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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 5/13/2026 has been entered.
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.
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) 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Suguro et al. (US 20070284759) in view of Mizuno et al. (US 20050076498).
Regarding claim 16, Suguro discloses that an IC chip mounting method for mounting an IC chip on an antenna, the IC chip mounting method comprising:
sucking, by a nozzle 31, an IC chip 20 at a first position (Fig. 1);
acquiring an image of the IC chip sucked by the nozzle, while the IC chip is continuously moved from the first position to a second position where the IC chip is mounted; and determining a correction value for mounting the IC chip at a reference position of the antenna, based on the image acquired by the acquiring (Fig. 2, para. 0159).
Suguro fail to specify that determining a correction amount for correcting an angle of the nozzle around an axis of the nozzle, as a correction value for mounting the IC chip at a reference position of the antenna, based on the image acquired by the acquiring.
However, Mizuno suggests that determining a correction amount for correcting an angle of the nozzle around an axis of the nozzle, as a correction value for mounting the IC chip at a reference position of the antenna, based on the image acquired by the acquiring (para. 0012, 0022, & 0026).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of applicant(s) claimed invention was made to provide Suguro with determining a correction amount for correcting an angle of the nozzle around an axis of the nozzle, as a correction value for mounting the IC chip at a reference position of the antenna, based on the image acquired by the acquiring as taught by Mizuno in order to enhance high reliability and excellent accuracy (para. 0040) and also, the claim would have been obvious because a particular know technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art.
Regarding claim 17, Suguro & Mizuno disclose that an IC chip mounting method for mounting an IC chip on an antenna, the IC chip mounting method comprising: sucking an IC chip at a first position (Suguro, pickup at 11a , Fig. 5)) ;
moving the IC chip from the first position to a second position (bonding location at 22) where the IC chip is mounted on the antenna (Suguro, Fig. 1-3);
acquiring an image of the IC chip 20 while the IC chip is moved from the first position to the second position (Suguro, Fig 5); and
determining, based on the image of the IC chip, a first correction amount for correcting an angle of the IC chip around an axis extending through the IC chip (Mizuno, Fig. 4A-4B), a second correction amount for correcting a position of the IC chip in a conveying direction of the antenna, and a third correction amount for correcting the position of the IC chip in a width direction (Suguro para. 0159 in view of Mizuno’s para. para. 0012, 0022, & 0026).
Reclaim 18, Suguro & Mizuno disclose that conveying an antenna continuous body on which a plurality of the antennas are continuously formed in a conveying direction, on a conveying surface, and rotating a nozzle attachment to which the nozzle is attached, such that the nozzle moves, on a surface orthogonal to the conveying surface, along a circular track, and a moving direction of the nozzle at the second position matches the conveying direction of the antenna continuous body (Suguro’s Fig. 3-5 in view of Mizuno’s Fig. 4A-4B).
Reclaim 19, Suguro & Mizuno disclose that conveying the antenna in a conveying direction; and moving the nozzle in a width direction orthogonal to the conveying direction, wherein the moving the nozzle in the width direction is performed by moving a nozzle attachment to which the nozzle is attached in the width direction (Suguro’s Fig. 3-5 in view of Mizuno’s Fig. 4A-4B).
Reclaim 20, Suguro & Mizuno disclose that placing the IC chip at a reference position of the antenna, when the IC chip is located at the second position, wherein the placing the IC chip at the reference position of the antenna is performed by releasing the IC chip toward the reference position of the antenna (Suguro’s Fig. 3-5 in view of Mizuno’s Fig. 4A-4B).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-15 are allowed over the prior art.
Reasons for Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
After further search and consideration, it is determined that the prior art neither anticipated nor renders obvious the claimed subject matter of the instant application as a whole either taken alone or in combination.
The prior art does not teach or render not obvious “- - a processor configured to determine correction amounts for the IC chip sucked by the nozzle, based on the image acquired by the image acquisition unit, the correction amounts including: a first correction amount for correcting an angle of the nozzle around the axis, a second correction amount for correcting a position of the IC chip in a conveying direction of the antenna, and a third correction amount for correcting the position of the IC chip in a width direction, wherein the first rotating unit is configured to rotate the nozzle around the axis based on the first correction amount, wherein the second rotating unit is configured to rotate the nozzle attachment, with an angular velocity adjusted based on the second correction amount, and wherein the moving machine is configured to move the nozzle in the width direction orthogonal to the conveying direction of the antenna, based on the third correction amount.” with combination of other claim limitations in claim 1.
Also, the prior art does not teach or render not obvious “- - determining correction amounts for the IC chip sucked by the nozzle, based on the acquired image, the correction amounts including: a first correction amount for correcting an angle of the nozzle around an axis, a second correction amount for correcting a position of the IC chip in a conveying direction of the antenna, and a third correction amount for correcting the position of the IC chip in a width direction orthogonal to the conveying direction, rotating the nozzle around the axis based on the first correction amount; rotating the nozzle attachment, with an angular velocity adjusted based on the second correction amount; moving the nozzle in the width direction based on the third correction amount; and placing the IC chip sucked by the nozzle, at the reference position of the antenna, when the nozzle is located at the second position.” with combination of other claim limitations in claim 9
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SU C KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-5972. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 to 5:00.
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, Dale Page can be reached at 571-270-7877. 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.
/SU C KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights