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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 18, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicant's argument on page 8 pertaining to “From the above text, it is clear that the system uses a virtual appliance for testing semiconductor devices. However, since the appliances are virtual, the connections are also virtual, not end-to-end. Since the communication hardware resources for connection for the virtual appliance may change dynamically as the virtual set of hardware resources are allocated, it is unreasonable to expect that Hilliges' system will have an end-to-end connection with the DUT. Therefore, Hilliges fails to teach or suggest the feature: the centralized server having one or more end-to-end connections with the one or more DUT, as recited in claim 1 .”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The specification on page 2, lines 12 – 15 recites “The method may further comprise accessing by the test control apparatus the one or more DUT of the ATE system via one or more Local Area Networks (LANs), the one or more LANs coupling the one or more DUT with the centralized server.” A LAN as known in the art is an electrical (wired) connection between two elements or a radio-frequency (rf) (wireless) connection between two elements. The “one or more end-to-end connections” recited by claim 1 are therefore, wired/wireless connections between the centralized server and the one or more Device Under Test (DUT) in light of the specification. As mentioned in this office action (OA), Hilleges teaches “one or more end-to-end connections” (Fig. 1, ¶ 41 (and thereby, to/from one or more pads or ports of a number of semiconductor devices under test)). The pads or ports connect to the DUTs at a first end and connect to the centralized server (Fig. 1, computer system 106) at a second end. The virtual appliances mentioned by the applicant are software elements that are executed in the centralized server. They are not the same as the “one or more end-to-end connections” that are wired/wireless hardware elements. Therefore Hilleges teaches, the feature of “the centralized server having one or more end-to-end connections with the one or more DUT”, as recited in claim 1
In response to Applicant's argument on page 8 pertaining to “Hobbs does not disclose whether the connections between the server and the DUT are virtual or end-to-end. However, even if an end-to-end is assumed in Hobbs, it is not possible to change Hilliges' connections to end-to-end, because this will frustrate the virtualization feature - a principle of operation of Hilliges. Therefore, it is not obvious to combine and modify Hilliges and Hobbs to arrive at the claimed feature of: the centralized server having one or more end-to-end connections with the one or more DUT.”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
As mentioned above, Hilleges teaches, “the centralized server having one or more end-to-end connections with the one or more DUT”. As mentioned in this OA, analogous art Hobbs teaches, the centralized server (Fig. 3, site modules 310A-310B) having one or more end-to-end connections (Fig. 3, ¶ 57 Network switch 302 can be connected to each of the site modules with a 32 bit wide bus) with the one or more DUT. The end-to-end connections taught by Hobbs are also wired. It would be obvious for one skilled in the art to combine the centralized server having one or more end-to-end connections with the one or more DUT taught by Hilleges with the centralized server having one or more end-to-end connections with the one or more DUT taught by Hobbs respectively, for the benefit of configuring one ATE body to test different types of Devices Under Test (DUTs).
In response to Applicant's argument on page 9 pertaining to “Thus, from the above text, the test control apparatus of Hilliges may not have access to all of the DUT and all of the test data from the DUT. Therefore, Hilliges fails to teach or suggest the feature: wherein the centralized server provides the test control apparatus with access to all of the one or more DUT and all of the test data from the one or more DUT. Hobbs does not explicitly disclose that the test control apparatus has access to all of the DUT and all of the test data from the DUT. However, even if full access to DUT is assumed in Hobbs, it would have frustrated Hilliges' security policies, which are designed to address the complications raised in paragraphs [0009] and [0010]. Thus, it is not obvious to combine and modify Hilliges and Hobbs to arrive at the claimed feature of: wherein the centralized server provides the test control apparatus with access to all of the one or more DUT and all of the test data from the one or more DUT.”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The security policies mentioned by Hilleges do not prevent the test control apparatus from accessing the DUTs. They are used to prevent the virtual appliances in the centralized server from interfering with other virtual appliances that have been given to access the DUTs. If the test control apparatus has been granted to access the DUTs, the security policies will allow it to do so. Hobbs further teaches, accessing by the test control apparatus (Fig. 2, system controller 201, personal computer (PC)) the one or more DUT of the ATE system via the centralized server (Fig. 3, site modules 310A-310B). It would be obvious for one skilled in the art to combine the test control apparatus, the centralized server having one or more end-to-end connections with the one or more DUT taught by Hilleges with, the test control apparatus, the centralized server having one or more end-to-end connections with the one or more DUT taught by Hobbs respectively, for the benefit of configuring one ATE body to test different types of Devices Under Test (DUTs).
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 – 6, 9 – 15, 17 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilliges et al (US 2015/0370248 A1) (herein after Hilliges) in view of HOBBS et al (US 2020/0033409 A1) (herein after Hobbs).
Regarding Claim 1, Hilliges teaches, a method of centralized control of an Automated Test Equipment (ATE) system (Fig. 1, ¶ 29 methods for creating, deploying, operating, and receiving data from, one or more virtual appliances used in a semiconductor test environment; ¶ 30 semiconductor test environment 100), the method comprising: accessing by a test control apparatus (Fig. 1, ¶ 51 remotely connect to the virtual user interface 134) a centralized server (Fig. 1, computer system 106) via a single connection (Fig. 1, virtual user interface 134), wherein an operating system of the ATE, a test sequence editor, test sequences (Fig. 1, ¶ 62 a proprietary device test program), data base for all test sequence results, and parameters (Fig. 1, ¶ 51 raw test data, processed or analyzed test data, or monitored parameters) for one or more Device Under Test (DUT) (Fig. 1, ¶ 41 devices under test) reside on the centralized server; — , wherein the test control apparatus is configured to update software code (Fig. 1, ¶ 43 installation of a device test program) for at least one of the ATE operating system, the one or more DUT, the test sequence editor, and the test sequences of the ATE system (Fig. 1, ¶ 43 loading of the memory image by the computer system 106 may result in the installation of a device test program).
Hilliges fails to teach, — accessing by the test control apparatus the one or more DUT of the ATE system via the centralized server, the centralized server having one or more end-to- end connections with the one or more DUT; accessing by the test control apparatus the one or more DUT of the ATE system via the centralized server and controlling test of the one or more DUT utilizing at least one of the operating system of the ATE, the test sequence editor, the test sequences, the data base for all test sequence results, and the parameters for one or more Device Under Test (DUT) reside on the centralized server; and accessing by the test control apparatus test data from the one or more DUT via the single connection to the centralized server, wherein the centralized server provides the test control apparatus with access to all of the one or more DUT and all of the test data from the one or more DUT —.
In analogous art, Hobbs teaches, — accessing by the test control apparatus (Fig. 2, system controller 201, personal computer (PC)) the one or more DUT of the ATE system via the centralized server (Fig. 3, site modules 310A-310B), the centralized server having one or more end-to- end connections (Fig. 3, ¶ 57 Network switch 302 can be connected to each of the site modules with a 32 bit wide bus; Note: Fig 3 is part of Fig 2, see ¶ 57) with the one or more DUT; accessing by the test control apparatus the one or more DUT (Fig. 3, ¶ 62 FPGAs 316 and 318 can be connected to the DUTs through buses 352 and 354 respectively) of the ATE system via the centralized server and controlling test (Fig. 3, ¶ 60 Each of the FPGAs 316 and 318 is controlled by the tester processor 304) of the one or more DUT utilizing at least one of the operating system of the ATE, the test sequence editor, the test sequences, the data base for all test sequence results (Fig. 3, ¶ 58 system controller 301 may be a computer system, to load the test programs and run tests for the DUTs), and the parameters for one or more Device Under Test (DUT) reside on the centralized server (Fig. 5, ¶ 79 store the critical information in storage module 550); and accessing by the test control apparatus test data (Fig. 2, ¶ 42 log test results and other data related to test flow) from the one or more DUT via the single connection to the centralized server, wherein the centralized server provides the test control apparatus with access to all of the one or more DUT and all of the test data from the one or more DUT (Fig. 5, ¶ 81 data captured by the IPA firmware 535 and advantageously determine root causes of device failures; Note: Fig 5 is part of Fig 2, 3, see ¶ 74, 56).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hilliges by combining the test control apparatus taught by Hilliges with a test apparatus taught by Hobbs and: accessing by the test control apparatus the one or more DUT of the ATE system via the centralized server, the centralized server having one or more end-to- end connections with the one or more DUT; accessing by the test control apparatus the one or more DUT of the ATE system via the centralized server and controlling test of the one or more DUT utilizing at least one of the operating system of the ATE, the test sequence editor, the test sequences, the data base for all test sequence results, and the parameters for one or more Device Under Test (DUT) reside on the centralized server; and accessing by the test control apparatus test data from the one or more DUT via the single connection to the centralized server, wherein the centralized server provides the test control apparatus with access to all of the one or more DUT and all of the test data from the one or more DUT; taught by Hobbs for the benefit of configuring one ATE body to test different types of Devices Under Test (DUTs) [Hobbs: ¶ 50].
Regarding Claim 2, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 1, which this claim depends on.
Hilliges further teaches, the method of claim 1, further comprising accessing by the test control apparatus the one or more DUT of the ATE system via one or more Local Area Networks (LANs) (Fig. 1, ¶ 51 coupled to a network such as a private network or the Internet), the one or more LANs coupling the one or more DUT with the centralized server.
Regarding Claim 3, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 1, which this claim depends on.
Hobbs further teaches, the method of claim 1, wherein the centralized server is a Commercial-Off-the- Shelf (COTS) server (Fig. 2, ¶ 46 commercially available Intel x86 CPU or any other well-known processor).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hilliges in view of Hobbs by combining the test apparatus taught by Hilliges in view of Hobbs with a test apparatus wherein, the centralized server is a Commercial-Off-the- Shelf (COTS) server; taught by Hobbs for the benefit of configuring one ATE body to test different types of DUTs [Hobbs: ¶ 50].
Regarding Claim 4, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 1, which this claim depends on.
Hilliges further teaches, the method according to claim 1, wherein the test control apparatus connects to the centralized server via at least one of a wired or wireless connection (Fig. 1, ¶ 36 one or more wired or wireless interfaces).
Regarding Claim 5, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 4, which this claim depends on.
Hobbs further teaches, the method according to claim 4, wherein the test control apparatus is at least one of a stationary computing apparatus, a laptop computing apparatus, and a mobile computing apparatus (Fig. 2, system controller 201, personal computer (PC)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hilliges in view of Hobbs by combining the test apparatus taught by Hilliges in view of Hobbs with a test apparatus wherein, the test control apparatus is at least one of a stationary computing apparatus, a laptop computing apparatus, and a mobile computing apparatus; taught by Hobbs for the benefit of configuring one ATE body to test different types of DUTs. [Hobbs: ¶ 50].
Regarding Claim 6, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 4, which this claim depends on.
Hilliges further teaches, the method according to claim 4, wherein the test control apparatus is connected to the centralized server via a secured connection (Fig. 1, ¶ 51 virtual user interface, 134 a secure user interface).
Regarding Claim 9, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 1, which this claim depends on.
Hilliges in view of Hobbs fail to teach, the method of claim 1, further comprising one or more portable test servers configured to run a copy of the centralized server enabling at least the test control apparatus to connect to the one or more portable test servers and perform off-site testing.
In analogous art, Tseng teaches, the method of claim 1, further comprising one or more portable test servers (Fig. 1, ¶ 18 the server is a processing device, e.g., a portable device) configured to run a copy of the centralized server enabling at least the test control apparatus to connect to the one or more portable test servers and perform off-site testing (Fig. 1, ¶ 18 create a test program suitable for characteristics of the DUT 300 to be tested).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hilliges in view of Hobbs by combining the centralized server taught by Hilliges in view of Hobbs with one or more portable test servers configured to run a copy of the centralized server enabling at least the test control apparatus to connect to the one or more portable test servers and perform off-site testing; taught by Tseng for the benefit of performing multiple test on a DUT without loss of function of the DUT [Tseng: ¶ 25].
Regarding Claim 10, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 1, which this claim depends on.
Hilliges further teaches, the method of claim 1, wherein the test control apparatus accesses the centralized server via a web based interface (Fig. 14, ¶ 111 Internet access tools; including, for example, an HTTP-compliant web browser; Note: Fig 14 is used to implement Fig 1, see ¶ 102).
Regarding Claim 11, Hilliges teaches, an Automated Test Equipment (ATE) system (Fig. 1, ¶ 30 semiconductor test environment 100) comprising: one or more Device Under Test (DUT) (Fig. 1, ¶ 41 devices under test); a centralized server (Fig. 1, computer system 106) configured to establish a connection (Fig. 1, ¶ 41 (and thereby, to/from one or more pads or ports of a number of semiconductor devices under test)) with the one or more DUT via one or more end-to-end connections with the one or more DUT; and a test control apparatus (Fig. 1, ¶ 51 remotely connect to the virtual user interface 134) configured to establish a connection with the centralized server via a single connection (Fig. 1, virtual user interface 134), wherein an operating system of the ATE, a test sequence editor, test sequences (Fig. 1, ¶ 62 a proprietary device test program), data base for all test sequence results, and DUT parameters (Fig. 1, ¶ 51 raw test data, processed or analyzed test data, or monitored parameters) reside on the centralized server, — , and the test control apparatus is configured to update software code (Fig. 1, ¶ 43 installation of a device test program) for at least one of the ATE operating system, the one or more DUT, the test sequence editor, and the test sequences of the ATE system (Fig. 1, ¶ 43 loading of the memory image by the computer system 106 may result in the installation of a device test program).
Hilliges fails to teach, — wherein the test control apparatus is configured to access the one or more DUT of the ATE system via the centralized server and control testing of the one or more DUT utilizing at least one of the operating system of the ATE, the test sequence editor, the test sequences, the data base for all test sequence results, and the parameters for one or more Device Under Test (DUT) reside on the centralized server; and wherein the centralized server provides the test control apparatus with access to all of the one or more DUT and all of the test data from the one or more DUT —.
In analogous art, Hobbs teaches, — wherein the test control apparatus is configured to access the one or more DUT (Fig. 3, ¶ 62 FPGAs 316 and 318 can be connected to the DUTs through buses 352 and 354 respectively) of the ATE system via the centralized server (Fig. 3, site modules 310A-310B) and control testing (Fig. 3, ¶ 60 Each of the FPGAs 316 and 318 is controlled by the tester processor 304) of the one or more DUT utilizing at least one of the operating system of the ATE, the test sequence editor, the test sequences, the data base for all test sequence results (Fig. 3, ¶ 58 system controller 301 may be a computer system, to load the test programs and run tests for the DUTs), and the parameters for one or more Device Under Test (DUT) reside on the centralized server (Fig. 5, ¶ 79 store the critical information in storage module 550); and wherein the centralized server provides the test control apparatus (Fig. 2, system controller 201, personal computer (PC)) with access to all of the one or more DUT and all of the test data from the one or more DUT (Fig. 5, ¶ 81 data captured by the IPA firmware 535 and advantageously determine root causes of device failures; Note: Fig 5 is part of Fig 2, 3, see ¶ 74, 56).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hilliges by combining the test apparatus taught by Hilliges with the test apparatus taught by Hobbs wherein the test control apparatus is configured to access the one or more DUT of the ATE system via the centralized server and control testing of the one or more DUT utilizing at least one of the operating system of the ATE, the test sequence editor, the test sequences, the data base for all test sequence results, and the parameters for one or more Device Under Test (DUT) reside on the centralized server; and wherein, the centralized server provides the test control apparatus with access to all of the one or more DUT and all of the test data from the one or more DUT; taught by Hobbs for the benefit of configuring one ATE body to test different types of DUTs. [Hobbs: ¶ 50].
Regarding Claim 12, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 11 which this claim depends on.
Hobbs further teaches, the ATE system of claim 11, wherein the centralized server is a Commercial-Off- the-Shelf (COTS) server (Fig. 2, ¶ 46 commercially available Intel x86 CPU or any other well-known processor).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hilliges in view of Hobbs by combining the test apparatus taught by Hilliges in view of Hobbs with a test apparatus wherein, the centralized server is a Commercial-Off- the-Shelf (COTS) server; taught by Hobbs for the benefit of configuring one ATE body to test different types of DUTs. [Hobbs: ¶ 50].
Regarding Claim 13, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 11 which this claim depends on.
Hilliges further teaches, the ATE system of claim 11, wherein test control apparatus connects to the centralized server via at least one of a wired or wireless connection (Fig. 1, ¶ 36 one or more wired or wireless interfaces).
Regarding Claim 14, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 13 which this claim depends on.
Hobbs further teaches, 14. the ATE system of claim 13, wherein the test control apparatus is at least one of a stationary computing apparatus, a laptop computing apparatus, and a mobile computing apparatus (Fig. 2, system controller 201, personal computer (PC)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hilliges in view of Hobbs by combining the test apparatus taught by Hilliges in view of Hobbs with a test apparatus wherein, the test control apparatus is at least one of a stationary computing apparatus, a laptop computing apparatus, and a mobile computing apparatus; taught by Hobbs for the benefit of configuring one ATE body to test different types of DUTs. [Hobbs: ¶ 50].
Regarding Claim 15, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 13 which this claim depends on.
Hilliges further teaches, the ATE system of claim 13, wherein the test control apparatus is connected to the centralized server via a secured connection (Fig. 1, ¶ 51 virtual user interface, 134 a secure user interface).
Regarding Claim 17, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 11 which this claim depends on.
Hilliges further teaches, ATE system of claim 11, wherein the ATE system is configured to perform design verification testing in a lab (Fig. 1, ¶ 62 a fabless semiconductor company).
Regarding Claim 18, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 11 which this claim depends on.
Hilliges in view of Hobbs fail to teach, the ATE system of claim 11, further comprising one or more portable test servers configured to run a copy of the centralized server enabling at least the test control apparatus to connect to the one or more portable test servers and perform off-site testing.
In analogous art, Tseng teaches, the ATE system of claim 11, further comprising one or more portable test servers (Fig. 1, ¶ 18 the server is a processing device, e.g., a portable device) configured to run a copy of the centralized server enabling at least the test control apparatus to connect to the one or more portable test servers and perform off-site testing (Fig. 1, ¶ 18 create a test program suitable for characteristics of the DUT 300 to be tested).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Hilliges in view of Hobbs by combining the centralized server taught by Hilliges in view of Hobbs with one or more portable test servers configured to run a copy of the centralized server enabling at least the test control apparatus to connect to the one or more portable test servers and perform off-site testing; taught by Tseng for the benefit of performing multiple test on a DUT without loss of function of the DUT [Tseng: ¶ 25].
Regarding Claim 19, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 11 which this claim depends on.
Hilliges further teaches, the ATE system of claim 11, wherein the test control apparatus accesses the centralized server via a web based interface (Fig. 14, ¶ 111 Internet access tools; including, for example, an HTTP-compliant web browser; Note: Fig 14 is used to implement Fig 1, see ¶ 102).
Regarding Claim 20, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 11 which this claim depends on.
Hilliges further teaches, the ATE system of claim 11, further comprising one or more Local Area Networks (LANs), wherein the one or more LANs (Fig. 1, ¶ 51 coupled to a network such as a private network or the Internet) couple the one or more DUT with the centralized server.
Claim(s) 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hilliges et al (US 2015/0370248 A1) (herein after Hilliges) in view of HOBBS et al (US 2020/0033409 A1) (herein after Hobbs), and further in view of TSENG et al (US 2022/0229109 A1) (herein after Tseng).
Regarding Claim 8, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 1, which this claim depends on.
Hilliges further teaches, the method according to claim 1, further comprising verifying design testing in a lab environment (Fig. 1, ¶ 62 a fabless semiconductor company).
Regarding Claim 17, Hilliges in view of Hobbs teach the limitations of claim 11 which this claim depends on.
Hilliges further teaches, ATE system of claim 11, wherein the ATE system is configured to perform design verification testing in a lab (Fig. 1, ¶ 62 a fabless semiconductor company).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Luff et al. (US 2005/0193306 A1) teaches, an Automated Test Equipment (ATE) system (Fig. 1, ¶ 51 FIGS. 1A and 1B are high level block diagrams of a polymorphic automatic test equipment system 10).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH O. NYAMOGO whose telephone number is (469)295-9276. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 A to 5:00 P CT.
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, EMAN ALFAKAWI can be reached at 571-272-4448. 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.
/JOSEPH O. NYAMOGO/
Examiner
Art Unit 2858
/FARHANA A HOQUE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858