www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`
`15/454,220
`
`03/09/2017
`
`Shigehiro YOShiuchi
`
`PIPMB-52210US2
`
`9836
`
`759°
`52°“
`PEARNE & GORDON LLP
`
`”’31ng
`
`1801 EAST 9TH STREET
`SUITE 1200
`
`CLEVELAND, OH 44114-3108
`
`SINGER DAVID L
`
`2856
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`12/31/2018
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`patdoeket@pearne.eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Off/09 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/454,220
`Examiner
`DAVID L SINGER
`
`Applicant(s)
`Yoshiuchi et al.
`Art Unit
`AIA Status
`2856
`No
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 03/09/2017.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)D This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)
`
`This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)[:] Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Expat/7e Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`5)
`Claim(s)
`
`7—26 is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) E is/are rejected.
`
`[:1 Claim(s) _ is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s)
`9
`* If any claims have been determined aflowabte. you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`10)[:] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 03/09/2017 is/are: a)[:] accepted or b). objected to by the Examiner.
`
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`12). Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a). All
`
`b)D Some”
`
`C)D None of the:
`
`1.. Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3:] Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) D Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20181208
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/454,220
`Art Unit: 2856
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`The present application is being examined under the pre-AlA first to invent provisions.
`
`In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to NA 35 U.S.C. 102 and
`
`103 (or as subject to pre-AlA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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.
`
`Priority
`
`Acknowledgment is made that this application is a continuation of parent application 14/347,867.
`
`Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
`
`The drawings are objected to because figure 8 contains non-English, non-standard
`
`words/characters.
`
`Drawings
`
`Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121 (d) are required in reply to the Office
`
`action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include
`
`all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being
`
`amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a
`
`drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet,
`
`and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the
`
`brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may
`
`be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the
`
`filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New
`
`Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). lfthe changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will
`
`be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the
`
`drawings will not be held in abeyance.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/454,220
`Art Unit: 2856
`
`Page 3
`
`Specification
`
`The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the
`
`presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of
`
`which Applicant may become aware in the specification.
`
`Claim Objections
`
`Claim(s) 10-11, 20-21, 24, and 26 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
`
`As to Claim(s) 10 & 20, Applicant references a “third layer” without an explicit “first layer” or
`
`“second layer”; however, as best understood, the “third layer” is shorthand for “third connection layer”, as
`
`the independent claims comprise a “first connection layer” & a “second connection layer” and the
`
`drawings support this interpretation. The Examiner therefore suggests using the full name of “third
`
`connection layer” for explicit antecedent basis of the numerical referencing.
`
`As to claims 24 and 26, “forth substrate” appears to be a typo of “fogrth substrate”.
`
`Dependent Claim(s) of objected to Claim(s) is/are likewise objected to.
`
`Appropriate correction is required.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 1 12
`
`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.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph:
`The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly
`claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
`
`MPEP 2173.02(l) states in part: “if the language of a claim, given its broadest reasonable
`interpretation, is such that a person of ordinary skill in the relevant art would read it with more
`than one reasonable interpretation, then a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C.
`112, second paragraph is appropriate”.
`
`Claim(s) 11, 15-16, 21, and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-
`
`AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim
`
`the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as
`
`the invention.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/454,220
`Art Unit: 2856
`
`Page 4
`
`Regarding claims 11 & 21, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation "the
`
`connection layer" in the claim. Furthermore, there appears to be three separate connection layers that
`
`could be interpreted as so referenced (“first connection layer”, “second connection layer”, “third layer”).
`
`Based on the disclosure (see especially fig. 8D), the third (connection) layer (see exemplary fig. 8D, third
`
`adhesive 13) is being referenced.
`
`Regarding claim(s) 15 & 23, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation "the weight
`
`parts" in the claim, as only a single instance of a “weight part” was introduced in independent claim 7/17.
`
`Forthe purpose of examination, the “weight parts” will be interpreted as a plurality of weight parts
`
`comprising the weight part of claim 7/17.
`
`Dependent claim(s) of rejected claim(s) is/are likewise rejected.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness
`
`rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described
`as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented
`and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the
`time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject
`matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was
`made.
`
`Claim(s) 7-8, 12-14, 17-18, 22, and 24-26 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as
`
`being unpatentable over Applicant cited Mutsuto* (JP 2007—033393 A; hereafter “Mutsuto”) in view
`
`of Applicant cited Ao* et al (JP 2003-28644A; hereafter “Ao”), Applicant cited Questad et al (US
`
`6084299 A; hereafter “Questad”), and in further view of newly cited Yamanaka et al (US
`
`20130241013; hereafter “Yamanaka”).
`
`*For the purpose of providing English citations, Applicant provided translation of JP 2007-033393
`will be referenced, and US 6658937 B2 will be used for a translation of JP 2003-28644A.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/454,220
`Art Unit: 2856
`
`Page 5
`
`Instant fig. 2 followed by Mutsuto fig. 1:
`
`FIG. 2
`
`
`iffy E
`.
`WWW.“ gig‘
`
`trial-urn,ants:trxx’ramwr:argue.wrarrxrmr:nutrmwyxxr.
`\\‘\\‘K\‘XK‘AVVAKVS‘K‘W‘AK‘AVA‘K“‘m‘x‘m‘fi‘m‘V
`
`
`
`
`ff,“
`
`‘
`
`l;
`
`
`'\
`
`‘z
`
`
`
`13;?
`
`.43
`
`823
`
`4b
`
`fro
`
`3}:
`
`Regarding independent claim 7, Mutsuto teaches an angular velocity sensor (fig. 1, angular
`
`velocity sensor apparatus 100) having support substrates (fig. 1, ceramic layers 11 with circuit board 30
`
`with pedestal 60 with angular velocity detecting element 20) comprising (The Examiner respectfully notes
`
`that Mutsuto teaches that a second substrate and that a third substrate having upper & lower adhesives
`
`are in the reverse order of the Applicant’s corresponding substrates as described in detail below):
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/454,220
`Art Unit: 2856
`
`Page 6
`
`a first substrate (fig. 1, ceramic layers 11) having an output terminal (not shown) ([0016] wiring
`
`formed in the inside of the through hole formed in the surface of each layer 11 and electrically connects to
`
`outside);
`
`a second substrate (fig. 1, circuit board 30) disposed (indirectly) on the first substrate (fig. 1,
`
`ceramic layers 11), having a circuit carrying out a signal processing ([0026]-[0029] processing the
`
`electrical signal);
`
`a third substrate (fig. 1, pedestal 60) disposed on the second substrate (fig. 1, circuit board 30);
`
`a fourth substrate (fig. 1, angular velocity detecting element 20) disposed (indirectly) on the third
`
`substrate (fig. 1, pedestal 60) ([0002]-[0003]; [0021] JP 2003-28644 A) having an electrode pad (not
`
`shown explicitly; see fig. 1, vibrating body 21) (not shown explicitly; see fig. 1, 21, vibrating body) ;
`
`a bonding wire (fig. 1, bonding wire 50) electrically connecting the electrode pad (not shown
`
`explicitly; see fig. 1, vibrating body 21) and the second substrate (fig. 1, circuit board 30);
`
`a first connection layer (fig. 1, adhesive 40) disposed directly under the third substrate (fig. 1,
`
`pedestal 60); and
`
`a second connection layer (fig. 1, adhesive 41) disposed directly above the third substrate (fig. 1,
`
`pedestal 60) and disposed indirectly under the fourth substrate (fig. 1, angular velocity detecting element
`
`20);
`
`wherein the first substrate (fig. 1, ceramic layers 11), the second substrate (fig. 1, circuit board
`
`30), the third substrate (fig. 1, pedestal 60) and the fourth substrate (fig. 1, angular velocity detecting
`
`element 20) are stacked in the order of first, third, second, & fourth; and
`
`where an elastic modulus of the first connection layer (fig. 1, adhesive 40) is small ([0018] "This
`
`base 60 is mounted and fixed via the adhesives 40 for structure support as a low elasticity member”;
`
`silent to elasticity of adhesive 41, and relatedly silent to what adhesive 40’s elasticity is small as
`
`compared to)
`
`It is unclear if Mutsuto explicitly teaches items: 1) that the circuit carries out at least one of a
`
`signal process selected from a synchronous detection process, a filter process or a correction process
`
`(see: [0026] processing the electrical signal; [0029] outputs an angular velocity signal); and 2) that the
`
`sensor element has a frame part, a beam part connected to the frame part, a weight part connected to the
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/454,220
`Art Unit: 2856
`
`Page 7
`
`beam part and an electrode pad disposed on the frame part ([0021] SOI board, vibrating body; [0022]
`
`beam structure body, movable comb-tooth structure supported by beam; [0023] detects by Coriolis force;
`
`[0024] electrode for detection provided by velocity detecting element 20). Mutsuto is silent to item 3)
`
`wherein an elastic modulus of the first connection layer is smaller than an elastic modulus of the second
`
`connection layer. Mutsuto does not teach item 4), that the order of the components is that the second
`
`substrate is disposed above the first substrate while the third substrate with adhesives is disposed above
`
`the second substrate.
`
`Regarding item 1), the Examiner took Official Notice in the Non-Final Rejection dated 02/17/2016
`
`in parent application 14/347,867 that combining a synchronous/filter/correction process with a circuit
`
`board is well known in the art. As the Applicant had not adequately traversed this assertion, this is
`
`considered admitted prior art in accordance with MPEP 2144.03 (Procedure C).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to
`
`combine the knowledge of one skilled in the art with Mutsuto’s circuit board by configuring Mutsuto’s
`
`circuit board to carry out a synchronous/filter/correction process thereby providing a more precise and
`
`accurate angular velocity output signal.
`
`Regarding item 2), Mutsuto teaches a sensor element like JP 2003-28644A ([0003], [0021]): A0
`
`teaches in fig. 2 an Angular velocity sensor (title) comprising: frame part (20), a beam part (34) connected
`
`to the frame part (20), a weight part (31) connected to the beam part (34), an electrode pad (41) disposed
`
`on the frame part (20), and a drive part (33) to cause a vibration in the weight part (31 ).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to
`
`combine Ao’s angular velocity sensor with Mutsuto's sensorthereby providing the expected result of
`
`having a sensor element to measure angular velocity, and further to eliminate error caused by
`
`undesirable acceleration acting on the sensor unit (Abstract of corresponding US 6658937).
`
`Regarding item 3), Questad teaches in figure 3a a first (lower) layer (fig. 3a, 68, second adhesive
`
`layer) and a second (upper) layer (fig. 3a, 62, first adhesive layer) wherein an elastic modulus of the first
`
`(lower) layer (fig. 3a, 68) is smaller than an elastic modulus of the second (upper) layer (fig. 3a, 62) (col.
`
`4, ll. 7-20 lower modulus of elasticity for lower adhesive to greater accommodate stress; col. 4, II. 28-35
`
`silicone adhesives are well-known).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/454,220
`Art Unit: 2856
`
`Page 8
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to
`
`combine Questad’s greater elastic modulus of an upper adhesive and lower elastic modulus of a lower
`
`adhesive with Mutsuto’s inertial force sensor having two adhesives (the lower adhesive already of a small
`
`elastic modulus, Mutsuto, [0018]) thereby providing greater accommodation of stress and therefore
`
`improving Mutsuto’s sensor’s precision and accuracy. The Examiner respectfully notes that it has been
`
`held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its
`
`suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice, In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125
`
`USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960); see also MPEP 2144.07. The Examiner additionally notes that it had been held
`
`that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or
`
`workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235
`
`(CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.05. In the present case, one having ordinary skill in the art could easily
`
`conceive of forming Mutsuto’s upper adhesive of a material having a higher modulus of elasticity than
`
`Mutsuto’s small modulus of elasticity lower adhesive (Mutsuto, [0018]) to adjust the characteristic
`
`frequency of the vibration transfer to improve the vibration isolation.
`
`FIG.1
`
`108
`
`H m
`
`WEE:W
`
`108
`
`Regarding item 4), Yamanaka teaches an angular velocity sensor (fig. 1) ([0018] “angular velocity
`
`sensor”) having support substrates comprising: a first substrate (fig. 1, packaging member 101) (fig. 1,
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/454,220
`Art Unit: 2856
`
`Page 9
`
`packaging member 101) having an output terminal (fig. 1, terminal 108); a second substrate (fig. 1,
`
`semiconductor chip 102) disposed on the first substrate (fig. 1, packaging member 101), having a circuit
`
`carrying out signal processing ([0037] “The integrated circuit formed in the semiconductor chip 102 has
`
`the function of processing the output signal of the detecting unit of the angular velocity sensor and finally
`
`outputs an angular velocity signal”); a third substrate (fig. 1, vibration proof part 103) disposed on the
`
`second substrate (fig. 1, semiconductor chip 102) ([0038] “A semiconductor chip 104 is mounted on the
`
`semiconductor chip 102, with a vibration-proof structure comprising a vibration-proof part 103a and a
`
`vibration-proof part 103b, interposed between them”; [0055] “prevents such accelerating vibration from
`
`being transmitted to the substrate 104”; [0013] “characteristic frequency of the structure can be lowered
`
`by adjusting the shape or the modulus of elasticity of the film”; [0054] “the characteristic frequency of the
`
`structure in the direction of the y-aXis is determined by adjusting the thicknesses of the vibration-proof
`
`parts”); a fourth substrate (fig. 1, semiconductor chip 104) ([0043] “semiconductor chip 104 on which the
`
`MEMS structure of the angular velocity sensor as the first embodiment of this invention is formed”; [0003]
`
`weight) disposed on the third substrate (fig. 1, vibration proof part 103), having an electrode pad (fig. 1,
`
`pad 110); a bonding wire (fig. 1, metal wire 106a) electrically connecting the electrode pad (fig. 1, pad
`
`110) and the second substrate (fig. 1, semiconductor chip 102); wherein the first substrate (fig. 1,
`
`packaging member 101), the second substrate (fig. 1, semiconductor chip 102), the third substrate (fig. 1,
`
`vibration proof part 103) and the fourth substrate (fig. 1, semiconductor chip 104) are stacked in this
`
`order.
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to
`
`switch the arrangement of Mutsuto’s vibration proof part (pedestal 60 with adhesives 40 & 41) with
`
`Mutsuto’s chip (circuit board 30)—as supported by Yamanaka—thereby providing vibration isolation
`
`between Mutsuto’s angular velocity detecting element (20) and Mutsuto’s chip (30) and thus increasing
`
`the precision of Mutsuto’s angular velocity detection (Yamanaka [0005]; [0014] sensor precision) as well
`
`as protecting Mutsuto’s circuit board from being detrimentally vibrated by Mutsuto’s angular velocity
`
`weight movement. The Examiner additionally notes that it has been held that rearranging parts of an
`
`invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950). In
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/454,220
`Art Unit: 2856
`
`Page 10
`
`the present case, only ordinary skill in the art is required to rearrange the layers of a sensor (see prior art
`
`of record showing the level of ordinary skill).
`
`Regarding independent claim 17, Mutsuto teaches an angular velocity sensor (fig. 1, angular
`
`velocity sensor apparatus 100) having support substrates (fig. 1, ceramic layers 11 with circuit board 30
`
`with pedestal 60 with angular velocity detecting element 20) comprising (The Examiner respectfully notes
`
`that Mutsuto teaches that a second substrate and that a third substrate having upper & lower adhesives
`
`are in the reverse order of the Applicant’s corresponding substrates as described in detail below):
`
`a first substrate (fig. 1, ceramic layers 11) having an output terminal (not shown) ([0016] wiring
`
`formed in the inside of the through hole formed in the surface of each layer 11 and electrically connects to
`
`outside);
`
`a second substrate (fig. 1, circuit board 30) disposed (indirectly) on the first substrate (fig. 1,
`
`ceramic layers 11), having a circuit carrying out a signal processing ([0026]-[0029] processing the
`
`electrical signal);
`
`a third substrate (fig. 1, pedestal 60) disposed on the second substrate (fig. 1, circuit board 30);
`
`a fourth substrate (fig. 1, angular velocity detecting element 20) disposed (indirectly) on the third
`
`substrate (fig. 1, pedestal 60) ([0002]-[0003]; [0021] JP 2003-28644 A) having an electrode pad (not
`
`shown explicitly; see fig. 1, vibrating body 21) (not shown explicitly; see fig. 1, 21, vibrating body) ;
`
`a bonding wire (fig. 1, bonding wire 50) electrically connecting the electrode pad (not shown
`
`explicitly; see fig. 1, vibrating body 21) and the second substrate (fig. 1, circuit board 30);
`
`a first connection layer (fig. 1, adhesive 40) disposed directly under the third substrate (fig. 1,
`
`pedestal 60); and
`
`a second connection layer (fig. 1, adhesive 41) disposed directly above the third substrate (fig. 1,
`
`pedestal 60) and disposed indirectly under the fourth substrate (fig. 1, angular velocity detecting element
`
`20);
`
`wherein the first substrate (fig. 1, ceramic layers 11), the second substrate (fig. 1, circuit board
`
`30), the third substrate (fig. 1, pedestal 60) and the fourth substrate (fig. 1, angular velocity detecting
`
`element 20) are stacked in the order of first, third, second, & fourth;
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/454,220
`Art Unit: 2856
`
`Page 11
`
`wherein the fourth substrate (fig. 1, angular velocity detecting element 20) is shown in fig. 1 to be
`
`thicker than the second substrate (fig. 1, circuit board 30), and the third substrate (fig. 1, pedestal 60) is
`
`the same size (not shown) as the second substrate (fig. 1, circuit board 30) ([0040] “in order to prevent
`
`the angular velocity sensor device from being enlarged in size, the pedestal 60 has the same size as the
`
`circuit chip 30”; the Examiner notes this implicitly suggests that the fourth substrate may be thicker than
`
`the third substrate); and
`
`wherein an elastic modulus of the first connection layer (fig. 1, adhesive 40) is small ([0018] "This
`
`base 60 is mounted and fixed via the adhesives 40 for structure support as a low elasticity member”;
`
`silent to elasticity of adhesive 41, and relatedly silent to what adhesive 40’s elasticity is small as
`
`compared to).
`
`It is unclear if Mutsuto explicitly teaches items: 1) that the circuit carries out at least one of a
`
`signal process selected from a synchronous detection process, a filter process or a correction process
`
`(see: [0026] processing the electrical signal; [0029] outputs an angular velocity signal); and 2) that the
`
`sensor element has a frame part, a beam part connected to the frame part, a weight part connected to the
`
`beam part and an electrode pad disposed on the frame part ([0021] SOI board, vibrating body; [0022]
`
`beam structure body, movable comb-tooth structure supported by beam; [0023] detects by Coriolis force;
`
`[0024] electrode for detection provided by velocity detecting element 20). Mutsuto is silent to item 3)
`
`wherein an elastic modulus of the first connection layer is smaller than an elastic modulus of the second
`
`connection layer. Mutsuto does not expressly state item 4) wherein the fourth substrate is thicker than the
`
`third substrate. Mutsuto does not teach item 5), that the order of the components is that the second
`
`substrate is disposed above the first substrate while the third substrate with adhesives is disposed above
`
`the second substrate.
`
`Regarding item 1), the Examiner took Official Notice in the Non-Final Rejection dated 02/17/2016
`
`in parent application 14/347,867 that combining a synchronous/filter/correction process with a circuit
`
`board is well known in the art. As the Applicant had not adequately traversed this assertion, this is
`
`considered admitted prior art in accordance with MPEP 2144.03 (Procedure C).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to
`
`combine the knowledge of one skilled in the art with Mutsuto’s circuit board by configuring Mutsuto’s
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/454,220
`Art Unit: 2856
`
`Page 12
`
`circuit board to carry out a synchronous/filter/correction process thereby providing a more precise and
`
`accurate angular velocity output signal.
`
`Regarding item 2), Mutsuto teaches a sensor element like JP 2003-28644A ([0003], [0021]): A0
`
`teaches in fig. 2 an Angular velocity sensor (title) comprising: frame part (20), a beam part (34) connected
`
`to the frame part (20), a weight part (31) connected to the beam part (34), an electrode pad (41) disposed
`
`on the frame part (20), and a drive part (33) to cause a vibration in the weight part (31 ).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to
`
`combine Ao’s angular velocity sensor with Mutsuto's sensorthereby providing the expected result of
`
`having a sensor element to measure angular velocity, and further to eliminate error caused by
`
`undesirable acceleration acting on the sensor unit (Abstract of corresponding US 6658937).
`
`Regarding item 3), Questad teaches in figure 3a a first (lower) layer (fig. 3a, 68, second adhesive
`
`layer) and a second (upper) layer (fig. 3a, 62, first adhesive layer) wherein an elastic modulus of the first
`
`(lower) layer (fig. 3a, 68) is smaller than an elastic modulus of the second (upper) layer (fig. 3a, 62) (col.
`
`4, ll. 7-20 lower modulus of elasticity for lower adhesive to greater accommodate stress; col. 4, II. 28-35
`
`silicone adhesives are well-known).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to
`
`combine Questad’s greater elastic modulus of an upper adhesive and lower elastic modulus of a lower
`
`adhesive with Mutsuto’s inertial force sensor having two adhesives (the lower adhesive already of a small
`
`elastic modulus, Mutsuto, [0018]) thereby providing greater accommodation of stress and therefore
`
`improving Mutsuto’s sensor’s precision and accuracy. The Examiner respectfully notes that it has been
`
`held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its
`
`suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice, In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125
`
`USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960); see also MPEP 2144.07. The Examiner additionally notes that it had been held
`
`that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or
`
`workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235
`
`(CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.05. In the present case, one having ordinary skill in the art could easily
`
`conceive of forming Mutsuto’s upper adhesive of a material having a higher modulus of elasticity than
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/454,220
`Art Unit: 2856
`
`Page 13
`
`Mutsuto’s small modulus of elasticity lower adhesive (Mutsuto, [0018]) to adjust the characteristic
`
`frequency of the vibration transfer to improve the vibration isolation.
`
`Regarding item 4), Mutsuto’s description ofthe relative size ofthe third substrate (60) and the
`
`second substrate (30) ([0040] reduced to “same size”) in combination with fig. 1 showing that the fourth
`
`substrate (20) is thicker than the second substrate (30) reasonably suggests to one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art that the fourth substrate may be thicker than the third substrate. See MPEP 2125, and In re Wright,
`
`569 F.2d 1124, 193 USPQ 332 (CCPA 1977). Likewise, the skilled artisan would know that the thickness
`
`of the third substrate affects the overall size of the sensor (Mutsuto, [0040]) and would reasonably want to
`
`provide a smaller sensor (see MPEP 2144(ll) and Dystar Textilfarben GmbH & Co. Deutschland KG V.
`
`C.H. Patrick, 464 F.3d 1356, 1368, 80 USPQ2d 1641, 1651 (Fed. Cir. 2006)).
`
`Furthermore, the specific claimed thickness comparison, absent any criticality, is only considered
`
`to be the “optimum” thickness arrangement that a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been
`
`able to determine using routine experimentation (see In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235
`
`(CCPA 1955)) based, among other things, on the desired vibration isolation, manufacturing costs, desired
`
`size reduction, etc. (see In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980)), and since neither
`
`non-obvious nor unexpected results, i.e. results which are different in kind and not in degree from the
`
`results of the prior art, will be obtained as long as the relative mass (not thickness) is used, as already
`
`suggested by Mutsuto ([0032]-[0033] “The pedestal 60 serves to increase the mass of the entire structure
`
`70 including the angular velocity detection element 20, the circuit substrate 30, and the pedestal 60, and
`
`is preferably heavier than the angular velocity detection element 20 and the circuit substrate 30 , The
`
`angular velocity detection element 20 and the circuit board 30 are combined. From such a viewpoint, the
`
`pedestal 60 preferably has a higher density than the angular velocity detection element 20 and the circuit
`
`board 30, and as described above”). Additionally, it has been held to be within the general skill of a
`
`worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter
`
`of obvious design choice, In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960); see also MPEP
`
`2144.07. Therefore, only ordinary skill in the art is required to select a material for the third substrate such
`
`that the density of the material is sufficient to offset a reduced thickness and therefore retain the desired
`
`difference in mass.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/454,220
`Art Unit: 2856
`
`Page 14
`
`Please note that the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed
`
`relative thickness nor any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is said to be based
`
`upon particular chosen dimensions or upon another variable recited in a claim, the Applicant must show
`
`that the chosen dimensions are critical. In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16