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 Amendment
In response to the amendment filed on 06/25/2026. Claim 1 has been amended, claims 2-3 & 6-9 have been cancelled, and claims 1 & 4-5 are pending and under examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 03/10/2026 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on pages 6-9 that Takamitsu merely discloses successive drilling of independent holes rather than performing a secondary drilling step in a through hole made during the first drilling step. Applicant also points out that Takamitsu does not teach wherein the drilled hole [secondary drilled hole] has a diameter larger than the diameter of the through hole. Furthermore, Kanaya does not teach either feature.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to prior art Kanaya has been considered, but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on Kanaya applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Respectfully, the Applicant’s argument is not found to be compelling as the new rejection of claim 1, detailed in section Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103, infra, relies on a new combination of Takamatsu, in further view of Ding and Yang. Takamitsu teaches a method of measuring parameters of a drilling hole step, namely the time and velocity of a drill to obtain the height. From there, the measured parameters are to be used for another drilling step of a new through hole to create identical holes. New reference Yang teaches the formation of both the first drilling step [through hole] as well as the second drilling step [back drilling] wherein the second drilling step utilizes a drill of a larger diameter than the first drilling step. However, Yang teaches of a method where the measured parameter is only applied to their respective step. Thus, a combination would allow the measuring method of Takamitsu to be used for a relationship between Yang’s two drilling steps to obtain reduce error and loss done by the second drilling step.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takamitsu et al (J.P Patent Application Publication 2018083264 A) hereinafter Takamitsu, further in view of Ding et al (C.N. Patent Application Publication 208930432 U), hereinafter Ding, and further in view of Yang et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication 20150078848 A1), hereinafter Yang.
Regarding claim 1, Takamitsu discloses a method of using a drill bit (Title: Drill Processing Device and Drill Processing Method), the method of using the drill bit comprises following steps:
drilling a through hole (hole, p. 2, ll. 20; also seen in FIG. 1, the hole created by drill 4 is a through hole in the multilayer printed circuit board 1) by the drill bit in a board to be processed (multilayer printed board in FIG. 2, p. 2, ll. 8), and for each conductive layer of a plurality of conductive layers of the board to be processed (conductor layers L1 to L4, p. 4, ll. 11), collecting a feedback time T at which the drill tip touches the conductive layer (generation period t, p. 4, ll. 21-24, “When the spindle unit 5 further descends and the drill 4 advances in the machining direction, a resonance detection signal S is generated from the resonance detection circuit 44 every time the drill 4 passes through each of the conductor layers L1 to L4, and the overall control unit 14 Is received by the thickness detector 15”), wherein the plurality of conductive layers are arranged at intervals (FIG. 1 depicts layers R1-R3 & L1-L4 arranged in intervals);
PNG
media_image1.png
436
444
media_image1.png
Greyscale
determining, from the plurality of conductive layers, a target layer (chosen conductor layers L1 to L4 in FIG. 1, p. 4, ll. 11) and a reference layer (surface of the multiplayer printed circuit board 1, p. 4, ll. 17) of the board to be processed, and calculating a time difference t (generation period t, p. 4, ll. 21-24) between the target layer and the reference layer , wherein the reference layer is located on a surface layer or an inner layer of the board to be processed and is different from the target layer (p. 4, ll. 17-20, “First, when the pressure foot 9 comes into contact with the surface of the multilayer printed circuit board 1, a detection signal from the board top surface sensor 11 is input to the overall control unit 14, and the overall control unit 14 includes the feed position information of the spindle vertical drive unit 8 at that time. Based on this, the height position of the surface of the multilayer printed circuit board 1 can be recognized”; using the surface of the multilayer printed board and the method of collected feedback as detailed above, the machine would be able to differentiate the signal S given by the resonance detection to measure time differences);
determining a distance H (thickness, p. 4, ll. 25) between the target layer and the reference layer according to the time difference t and a drilling speed v of the drill bit (feed speed V0, p. 4, ll. 26) (p. 4, ll. 25-27, “The thickness detection unit 15 obtains the thickness of each of the conductor layers L1 to L4 from the product of the generation period t of the resonance detection signal S and the feed speed V0 of the drill 4 at this time, and adds them together to obtain the conductor layer L1”); and
performing a controlled depth drilling by starting from the reference layer and taking the distance H as a drilling depth to obtain a drilled hole (p. 5, ll. 8-13, “The thickness detection unit 15 of the overall control unit 14 obtains a total value T of the thicknesses of the conductor layers L1 to L4 of the multilayer printed circuit board 1 by the same method as described above. Next, the feed rate setting unit 17 selects the corresponding optimum feed rate from the optimum feed rate storage unit 16 on the basis of the total thickness T, and the height of the tip of the drill 4 returns to the reference position H to the next. At the point P before drilling the hole, the feed speed of the drill 4 in the spindle vertical drive unit 8 is newly set”);
wherein the distance H, the time difference t, and the drilling speed v satisfy the following formula: H = t x v (p. 4, ll. 25-27, “The thickness detection unit 15 obtains the thickness of each of the conductor layers L1 to L4 from the product of the generation period t of the resonance detection signal S and the feed speed V0 of the drill 4 at this time, and adds them together to obtain the conductor layer L1”);
However, Takamitsu fails to disclose the details of the drill, wherein the drill bit comprises a drill shank, a drill edge and a drill tip which are connected in sequence, the drill tip is capable of conducting electricity, and the drill edge is covered with a non-conductive film layer. Takamitsu also fails to disclose wherein a diameter of the drilled hole is larger than a diameter of the through hole.
Ding discloses a drill (Title: Drilling Machine), wherein the drill bit comprises a drill shank (shank 53 in FIG. 3, p. 6, ll. 31), a drill edge (edge 51 in FIG. 3, p. 5, ll. 26), and a drill tip (drill tip 511 in FIG. 3, p. 6, ll. 17) which are connected in sequence (as seen in FIG. 3), the drill tip is capable of conducting electricity (p. 4, ll. 17-18, “when machining, the circuit board 200 to the circuit board 200 of the first conductive layer 230 to electrify the drill tip 511”, FIG. 2 depicts electrical connection between conductive layers and drill via drill tip), and the drill edge is covered with a non-conductive film layer (insulating layer 70 in Fig. 3, p. 4, ll. 14).
PNG
media_image2.png
220
649
media_image2.png
Greyscale
While Takamitsu details the steps used for operating a drill to measure processing time, drill speed, and calculating depth of the multilayer printed board, Ding discloses the physical features of the drill comprising the shank, edge, tip, and a non-conductive film layer. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use Ding’s drill and operate it with Takamitsu’s method of calculating depth to prevent electrical connection of the drill head to multiple conductive layers, potentially causing miscalculations and feed errors (Ding, p. 4, ll. 15-27).
However, both Takamitsu and Ding fail to disclose the method wherein, within the through hole, a “backdrilling” step of diameter of a drilled hole of the controlled depth drilling is larger than a diameter of the through hole.
Yang discloses of a method of using a drill bit (Title: Method for Implementing High-Precision Backdrilling Stub Length Control) wherein the method comprises of the following steps:
drilling a through hole (through hole 102, ¶25) by the drill bit (drill bit, ¶24) in a board (printed circuit board, ¶24) to be processed and for each conductive layer of a plurality of conductive layers of the board to be processed (conductive layers, ¶24);
determining, from the plurality of conductive layers, a target layer (first conductive layer 101, ¶25) and a reference layer (second conductive layer 104, ¶25) of the board to be processed, and wherein the reference layer is located on a surface layer or an inner layer of the board to be processed and is different from the target layer (FIG. 4 depicts second conductive layer 104 at a bottom surface of the printed circuit board);
PNG
media_image3.png
625
641
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
606
625
media_image4.png
Greyscale
determining a distance H between the target layer and the reference layer (¶52, “At this time, the main body of the drill may acquire the first Z-coordinate information of the drill bit. When the drill bit reaches a conductive layer between the backdrill-side conductive layer and a signal layer, the control circuit in the main body of the drill, the drill bit, and the conductive layer form a test circuit loop. At this time, the main body of the drill may acquire the second Z-coordinate information of the drill bit. By using the first Z-coordinate information and the second Z-coordinate information, a medium thickness h between the 101 conductive layer and the 104 conductive layer may be acquired”); and
performing, within the through hole, a controlled depth drilling by starting from the reference layer and taking the distance H as a drilling depth to obtain a drilled hole (¶54, “performing backdrilling according to an acquired backdrilling depth according to an embodiment of the present invention. After compensation processing, a backdrilling depth is obtained. That is, after a depth is preset, a through hole that needs to be backdrilled is backdrilled”);
wherein a diameter of the drilled hole is larger than a diameter of the through hole (¶54, “An aperture D of the backdrilling is greater than the aperture of the through hole, so as to grind off the copper plating on a wall of the through hole”).
The combination of Takamitsu and Ding teaches a drill to be used to bore a hole that is able to electrically connect the drill and conductive layer to then calculate the thickness between the surface and the chosen conductive layer with the product of the time difference and drilling speed. Yang discloses a drilling method that first forms a through hole, measuring the depth of the through hole during the through hole formation step, and then performing a secondary drilling step [back drilling step] to increase the size of the hole. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use the method from Takamitsu’s disclosure, in view of Ding’s featured drill, being able to calculate a drill’s drilling speed, time difference, and thickness of a conductive board, and use it in Yang’s method because the backdrilling depth is obtained at the time of drilling the through hole and an error of the backdrilling depth is very small, the stub length of backdrilling is very small, thereby significantly reducing loss of a hole link in a high-speed and high-frequency signal transmission process and improving integrity of a transmitted high-frequency signal (Yang, ¶54). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a POSITA as a combination would reduce risk of over-drilling, preventing damage to the circuit board by avoiding conductive layers intended to remain intact.
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takamitsu, in view of Ding and Yang, and further in view of Wang (C.N. Patent Application Publication 108465849 A).
Regarding claim 4, Takamitsu, in view of Ding and Yang, further discloses he method of using the drill bit according to claim 1, as detailed above.
However, all fail to disclose a transition part, one end of the transition part is connected to the drill shank, and another end of the transition part is connected to the drill edge.
Wang discloses a drill bit (Title: wherein the drill bit further comprises a transition part (Annotated FIG. 1, a transition portion connects the shank to the edge), one end of the transition part is connected to the drill shank, and another end of the transition part is connected to the drill edge.
PNG
media_image5.png
289
914
media_image5.png
Greyscale
The combination of Takamitsu, Ding, and Yang teaches a drill with a non-conductive film layering being used to measure the depth at which a targeted conductive layer is at, as detailed above in the rejection of claim 1, supra, for circuit board layer removal. Wang discloses the drill having a specific physical feature of having a transition part, located between the drill shank and edge, that connects the two drill elements together. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use the transition portion from Wang’s disclosure and use it in Takamitsu’s method, in further view of Ding, to reduce the point of stress concentration, to have a shank that correctly fits into the chuck of a drill machine, and to minimize inaccuracy during machining from drill vibrations.
Regarding claim 5, Takamitsu, in view of Ding, Yang, and Wang, further discloses the method of using the drill bit according to claim 4, as detailed above, and Wang further discloses wherein the transition part is in a truncated cone shape (Annotated FIG. 1 features the transition part resembling a truncated cone).
(Regarding the reason to combine references, refer to rejection of claim 4, supra, as it is applicable to claim 5 in the manner of a drill bit comprising a transition part to reduce stress and inaccuracy during machining).
Conclusion
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 EUGENE REY D LEGASPI whose telephone number is (571)272-2956. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5PM.
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, Thomas Hong can be reached at (571) 272-0993. 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.
/E.D.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3729 /THOMAS J HONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3729
Prosecution Insights