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 Objection
Claim 2 is objected because there is no antecedent basis for “the IPD filter”.
Claim 6 is objected because “a matching inductor” in line 4 has been recited in line 3. It is suggested that “a matching inductor” in line 3 should be changed to “a first matching inductor”, and “a matching inductor” in line 4 should be changed to “a second matching inductor”.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5,7 and 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Black et al. (US 20140035702) in view of Takamine (US 20190222200).
As to claim 1, Black et al.’s figure 7 shows a hybrid band-pass filter (figure 8), comprising: a first acoustic resonance unit (left 712s and 710s) coupled to and receiving an input signal (Vin) at an input terminal of the hybrid band-pass filter; a filter (middle 702) coupled at its input to an output of the first acoustic resonance unit and providing an intermediate signal at an output; a second acoustic resonance unit coupled (right 710s and 712s) at its input to the output of the filter and providing an output signal of the hybrid band-pass filter at an output terminal of the hybrid band-pass filter. Figure 7 fails to show that the shown elements are arranged on a matching substrate and in a polymer filled shell encapsulant. However, Takamine’s figure 5 shows filtering devices (12 and 13) are arranged on matching substrate 60 and in encapsulant 80. Furthermore, polymer filled encapsulant is well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to arranged Black et al.’s elements on a matching substrate and in a polymer filled encapsulant for the purpose protecting the elements and saving space.
As to claim 2, the modified Black et al.’s figure 7 shows that the first acoustic resonance unit is coupled with the input of the IPD filter through a first matching inductor (left middle 706), an output of the IPD filter being coupled with the second acoustic resonance unit through a second matching inductor (right middle 706), and the first acoustic resonance unit, the second acoustic resonance unit and the IPD filter unit are integrated on the matching substrate utilizing flip-chip weld points (flip-chip weld points is well known in the art. Integrating the devices on the substrate using flip-chip weld points is seen as an obvious design preference to ensure optimum performance).
As to claim 3, the modified Black et al.’s figure 7 shows that the first acoustic resonance unit comprises at least one series acoustic resonator and at least one parallel acoustic resonator.
As to claim 4, forming a substrate with Si, GaAs, glass, or sapphire, utilizing photoetching, etching, deposition or sputtering is well known in the art. It is seen as an obvious design preference to form the filter using a substrate of Si, GaAs, glass, or sapphire, utilizing photoetching, etching, deposition or sputtering in order to ensure optimum performance.
As to claim 5, the modified Black et al.’s figure 7 shows that the second acoustic resonance unit comprises at least one series acoustic resonator and at least one parallel acoustic resonator.
As to claim 7, the modified Black et al.’s figure 7 shows a signal port including the input terminal, the output terminal and at least one grounding terminal.
As to claim 9, the modified Black et al.’s figure 7 shows that the filter comprises an IPD filter.
As to claim 10, the modified Black et al.’s figure 7 shows that the series acoustic resonator or the parallel acoustic resonator each comprise two separate resonators, each separate resonator having a respective top electrode and respective bottom electrode, wherein the bottom electrodes are connected together (BAW resonator comprises top and bottom electrodes is well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use BAW resonators for Black et al.’s resonators for the purpose of a improving shock performance or decreasing piezoelectric coupling coefficient and Q factor.
As to claim 11, the modified Black et al.’s figure 7 shows that the series acoustic resonator or the parallel acoustic resonator each comprise two separate resonators, each separate resonator having a respective top electrode and respective bottom electrode, wherein the bottom electrodes are connected together.
As to claim 12, the modified Black et al.’s figure 7 shows that the filter comprises a high-pass filter (708 in 702), a low-pass filter (706 in 702), or a band-pass filter (702).
Claim(s) 1-5,7 and 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Toshio (JP 20100288179) in view of Black et al. (US 20140035702) and Takamine (US 20190222200).
As to claim 1, Toshio’s figure 14 shows a filter circuit. The figure fails to show first and second acoustic resonance units coupled to the input and outputs of the filter circuit. However, Black et al.’s figure 7 shows a modification of figure 6. Figure 7 shows first and second resonance units coupled to the inputs and outputs of the filter circuit shown figure 6 to improve the filter bandwidth (figure 8). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to add first and second acoustic resonance units coupled to input and output terminals of Toshio’s filter figure 14 for the purpose of improving the filter bandwidth. Toshio’s figure 14 fails to show that the shown elements are arranged on a matching substrate and in a polymer filled shell encapsulant. However, Takamine’s figure 5 shows filtering devices (12 and 13) are arranged on matching substrate 60 and in encapsulant 80. Furthermore, polymer filled encapsulant is well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to arranged the modified Toshio’s elements on a matching substrate and in a polymer filled encapsulant for the purpose protecting the elements and saving space.
As to claim 2, the modified Toshio’s figure shows that the first acoustic resonance unit is coupled with the input of the IPD filter (7a, C9 and 7b) through a first matching inductor (L8), an output of the IPD filter being coupled with the second acoustic resonance unit through a second matching inductor (L9), and the first acoustic resonance unit, the second acoustic resonance unit and the IPD filter unit are integrated on the matching substrate utilizing flip-chip weld points (flip-chip weld points is well known in the art. Integrating the devices on the substrate using flip-chip weld points is seen as an obvious design preference to ensure optimum performance).
As to claim 3, the modified Toshio’s figure 14 shows that the first acoustic resonance unit comprises at least one series acoustic resonator and at least one parallel acoustic resonator.
As to claim 4, forming a substrate with Si, GaAs, glass, or sapphire, utilizing photoetching, etching, deposition or sputtering is well known in the art. It is seen as an obvious design preference to form the filter using a substrate of Si, GaAs, glass, or sapphire, utilizing photoetching, etching, deposition or sputtering in order to ensure optimum performance.
As to claim 5, the modified Toshio’s figure 14 shows that the second acoustic resonance unit comprises at least one series acoustic resonator and at least one parallel acoustic resonator.
As to claim 7, the modified Toshio’s figure 14 shows a signal port including the input terminal, the output terminal and at least one grounding terminal.
As to claim 9, the modified Toshio’s figure 14 shows that the filter comprises an IPD filter.
As to claim 10, the modified Toshio’s figure 14 shows that the series acoustic resonator or the parallel acoustic resonator each comprise two separate resonators, each separate resonator having a respective top electrode and respective bottom electrode, wherein the bottom electrodes are connected together (BAW resonator comprises top and bottom electrodes is well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use BAW resonators for Black et al.’s resonators for the purpose of improving shock performance or decreasing piezoelectric coupling coefficient and Q factor.
As to claim 11, the modified Toshio’s figure 14 shows that the series acoustic resonator or the parallel acoustic resonator each comprise two separate resonators, each separate resonator having a respective top electrode and respective bottom electrode, wherein the bottom electrodes are connected together.
As to claim 12, the modified Toshio’s figure 14 shows that the filter comprises a high-pass filter, a low-pass filter, or a band-pass filter (parallel or series LC resonance is well known in the art. Selecting the parallel or series LC resonance circuit for 7a and 7b is seen as an obvious design preference to achieve desired bandwidth. It is known that parallel LC resonance comprises high pass filter coupled in parallel with lowpass filter).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANH-QUAN TRA whose telephone number is (571)272-1755. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri from 8:00 A.M.-5:00 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, Andrea Lindgren Baltzell can be reached on 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 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.
/QUAN TRA/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2843
Prosecution Insights