DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 7/31/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-4, 8, 11, 12, 14, and 19 have been amended. Claim 7 has been cancelled. Claims 20-22 have been added. Claims 1-6 and 8-22 remain pending. Applicant’s amendment has overcome all claim objections set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 5/1/2026 (“FAOM”), which are hereby withdrawn.
Response to Argument
Applicant’s argument, see pages 7-8 of the Remarks filed 7/31/2026 (“Remarks”), with respect to the rejection of the dependent claim 7 has been fully considered and found persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejections have been made, as set forth below, and the previously indicated allowability of claims 11-19 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 20-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor, or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Claims 20 and 22 recite “wherein at least one of the first piezoelectric layer and the second piezoelectric layer is from a 3m point group, and the other one of the first piezoelectric layer and the second piezoelectric layer is from a 6mm group” and also recite “wherein the first piezoelectric layer is a first LiNbO3 layer and the second piezoelectric layer is a second LiNbO3 layer.” It is unclear how can both layers be LiNbO3 and at the same time one of them selected from a 6mm group.
Claim 21 is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as dependent on the rejected claim.
Due to the 112(b) issues noted above, no meaningful prior art examination of claims 20-22 is currently possible and the examiner is unable to make a meaningful prior art rejection of these claims. Note that the lack of any prior art rejection should not be construed as an indication of allowable subject matter because the patentability determination of these claims cannot be made at this time due to the ambiguity in the claim language. When the 112(b) issues are resolved, the examiner will conduct prior art examination and may apply prior art rejections to these claims as appropriate.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-6 and 11-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0294415 (“Kadota”).
Kadota discloses in Figs. 14-15 and the corresponding description:
Claim 1
An acoustic resonator device (Fig. 14, ¶¶30-35, 101-123, elastic wave device 10) comprising:
a first piezoelectrical layer (11a) and a second piezoelectric layer (11b),
wherein a bottom surface of the first piezoelectric layer is attached to a top surface of the second piezoelectric layer (Fig. 14, ¶¶30-35, 101, both layers are stacked),
wherein the first piezoelectrical layer and the second piezoelectric layer have a same acoustic impedance, or the first piezoelectric layer and the second piezoelectric layer have acoustic impedances within a preset range of each other (¶¶30-35, 101, both layers are LiNbO3 and therefore have a same acoustic impedance, or acoustic impedances within a preset range of each other), and
wherein the first piezoelectrical layer and the second piezoelectric layer have opposite phase wave excitation for a given wave polarization (¶¶30-35, 101-102, Structures A, B, D, E include two piezoelectric layers placed with opposite faces upward, corresponding to a bond of -LN+ and +LN-, producing a 180° polarity reversal between the two layer resulting in opposite phase wave excitation for a given wave polarization. For example, Structure A includes two layers: Layer 1 (0°, 126°, ψ°) with a rotated Y-cut angle equal to (126°+90°)Y=216°Y=-144°Y and Layer 2 (0°, 306°, ψ°) with a rotated Y-cut angle equal to (306°+90°)Y=396°Y=36°Y (see rejection of claim 11 below for more detailed explanation of the conversion from Euler angles to rotated Y-cut angles), such an arrangement of piezoelectric layers results in opposite phase wave excitation for a given wave polarization);
wherein at least one of the first piezoelectric layer and the second piezoelectric layer is from a 3m point group (¶101, both layers are LiNbO3); and
a first electrode (Fig. 14, ¶101, top Al electrode 12) attached to a top surface of the first piezoelectrical layer (11A) and a second electrode (bottom Al electrode 12) attached to a bottom surface of the second piezoelectric layer (11b), wherein the first electrode and the second electrode are arranged to convert an electrical signal into an acoustic wave in the first piezoelectrical layer and the second piezoelectric layer (¶101-122).
Claim 2
wherein a ratio between the acoustic impedance of the first piezoelectrical layer and the acoustic impedance of the second piezoelectrical layer is in the preset range of 0.8 - 1.2 (¶101, when both layers are made of the same piezoelectric material and oriented as described, the ratio between their acoustic impedances is equal to 1).
Claim 3
wherein a thickness d1 of the first piezoelectrical layer and a thickness d2 of the second piezoelectric layer are in a range of 0.3λ-0.7λ, where λ is an acoustic wavelength at resonance (¶30, “The wavelength of the bulk waves when two piezoelectric substrates are stacked is 2x(total thickness of the two piezoelectric substrates),” which means each layer is approximately 0.5λ thick).
Claim 4
wherein the thickness d1 of the first piezoelectrical layer and the thickness d2 of the second piezoelectric layer are in a range of 100-1100 nm (¶101, each layer is 1000nm thick).
Claim 5
wherein the acoustic resonator device is configured to operate in a frequency range of 3 - 10 GHz (Fig. 15, ¶103, elastic wave device 10 operates in a frequency range of 3.3-9.8GHz).
Claim 6
wherein the acoustic resonator device is configured to operate at its second composite plate thickness resonance (Fig. 15, ¶103, operating at second harmonic, 3.3GHz).
Claim 11
wherein the first piezoelectrical layer is a first LiNbO3 layer and the second piezoelectric layer is a second LiNbO3 layer, wherein the first LiNbO3 layer and the second LiNbO3 layer have a rotated Y-cut in any of the ranges of 153º to 173º or -7º to -27º, and wherein the first LiNbO3 layer has a 180º rotated X-axis in relation to an X-axis of the second LiNbO3 layer (¶117, Structure E).
Kadota discloses a well-known convention of expressing rotated Y-cut angles in Euler angles, with an example of a 40° rotated Y-cut LiNbO3 expressed in Euler form (0°, -50°, 0°) (¶35). As disclosed in Kadota, the rotated “cut angle” α is traditionally defined as α=θ+90°, where θ is a Euler angle of the material. Applying this convention, Structure E includes two layers: Layer 1 (0°, 74°, 0°) with a rotated Y-cut angle equal to (74°+90°)Y=164°Y and Layer 2 (0°, 254°, 180°) with a rotated Y-cut angle equal to (254°+90°)Y=344°Y=-16°Y. Both values are within the respective ranges recited in the claim. Structure E also has the X-axis of the layers rotated by 180º in relation to each other because Layer 1 has ψ=0° and Layer 2 has ψ=180°.
Claim 12
wherein the first piezoelectrical layer is a first LiNbO3 layer having a first rotated Y-cut and the second piezoelectric layer is a second LiNbO3 layer having a second rotated Y-cut, or vice versa, wherein the first rotated Y-cut is rotated 180º around an X-axis of the LiNbO3 layer crystal in relation to the second rotated Y-cut, or vice versa (¶107-108, 116-117, Structure A, Structure B, Structure D or Structure E, each of these structures includes two LiNbO3 layers rotated 180º around an X-axis with respect to each other).
Claim 13
wherein the first LiNbO3 layer has a rotated Y-cut in a range of 26º to 46º and the second LiNbO3 layer has a rotated Y-cut in a range of -134º to -154º (¶¶101, 107, 108 Structure A or Structure B).
Structure A includes two layers: Layer 1 (0°, 126°, ψ°) with a rotated Y-cut angle equal to (126°+90°)Y=216°Y=-144°Y, corresponding to the recited “second layer” and Layer 2 (0°, 306°, ψ°) with a rotated Y-cut angle equal to (306°+90°)Y=396°Y=36°Y, corresponding to the recited “first layer.”
Structure B includes two layers: Layer 1 (0°, 126°, ψ°) with a rotated Y-cut angle equal to (126°+90°)Y=216°Y=-144°Y, corresponding to the recited “second layer” and Layer 2 (0°, 306°, ψ°+180°) with a rotated Y-cut angle equal to (306°+90°)Y=396°Y=36°Y, corresponding to the recited “first layer.”
Claim 14
wherein the first LiNbO3 layer has a rotated Y-cut in s range of 153º to 173º and the second LiNbO3 layer has a rotated Y-cut in a range of -7º to -27º (¶116, Structure D).
Structure D includes two layers: Layer 1 (0°, 74°, 0°) with a rotated Y-cut angle equal to (74°+90°)Y=164°Y and Layer 2 (0°, 254°, 0°) with a rotated Y-cut angle equal to (254°+90°)Y=344°Y=-16°Y. Both values are within the respective ranges recited in the claim.
Claim 15
wherein the first LiNbO3 layer has a 0º, 60º, 90º, 120º or 180º rotated X-axis in relation to the X-axis of the second LiNbO3 layer (¶¶101, 107, 108 Structure A or Structure B).
Structure A has a 0º rotated X-axis in relation to the X-axis of the second layer (ψ1°= ψ2°). Structure B has a 180º rotated X-axis in relation to the X-axis of the second layer (ψ1°+180° = ψ2°).
Claim 16
wherein the first LiNbO3 layer and the second LiNbO3 layer are single crystalline layers (¶¶14, 22, 102).
Claim 17
wherein the first LiNbO3 layer is attached to the second LiNbO3 layer, or vice versa, by bonding (¶102, this structure corresponds to a bond of -LN+ and +LN-).
Claim 18
wherein the second piezoelectric layer is acoustically coupled to a Bragg-mirror, wherein the Bragg-mirror comprises a plurality of alternating layers having different acoustic impedances (Fig. 14, ¶101, acoustic multilayer film 13).
Claim 19
wherein the plurality of alternating layers are arranged on, and acoustically coupled to a supporting substrate (Fig. 14, ¶101, five-layer acoustic multilayer film 13 is acoustically coupled to supporting substrate 14).
Claims 1-6 are additionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 114465594 (“Ou”), a machine translation of which is provided herewith.
Ou discloses in Figs. 3-5 and the corresponding description:
Claim 1
An acoustic resonator device (Fig. 3, Abstract, Example 1-3, sound wave resonator) comprising:
a first piezoelectrical layer (202) and a second piezoelectric layer (201),
wherein a bottom surface of the first piezoelectric layer is attached to a top surface of the second piezoelectric layer (Fig. 3),
wherein the first piezoelectrical layer and the second piezoelectric layer have a same acoustic impedance, or the first piezoelectric layer and the second piezoelectric layer have acoustic impedances within a preset range of each other (both layers are X-cut lithium niobate and therefore have a same acoustic impedance, or acoustic impedances within a preset range of each other), and
wherein the first piezoelectrical layer and the second piezoelectric layer have opposite phase wave excitation for a given wave polarization (Example 1-3, “by adjusting the bottom piezoelectric film 201 and the top piezoelectric film 202 between the in-plane rotation angle α, the piezoelectric vector e = [e34, e35] of the bottom piezoelectric film 201 is opposite to the piezoelectric vector e = [e34, e35] direction of the top piezoelectric film 202”, such an arrangement results in opposite phase wave excitation for a given wave polarization);
wherein at least one of the first piezoelectric layer and the second piezoelectric layer is from a 3m point group (both layers are X-cut lithium niobate); and
a first electrode (300) attached to a top surface of the first piezoelectrical layer and a second electrode (100) attached to a bottom surface of the second piezoelectric layer, wherein the first electrode and the second electrode are arranged to convert an electrical signal into an acoustic wave in the first piezoelectrical layer and the second piezoelectric layer (Abstract).
Claim 2
wherein a ratio between the acoustic impedance of the first piezoelectrical layer and the acoustic impedance of the second piezoelectrical layer is in the preset range of 0.8 - 1.2 (both layers are X-cut lithium niobate and therefore have a same acoustic impedance, the ratio between their acoustic impedances is equal to 1).
Claim 3
wherein a thickness d1 of the first piezoelectrical layer and a thickness d2 of the second piezoelectric layer are in a range of 0.3λ-0.7λ, where λ is an acoustic wavelength at resonance (¶¶47-48, 70, 74, Example 1-3 uses two 500 nm piezoelectric layers and operates at the double-frequency shear resonance, which means that the total 1000 nm piezoelectric layer is approximately one wavelength, making each layer approximately 0.5λ).
Claim 4
wherein the thickness d1 of the first piezoelectrical layer and the thickness d2 of the second piezoelectric layer are in a range of 100-1100 nm (Example 1-3, each layer is 500nm thick).
Claim 5
wherein the acoustic resonator device is configured to operate in a frequency range of 3 - 10 GHz (Fig. 5, ¶74, operating frequency range from 1-5GHz).
Claim 6
wherein the acoustic resonator device is configured to operate at its second composite plate thickness resonance (Fig. 5, ¶¶47, 74; The acoustic wave resonator produces a shear mode response of an extremely large electro-mechanical coupling coefficient (about 94 %) at a second frequency doubling (about 3500MHz)).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-6, 8, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0321101 (“Liu”), of record, in view of Kadota.
Liu discloses in Figs. 1, 3A, 5A, 9B, 10 and the corresponding description:
Claim 1
An acoustic resonator device (Fig. 1, ¶68, a bulk acoustic wave device 10) comprising:
a first piezoelectrical layer (Fig. 3A, 24) and a second piezoelectric layer (22), wherein a bottom surface of the first piezoelectric layer is attached to a top surface of the second piezoelectric layer, wherein the first piezoelectrical layer and the second piezoelectric layer have a same acoustic impedance (¶89), or the first piezoelectric layer and the second piezoelectric layer have acoustic impedances within a preset range of each other, and wherein the first piezoelectrical layer and the second piezoelectric layer have opposite phase wave excitation for a given wave polarization (Fig. 9B, ¶¶86, 110); and
a first electrode (28) attached to a top surface of the first piezoelectrical layer (24) and a second electrode (26) attached to a bottom surface of the second piezoelectric layer (22), wherein the first electrode and the second electrode are arranged to convert an electrical signal into an acoustic wave in the first piezoelectrical layer and the second piezoelectric layer (¶88).
Liu does not explicitly disclose (albeit, fairly suggest by teaching that layer 22 and/or layer 24 “can include any suitable piezoelectric material,” ¶89) wherein at least one of the first piezoelectrical layer and the second piezoelectric layer is from a 3m point group.
As set forth above, Kadota, in the same field of endeavor, discloses a similar acoustic wave resonator using two piezoelectric layers made of rotated Y-cut LiNbO3.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the resonator of Liu by using rotated Y-cut LiNbO3 piezoelectric material for the second piezoelectric layer for the benefit of improved device characteristics, including higher operating frequencies and impedance ratio, as taught by Kadota (¶¶18, 30). It would also have been obvious to substitute rotated Y-cut LiNbO3 disclosed in Kadota for aluminum nitride disclosed in Liu as a simple substitution of one known piezoelectric material for another to obtain predictable results. MPEP 2143.I.B.
Liu in view of Kadota discloses:
Claim 2
wherein a ratio between the acoustic impedance of the first piezoelectrical layer and the acoustic impedance of the second piezoelectrical layer is in the preset range of 0.8 - 1.2 (when both piezo layers include the same piezoelectric material, for example, LiNbO3 disclosed in Kadota, the ratio between the acoustic impedances is equal to 1; when one layer is LiNbO3 and another layer is AlN, the ratio between the acoustic impedances of the layers is approximately 1.1).
Claim 3
wherein a thickness d1 of the first piezoelectrical layer and a thickness d2 of the second piezoelectric layer are in a range of 0.3λ-0.7λ, where λ is an acoustic wavelength at resonance (Liu, Fig. 9b, ¶110, each layer is 0.5λ thick; Kadota, (¶30, “The wavelength of the bulk waves when two piezoelectric substrates are stacked is 2x(total thickness of the two piezoelectric substrates),” which means each layer is approximately 0.5λ thick).
Claim 4
wherein the thickness d1 of the first piezoelectrical layer and the thickness d2 of the second piezoelectric layer are in a range of 100-1100 nm (Liu, ¶70; Kadota, ¶101, each layer is 1000nm thick).
Claim 5
wherein the acoustic resonator device is configured to operate in a frequency range of 3 - 10 GHz (Liu, ¶69; Kadota, Fig. 15, ¶103, elastic wave device 10 operates in a frequency range of 3.3-9.8GHz).
Claim 6
wherein the acoustic resonator device is configured to operate at its second composite plate thickness resonance (Liu, Fig. 9b, ¶110, operating in a second overtone mode; Kadota, Fig. 15, ¶103, operating at second harmonic, 3.3GHz).
Claim 8
the first piezoelectrical layer is a compression negative C-axis AlScN layer (Liu, ¶90) and the second piezoelectric layer is a LiNbO3 layer having a rotated Y-cut in a range of -134º to -154º, or vice versa (Kadota, ¶¶101, 107, 108 Structure A or Structure B, see rejection of claim 13 above); or
the first piezoelectrical layer is a compression positive C-axis AlScN layer (Liu, ¶90) and the second piezoelectric layer is a LiNbO3 layer having a rotated Y-cut in the range of 26º to 46º, or vice versa (Kadota, ¶¶101, 107, 108 Structure A or Structure B, see rejection of claim 13 above).
Claim 10
wherein the AlScN layer (Liu, ¶¶86, 90, top layer) is grown on the LiNbO3 layer, and wherein the LiNbO3 layer is a single crystalline layer (Kadota, ¶¶14, 22, 102).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Kadota and further in view of Bogner et al., Impact of High Sc Content on Crystal Morphology and RF Performance of Sputtered Al1-xScxN SMR BAW, 2019 IEEE Int’l Ultrasonic Symp (IUS), pp. 706-9 (“Bogner”), of record.
Regarding Claim 9, Liu in view of Kadota discloses all the limitations except “where x>0.2.”
However, Bogner, in the same field of endeavor, discloses a BAW SMR using Al1-xScxN piezoelectric layer with Sc content up to 35%, that is, x>0.2 (pp. 706, 709).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the BAW resonator of Liu by increasing Sc concentration over 20% in its Al1-xScxN piezoelectric layer for the benefit of increasing piezoelectric properties and electromechanical coupling, as taught by Bogner (p. 709).
Conclusion
This Office Action is made Non-Final due to the withdrawal of the previously indicated allowability of claims 11-19.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTOR COLE, telephone number (571) 272-4686. The examiner can be reached Monday-Friday, 9AM-5PM ET.
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 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and 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.
/VICTOR COLE/
Examiner, Art Unit 2843
/ANDREA LINDGREN BALTZELL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights