, particles of which particles diameters are in a range of 2.0 μm to 0.005 μm, inclusive (paras. 0072-0073; For example, the first heavy particles can comprise micron-sized or nano-sized particles selected from the group consisting of tungsten particles and lead zirconate titrate particles or a mixture thereof, about 5.5% of the composite material by volume comprises a plurality of nano-sized heavy particles.).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled in the art before the invention was made to modify the amount of fine sized particles of Oliver with the amount of nanoparticles of Chaggares to provide resin composition comprising 5% by volume or less, particles of which particles diameters are in a range of 2.0 μm to 0.005 μm because mixture of nano-particles with larger particles allows for high density loaded powders with both high volumetric fractions of the loading powder and excellent control over settling. Settling is controlled by adjusting the amount of nano-particles to control the viscosity and thixotropic index of the resulting paste. In addition, using an amount of nano-particles would prevent large areas of epoxy between large particles as disclosed within Chaggares in para. 0088.
Regarding claim 19, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 13, however, fails to explicitly teach wherein the metal particles are realized with one selected from between copper and tungsten.
Chaggares, in the same field of endeavor, disclose the metal particles are realized with one selected from between copper and tungsten (para. 0072; For example, the first heavy particles can comprise micron-sized or nano-sized particles selected from the group consisting of tungsten particles and lead zirconate titrate particles or a mixture thereof. The examiner notes that the metal particles consist of tungsten).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled in the art before the invention was made to modify the type of metal particles of Oliver with the tungsten particles of Chaggares to provide metal particles realized with tungsten because it will enhance the bandwidth and maintain excellent sensitivity as disclosed within Chaggares in para. 0056.
Claim(s) 10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oliver et al. (US 2005/0225211) in the view of Hamada et al. (US 2022/0125404).
Regarding claim 10, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 9, however, fails to explicitly teach wherein thermosetting resin is used as a curing agent for the epoxy resin.
Hamada, in the same field of endeavor, disclose wherein thermosetting resin is used as a curing agent for the epoxy resin (paras. 0078-0079; One known as a curing agent for an epoxy resin can be used as the curing agent without particular limitation. Examples of the curing agent include an aliphatic amine, an aromatic amine, a dicyandiamide, a dihydrazide compound, an acid anhydride, and a phenol resin.).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled in the art before the invention was made to modify the curing of the epoxy resin of Oliver with the curing agent of Hamada to provide thermosetting resin as a curing agent for the epoxy resin because it will increase the crosslink density and further reducing the variation in the acoustic characteristics of the obtained layer material as disclosed within Hamada in para. 0079.
Regarding claim 12, Oliver teaches the resin composition according to claim 2, however fails to explicitly teach wherein the ceramics particles are realized with tungsten carbide.
Hamada, in the same field of endeavor, disclose the inorganic particles are realized with tungsten carbide (table 1; WC: Uniform particle tungsten carbide powder (particle diameter: 9 μm, specific gravity: 15.6, manufactured by A.L.M.T. Corp.).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary skilled in the art before the invention was made to modify the curing of the epoxy resin of Oliver with the curing agent of Hamada to provide thermosetting resin as a curing agent for the epoxy resin because it effectively increase an acoustic impedance of an acoustic matching sheet obtained by suppressing a decrease in acoustic velocity.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZAINAB M ALDARRAJI whose telephone number is (571)272-8726. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday7AM-5PM 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, Carey Michael can be reached at (571) 270-7235. 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.
/ZAINAB MOHAMMED ALDARRAJI/ Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Prosecution Insights