DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicants election with traverse of the invention of Group II, Claims 10 through 14, in the reply filed on November 7, 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that (I) the common technical features of the claims do make a contribution over the cited prior art in the previous office action, and (II) there is a safe harbor exception under 37 C.F.R. 1.475(b).
This is not found persuasive for at least the following reasons. In regards to the merits of Zhang as cited in the previous office action, the examiner is in agreement with the applicants remarks to the extent that Claim 1 was amended as part of their submission. More importantly, Claim 1 was narrowed to the extent that the common technical features [between each of Claims 1, 10 and 15] should be reevaluated.
In taking a side-by-side comparison of each of these claims, the limitations emphasized (in italics) are common technical features between all three claims.
Claim 1: A method for depositing a viscous medium, the method comprising:
obtaining information regarding both a surface topography of a first surface of a component and a surface topography of a local surface of a workpiece onto which said component is to be mounted;
determining, based on said information, respective heights of a plurality of deposits of the viscous medium that are to be formed on at least one of said first surface and said local surface, such that said plurality of deposits forms a connection between said component and said workpiece upon placing said component on the workpiece; and
forming the plurality of deposits of the viscous medium on at least one of said first surface and said local surface, by applying at least one droplet of the viscous medium using non-contact dispensing.
Claim 10: A system for depositing a viscous medium, said system comprising:
a non-contact dispensing device arranged for applying droplets of the viscous medium onto a first surface of a component to be mounted on a workpiece or a local surface of said workpiece onto which said component is to be mounted; and
a control unit adapted to:
obtain information regarding both a surface topography of said first surface and a surface topography of said local surface of said workpiece;
determine, based on said information, respective heights of a plurality of deposits of the viscous medium that are to be formed on at least one of said first surface and said local surface, such that said plurality of deposits forms a connection between said component and said workpiece upon placing said component on the workpiece; and
cause the non-contact dispensing device to form each of the plurality of deposits of the viscous medium by applying at least one droplet of the viscous medium using non-contact dispensing.
Claim 15: A storage medium comprising instructions which when carried out by a control unit of a system for depositing a viscous medium, causes the control unit of the system to:
obtain information regarding both a surface topography of at least one of a first surface of a component and a surface topography of a local surface of a workpiece onto which said component is to be mounted;
determine, based on said information, respective heights of a plurality of deposits of the viscous medium that are to be deposited on at least one of said first surface and said local surface, such that said plurality of deposits forms a connection between said component and said workpiece upon placing said component on the workpiece; and
bring a non-contact dispensing device of the system to form the plurality of deposits, based on the determined respective heights, on at least one of said first surface and said local surface by applying at least one droplet of the viscous medium using non-contact dispensing.
Additionally, the storage medium recited in Claim 15 is not recited in either of Claims 1 and 10. The order of the process steps in Claim 1 does not necessarily apply to the system of Claim 10, or the storage medium of Claim 15. The system of Claim 10 does not necessarily have to carry out the order of process steps recited in Claim 1, or does not require the storage medium properties of Claim 15.
Therefore, it is maintained that Groups I, II and III do not relate to a single general inventive concept under PCT Rule 13.1 because, under PCT Rule 13.2, they lack the same or corresponding special technical features based of the following applied prior art. In other words, the technical features that are not special (emphasized above) do not make a contribution over the applied prior art references below.
In regards to the Safe Harbor Exception, 37 C.F.R. 1.475(b) is not all encompassing when considering unity of invention and claims of different categories. In this case, the Lack of Unity was applied on the basis of PCT Rules 13.1 and 13.2, which do not exclude categories of inventions. These PCT rules simply take into account the corresponding technical features between each invention and not necessarily what category each invention belongs to.
Therefore, the requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 1 through 5, 7 through 9 and 15 through 17 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on November 7, 2025.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the content does not appear to be directed to the claimed invention. The content is directed mainly to a process and not the system (e.g. machine) as claimed. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: --System for Depositing a Viscous Medium with Topography-Based Deposition Height Adjustment--.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities.
In Claim 12, the term “LIFT device” (line 2) should be changed to –Laser Induced Forward Transfer (LIFT) device--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings, Figure 9, is objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show the control unit 224 and measurement device 230, as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). 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). If the 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.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
In Claim 10, a generic placeholder of “non-contact dispensing device” (line 3) that is coupled with functional language of “arranged for applying droplets of the viscous medium onto a first surface of a component to be mounted on a workpiece or a local surface of said workpiece onto which the component is to be mounted” (lines 3-6).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 10 through 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential structural cooperative relationships of elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the necessary structural connections. See MPEP § 2172.01.
The omitted structural cooperative relationship appears to be a measurement device (230, Fig. 8) disclosed on page 28 of the applicants’ specification.
In Claim 10, there are only two structural elements being claimed, the “non-contact dispensing device” and “control unit”. The control unit alone does not appear to be adapted to carry out the steps obtaining information regarding surface topography, determine respective heights of deposits of the viscous medium, and cause the non-contact dispensing device to form deposits (recited at lines 8-17). Based on the applicants specification, something has to provide the control unit with such information or data to carry out these steps. Page 28 of the specification certainly states that the control unit needs a “measurement device” to measure information of the surface of either the workpiece or component, in order to perform such process steps. However, Claim 10 recites no such structure. This raises a great deal of uncertainty as to how the control unit can be adapted to carry out any instructions or process steps. Therefore, the structure recited in Claim 10 is misleading, rendering the claim as indefinite.
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.
Claims 10, 11, 13 and 14, as best understood, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication 2017/0348786 to Nakamura (hereinafter “Nakamura”) in view of the teachings of:
1) U.S. Publication 2011/0208895 to Wiegers et al (hereinafter “Wiegers”);
2) U.S. Publication 2003/0170921 to Akram (hereinafter “Akram”);
3) U.S. Publication 2010/0230472 to Okamoto et al (hereinafter “Okamoto”).
Claim 10: Nakamura discloses a system (e.g. Fig. 3) for depositing a solder medium (e.g. P), the system comprising:
a non-contact dispensing device (e.g. M2, Fig. 1, or 17, 13, 44, 11, etc. in Fig. 3) arranged for applying droplets of the solder medium onto a local surface of the workpiece (e.g. 4) onto which a component is to be mounted (e.g. ¶ [0046]); and
a control unit (e.g. 3, 90, Fig. 12) adapted to:
obtain information regarding both the component and the workpiece [with cameras, ¶¶ [0036], [0052]);
determine, based on the information, respective amounts of a plurality of deposits of the solder medium that are to be formed on the local surface, such that the plurality of deposits forms a connection between the component and the workpiece upon placing the component on the workpiece (e.g. ¶ [0048]); and
cause the non-contact dispensing device to form each of the plurality of deposits of the solder medium by applying droplets the solder medium (e.g. Pa, Fig. 3) using the non-contact dispensing.
The non-contact dispensing device (at 44) does not contact the workpiece (e.g. 4, in Figs. 8A, 8B).
Claim 11: Nakamura discloses the system of claim 10, wherein the control unit is in communicative contact with a storage unit (e.g. 81, Fig. 12) comprising information regarding the component or the workpiece.
Claim 13: Nakamura discloses the system of claim 10, further comprising a surface measurement device (e.g. cameras 16, Fig. 3, or 71, 72, Fig. 10) configured to perform measurements of at least one of the first surface and the local surface.
Claim 14: Nakamura discloses the system of claim 13, wherein the surface measurement device (e.g. 16, 71 or 72) is arranged to perform the measurements of the at least one of the first surface and the local surface while the non-contact dispensing device (e.g. at 44) applies the droplets of the solder medium onto the at least one of the local surface (e.g. of 4).
Nakamura does not the term of “viscous” to describe the solder, or solder medium, i.e. viscous medium. Moreover, Nakamura does not mention that the information obtained is both a surface topography of the first surface of the component and the local surface of the workpiece. Lastly, Nakamura does not mention determining heights of the deposits of the viscous medium.
The solder medium dispensed by Nakamura is done so by printing (e.g. ¶¶ [0045], [0046]). Wiegers teaches that solder is dispensed by printing as a paste, which is viscous in form (e.g. ¶ [0023]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the solder medium of Nakamura is viscous, or a viscous medium, which is a necessary material state to dispense by printing.
Akram discloses an art-recognized equivalent system that dispenses a viscous medium (e.g. Fig. 17) that uses a camera to obtain information regarding a surface topography of a first surface of a component (e.g. 10) and local surface of a workpiece (e.g. 20). Akram states that obtaining information of surface topography helps to detect defective or damaged components or workpieces before connecting or soldering components to the workpiece, (e.g. ¶ [0084]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control unit of Nakamura by adding either one camera, or one camera for each the component and workpiece, to obtain information of surface topography of the first surface of the component and the local surface of the workpiece, as taught by Akram, to detect any defective or damaged components or workpieces prior to connecting each to one another.
Regarding Claim 11, Akram further teaches a storage unit (e.g. memory on computer) to store information regarding surface topography of the first surface and local surface as part of data files (e.g. ¶¶ [0066], [0082], [0084]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the storage unit of Nakamura by including the surface topography taught by Akram, to keep data files necessary on the components and workpieces in determining whether or not they are defective or damaged.
To reiterate, Nakamura does teach determining, based on the information received from camera, respective amounts of deposits of the viscous medium that are to be formed on the local surface of the workpiece (e.g. ¶ [0048]). Okamoto teaches dispensing a viscous medium (e.g. 7, Fig. 2) on a workpiece by printing where the amounts of the viscous medium being deposited on the workpiece (e.g. 5, Fig. 2) directly correlate to the heights of the plurality of deposits (e.g. ¶ [0037]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the amounts of the plurality of deposits that Nakamura determines, can directly correlate to heights of the deposits of the viscous medium, based on the teachings of Okamoto, when dispensing the droplets or deposits of the viscous medium.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura in view of Wiegers, Akram, and Okamoto, as applied to Claim 10 above, and further in view of U.S. Publication 2017/0252869 to Fritzsche et al (hereinafter “Fritzsche”).
Nakamura, as modified by Wiegers, Akram, and Okamoto, discloses the claimed system as relied upon above in Claim 10, further including that a screen printing non-contact dispensing device. The modified Nakamura system does not teach a jet printing device.
Fritzsche discloses that there are many ways to dispense a viscous medium of solder by a device, which can be by screen printing, stencil printing, or jet printing (e.g. ¶ [0056]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the non-contact dispensing device of Nakamura, to allow the device to perform jet printing, as taught by Fritzsche, to provide an art-recognized equivalent form of dispensing the very same droplets of a viscous medium or solder.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a) Japanese Patent Publication, JP 2016-219736 discloses a non-contact dispensing device (e.g. in Fig. 1) with a control unit (e.g. in Fig. 2).
b) Non-Patent Literature IEEE Publication to Niemeier et al, entitled "Selective Soldering with Precise Amounts of Liquid Solder", discloses a non-contact dispensing device (e.g. Fig. 3) that dispenses a viscous medium (solder) on a workpiece (e.g. Fig. 3, see entire document).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to A. DEXTER TUGBANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4570. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
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, JESSICA HAN can be reached at (571) 272-2078. 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.
/A. DEXTER TUGBANG/ Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2896