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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 February 3, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 – 11 have been considered, but they are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejections.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. In particular, the added subject matter “wherein the average size is obtained by averaging the Cu crystal grains present within a measurement region that extends continuously from one end of the through-hole at the first surface to the other end of the through-hole at the second surface in a thickness direction of the insulation substrate” is not disclosed in the specification as originally filed.
First, paragraph [0028] of the specification discloses that “the lines of the boundaries (grain boundaries) between the Cu crystal grains t1 in the SEM (scanning electron microscope) image or the SIM (scanning ion microscope) image of the cross-section including the through-conductor 25 and the wiring conductor 21 are extracted.” Thus, the measurement region includes not only the through hole but also the wiring conductor.
Second, paragraphs [0029] – [0030] disclose the following:
From the image, regions having sizes including 20 to 100 Cu crystal grains t1 are randomly selected as the target regions Rt. Multiple target regions Rt are selected from a main part of a target conductor (the main conductor part 251 of the through-conductor 25, the main conductor parts 211 and 231 of the wiring conductors 21 and 23). The number of the Cu crystal grains t1 in each target region Rt is counted, and the area of each target region Rt is divided by the corresponding number of the Cu crystal grains t1 to obtain the average cross-sectional area of the individual Cu crystal grains t1. Assuming that each Cu crystal grain t1 has a circular cross-section, the diameter of the circle is calculated from the area, and the diameter is obtained as the average size of the Cu crystal grains t1.
Thus, the average size is not obtained by averaging the Cu crystal grains present within a measurement region, but rather by averaging the Cu crystal grains present in multiple target regions selected from the main conductor part 251 of the through-conductor 25 and the main conductor parts of the wiring conductors 21 and 23.
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.
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 1 – 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being unpatentable over Maniwa (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2023/0039184).
Regarding claim 1, in Figure 1, Maniwa discloses a wiring board comprising: an insulation substrate (1) formed from a ceramic, wherein the insulation substrate comprises: a first surface (3; bottom surface of substrate 1), and a second surface (2; top surface of substrate 1) opposite to the first surface; and a through-hole (4, Figure 2(a)) extending from the first surface to the second surface; a through-conductor (comprising 18, 20, 30, 31, 32; paragraphs [0070], [0071], [0138]; Figures 1, 2(c), and 2(d)) located in the through-hole and on an opening of the through-hole on a first-surface side (Figure 1); and a wiring conductor (comprising 33, 34, 35; paragraphs [0106], [0108], and [0138]) located on the first surface and connected to the through-conductor, wherein the through-conductor and the wiring conductor contain copper as a main component (paragraphs [0070], [0071], [0106], [0108], [0138]), wherein the wiring conductor and the through conductor each include an intermediate layer (comprising 33, 34 – wiring conductor; comprising 30, 31 – through conductor) in contact with the insulation substrate, and wherein the intermediate layer contains copper (paragraph [0138]), titanium (paragraph [0138]) and oxygen (it is inherent for the copper layers to contain oxygen; standard copper typically contains small amounts of oxygen, usually introduced through the various smelting and refining processes; while “oxygen-free copper” exists, it still contains trace amounts, as completely removing oxygen is nearly impossible). Maniwa does not specifically disclose the substrate 1 being formed of ceramic (but rather discloses substrate 1 as being formed of glass (paragraph [0066]). However, providing a substrate formed of other materials, such as ceramic, is common place and well known in the art, and is merely a design option for a skilled artisan without the exercise of inventive skill.
Regarding claim 2, Maniwa discloses wherein a numerical difference between the average size of the Cu crystal grains in the through-conductor and the average size of the Cu crystal grains in the wiring conductor is 3 µm or less (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 3, Maniwa discloses wherein a boundary between the through-conductor and the wiring conductor, defined by a change in average Cu grain size, is located outside the through-hole (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 4, Maniwa discloses wherein, when the wiring board is viewed along a line perpendicular to the first surface, the boundary between the through-conductor and the wiring conductor overlaps at least a portion of the opening of the through-hole (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 5, Maniwa discloses wherein, in a cross-section that (i) intersects the geometric center of the through-hole and (ii) is perpendicular to the first surface, a shortest lateral distance between (a) a first boundary line at a first lateral side of the through-conductor and (b) a second boundary line at an opposite lateral side of the through-conductor decreases as the measurement point moves away from the through-hole toward the wiring conductor (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 6, Maniwa discloses wherein, in the cross-section recited in claim 5, an acute angle formed between a tangent of the boundary line and a segment representing the wall of the through-hole decreases as the measurement point approaches an edge of the opening (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 7, Maniwa discloses an electronic device comprising: the wiring board according to claim 1; and an electronic component mounted on the wiring board (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 8, Maniwa discloses an electronic module comprising: the electronic device according to claim 7; and a module substrate on which the electronic device is mounted (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 9, Maniwa discloses wherein the through-hole has a tapered profile such that an inner diameter of the through-hole decreases continuously from the opening at the first surface toward a midpoint of the through-hole in the thickness direction and increases continuously from the midpoint toward the opening at the second surface, the midpoint exhibiting a minimum inner diameter that is smaller than an inner diameter at each opening (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 10, Maniwa discloses wherein, when the wiring board is observed along the thickness direction, an average size of copper crystal grains located outside the through-hole in a region that overlaps, in plan view, with the opening of the through-hole is larger than an average size of Cu crystal grains located outside the through-hole in a region that does not overlap with the opening of the through-hole (Figure 1).
Regarding claim 11, Maniwa discloses wherein an average size of copper crystal grains in the through-conductor is larger than an average size of Cu crystal grains in the wiring conductor, wherein the average size is obtained by averaging the Cu crystal grains present within a measurement region that extends continuously from one end of the through-hole at the first surface to the other end of the through-hole at the second surface in a thickness direction of the insulation substrate (see 112 rejection).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TREMESHA W BURNS whose telephone number is (571)270-3391. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am - 4:30 pm EST.
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, Timothy Thompson can be reached at (571) 272-2342. 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.
TREMESHA W. BURNS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2847
/TREMESHA W BURNS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847