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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II (claims 9-14) in the reply filed on 12/17/25 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/19/23 has been acknowledged and considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 9 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kennedy (WO 2016 040156 A1).
Regarding claim 9; Kennedy discloses a method of constructing an endoscope (700 @ figure 7) including an electrical bridge (circuit board connector 102 @ figures 1A, 2A, 7) coupling an image processor (paragraphs [0035] and [0042]: e.g., communicate data signals carrying captured image data from the image sensor 110 to the external image processor) to a packaged image sensor (110 @ figures 1A, 2A, 7), the method comprising:
providing an electrical bridge (102 @ figures 1A, 2A, 7) including a cross-sectional area no greater than that of the packaged image sensor (110 @ figures 1A, 2A), and including a plurality of electrical contacts (108a-108d, 130a-130d @ figures 1A, 2A) on a distal face arranged in an array (figure 1A);
placing the packaged image sensor (110 @ figures 1A, 2A, 7) in an elongated cradle fixture (702 @ figure 7);
placing the electrical bridge (102 @ figure 7) in the elongated cradle fixture (702 @ figure 7) with the plurality of electrical contacts (130c, 130d @ figure 7) in physical contact with a respective BGA contact (paragraph [0004]: e.g., a ball grid array (BGA) may include solder balls raised above the surface of the package… paragraph [0039]: e.g., the electrical contacts 108a-108d may include solder balls, pins, tabs, or pads as examples. Other conductive structures may be possible. In the example image sensor 110 shown in Fig. 1, the electrical contacts 108a-108d are configured as a two- by-two ball grid array (BGA)) of the packaged image sensor (110 @ figures 1A, 2A, 7); and
reflow soldering the BGA contacts (108a-108d @ figures 1A, 2A and paragraph [0064]: e.g., reflow solder or conductive adhesive, although other material and/or other bonding techniques such as bond wires may be used to bond and electrically connect the conductive components together) of the packaged image sensor (110 @ figures 1A, 2A, 7) to the electrical contacts (130a-130d @ figures 1A, 2A) of the electrical bridge (102 @ figures 1A, 2A) while they are both positioned in the elongated cradle fixture (702 @ figure 7). See figures 1-11
PNG
media_image1.png
605
720
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
602
678
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11; Kennedy discloses further comprising: positioning a cable assembly (606 @ figures 6A-6B) with at least four tinned wires (604a-604d @ figure 6A) of the cable assembly (606 @ figure 6A) contacting respective wire attachment contacts (632a-623d @ figure 6) of the electrical bridge (602 @ figure 6A); and soldering the at least four tinned wires (604a-604d @ figure 6) to the wire attachment contacts (623a-623d @ figure 6).
Regarding claim 12; Kennedy discloses the packaged image sensor (610 @ figure 6) and the cable assembly (606 @ figure 6) are reflow soldered to the electrical bridge (602 @ figure 6) while reflow soldering the BGA contacts (608a-608d @ figure 6) of the packaged image sensor (610 @ figure 6) to the electrical contacts (630a-630d @ figure 6) of the electrical bridge (602 @ figure 6).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kennedy (WO 2016 040156 A1) in view of Kusakabe et al (US 2013/0284707 hereinafter “Kusakabe”).
Regarding claim 10; Kennedy discloses all of feature of claimed invention except for passing heated air through a plurality of voids formed in the elongated cradle fixture adjacent to the BGA contacts of the packaged image sensor to the electrical contacts of the electrical bridge. However, Kusakabe teaches that it is known in the art to provide passing heated air (22 @ figure 5 and paragraph [0050]: e.g., the hot air generating unit 22 blows, against the backside of the base member, the high temperature air that has been heated to such a degree that melting of solder that supports the component is not hindered in order to reduce a temperature rise of the base member on the backside of the component) through a plurality of voids (14 @ figure 5) formed in the elongated cradle fixture adjacent (13 @ figure 5) to the BGA contacts of the packaged image sensor (2 @ figure 5) to the electrical contacts of the electrical bridge (solder balls 4 @ figure 5). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of claimed invention to combine method of Kennedy with limitation above as taught by Kusakabe for the purpose of reducing local heating of the component.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kennedy (WO 2016 040156 A1) in view of Garret et al (WO 2022 165302 A1 hereinafter “Garrett”).
Regarding claim 13; Kennedy discloses all of feature of claimed invention except for the elongated cradle fixture is formed of polyether ether ketone (PEEK). However, Kusakabe teaches that it is known in the art to provide the elongated cradle fixture (101 @ figure 1B) of endoscopic (100 @ figure 1B) is formed of polyether ether ketone PEEK (paragraph [0054]: e.g., outermost layer 101 can have a thickness of 0.0001-0.01”, such as approximately 0.001”, 0.002, 0.003” or 0.004”. Alternatively, the outermost layer can be plastic, including, for example, LDPE, nylon, or PEEK). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of claimed invention to combine method of Kennedy with limitation above as taught by Garret for the purpose of improving sliding of the rigidizing apparatus through the anatomy involved in maximizing flexibility.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 is 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.
The prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails discloses or render obvious a method of constructing an endoscope comprising all the specific elements with the specific combination including providing the electrical bridge comprises: 3D printing a bridge structure with a paste comprising ceramic particles, a paste comprising conductive metal particles, and a paste comprising sacrificial support particles, the bridge structure comprising: (a) a pre-formed insulative body including a distal surface with a cross sectional size no greater than that of the packaged image sensor; (b) a plurality of pre- formed electrical contacts disposed along the distal surface of the pre-formed insulative body; (c) a plurality of pre-formed conductive paths through the pre-formed insulative body connecting to respective ones of the pre-formed electrical contacts; and (d) a plurality of pre-formed wire attachment contacts connecting to respective ones of the pre-formed conductive paths, formed within the cross-sectional area of the pre-formed insulative body, and elongated in a longitudinal direction perpendicular the distal surface; and firing the 3D printed bridge structure to cure the insulative body, conductive paths, electrical contacts, and wire attachment contacts while burning away the sacrificial support particles to form the electrical bridge in set forth of claim 14.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
1) Birnkrant et al (US 2019/0133423) discloses an image sensor module includes a circuit board, an image sensor, and a turning prism.
2) Ohno et al (US 2017/0172388) discloses an endoscopic device, including: an image sensor section including an image sensor that senses and converts lights into an electrical signal; a substrate that is electrically connected to the image sensor section; and an intermediate unit, interposed between the image sensor section and the substrate, that electrically connects the image sensor section and the substrate.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANG H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2425. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached at 571-270-5789. 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.
/SN/
February 7, 2026
/SANG H NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877