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 .
This is a final office action in response to Applicant's remarks and amendments filed on 04/14/2026. Claims 9-12 are canceled. Claims 23-26 are newly added. Claims 1-8, 13, and 16-26 are pending review in this action. The previous 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections are maintained and reproduced below. New rejections to address newly added Claims 23-26 are detailed below. As an effort to advance prosecution, new grounds of rejection are additionally added below.
Maintained Rejections/New Claims
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-6, 8, 18-23, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shimoichi (JP 2019161170 A) (citations made in reference to the English translation attached to the previous office action, Non-Final Rejection dated 01/16/2026).
Regarding Claim 1, Shimoichi discloses a terminal comprising: a substrate (first electrode film, 7) made of metal; an electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) that is made of a same material as the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and functions as an electrode (Figure 5C, [0024, 0034-0035]). Shimoichi further discloses that the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) is surrounded by the substrate (first electrode film, 7) in a view from a thickness direction, and overlapping the substrate (first electrode film, 7) in a view from a plane direction (see Figure 5C). Shimoichi further discloses an insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) that is between the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8), surrounds the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8), and electrically insulates the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) from each other (Figure 5C, [0035-0036]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 1 are met.
Regarding Claim 2, Shimoichi further discloses that the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) is on a part of a surface of the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and a part of a surface of the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) on a first main surface side (top surface relative to Figure 5C) of the substrate (first electrode film, 7) (Figure 5C, [0035-0036]). Shimoichi further discloses that the terminal further comprises: an insulating film (first insulating film, 11) between the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) on the first main surface side (top surface relative to Figure 5C) of the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and between the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) on the first main surface side (top surface relative to Figure 5C) of the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) (Figure 5C, [0035-0036]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 2 are met.
Regarding Claim 3, Shimoichi further discloses that the insulating film (first insulating film, 11) is at a position where the insulating film (first insulating film, 11) covers at least the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) on a second main surface side (bottom surface relative to Figure 5C) facing a first main surface (top surface relative to Figure 5C) of the substrate (first electrode film, 7) (Figure 5C, [0035-0036]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 3 are met.
Regarding Claim 4, Shimoichi further discloses that the insulating film (first insulating film, 11) is between the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) which surrounds the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8), and is between the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) which surrounds the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) and the substrate (first electrode film, 7) (Figure 5C, [0035-0036]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 4 are met.
Regarding Claim 5, Shimoichi further discloses a metal film (Ni film) that covers at least a part of the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) (Figure 5E, [0026, 0037]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 5 are met.
Regarding Claim 6, Shimoichi further discloses that the metal film (Ni film) includes Ni (Figure 5E, [0026,0037]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 6 are met.
Regarding Claim 8, Shimoichi further discloses that the insulating film (first insulating film, 11) is between the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) which surrounds the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8), and is between the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) which surrounds the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) and the substrate (first electrode film, 7) (Figure 5C, [0035-0036]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 8 are met.
Regarding Claim 18, Shimoichi discloses a manufacturing method of a terminal, the terminal including a substrate (first electrode film, 7) made of metal, an electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) that is configured of a same material as the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and is configured to function as an electrode (Figure 5C, [0024, 0032, 0034-0035]). Shimoichi further discloses an insulating resin (first insulating film, 11) that is between the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) to surround the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8), and insulates the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) from each other (Figure 5C, [0035]). Shimoichi further discloses that the manufacturing method comprises: providing a groove (portions of base electrode film removed during etching) for dividing a mother substrate (base electrode film) made of metal into the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8); and disposing the insulating resin (first insulating film, 11) in the groove (portions of base electrode film removed during etching) (Figure 5C, [0035]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 18 are met.
Regarding Claim 19, Shimoichi further discloses that before the providing of the groove (portions of base electrode film removed during etching), providing an insulating film (surface insulating film, 6) on a surface (lower surface relative to Figure 5C) of the mother substrate (base electrode film) (Figure 5C, [0032-0035]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 19 are met.
Regarding Claim 20, Shimoichi further discloses a step of providing an insulating film (surface insulating film, 6) before the disposing of the insulating resin (first insulating film, 11) (Figure 5C, [0032-0033, 0035]).
The skilled artisan would appreciate that insulating film (surface insulating film, 6) may only be provided on the surface of the groove (portions of base electrode film removed during etching) after the groove (portions of base electrode film removed during etching is provided (i.e., after the groove is provided, the surface insulating film is exposed such that it is provided on what then may be considered the bottom surface of the groove). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 20 are met.
Regarding Claim 21, Shimoichi further discloses that the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) is surrounded by the substrate (first electrode film, 7) in a view from a thickness direction, and overlapping the substrate (first electrode film, 7) in a view from a plane direction (see Figure 5C). Shimoichi further discloses that the insulating resin (first insulating film, 11) surrounds the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) electrically insulates the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) from each other (Figure 5C, [0035]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 21 are met.
Regarding Claim 22, Shimoichi further discloses a metal film (Ni film) that covers at least a part of the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) (Figure 5E, [0026, 0037]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 22 are met.
Regarding Claim 23, Figure 1 of Shimoichi depicts an implementation of the terminal in the form of a chip component (1) (Figure 1, [0017]). From Figure 1 of Shimoichi, it can be seen that the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) surrounds an entire lower periphery of external electrode (17) (Figure 1). Shimoichi further discloses that the external electrode (17) is formed by applying metal layers on the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8), such that the external electrode (17) is in direct contact with the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) (Figure 5F, [0037]).
As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) indeed surrounds an entire upper periphery of the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) (Figure 5F). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 23 are met.
Regarding Claim 25, Figure 1 of Shimoichi depicts an implementation of the terminal in the form of a chip component (1) (Figure 1, [0017]). From Figure 1 of Shimoichi, it can be seen that the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) surrounds an entire lower periphery of external electrode (17) (Figure 1). Shimoichi further discloses that the external electrode (17) is formed by applying metal layers on the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8), such that the external electrode (17) is in direct contact with the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) (Figure 5F, [0037]).
As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) indeed surrounds an entire upper periphery of the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) (Figure 5F). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 25 are met.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 7, 13, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimoichi (JP 2019161170 A) (citations made in reference to the English translation attached to the previous office action, Non-Final Rejection dated 01/16/2026), as applied to Claims 1-2 and 5-6 above, and further in view of Poff (US 2009/0208818 A1).
In Regards to Claim 7 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Shimoichi discloses the terminal of Claim 1 as set forth above. Shimoichi further discloses a chip component (1) comprising the terminal (Figures 1 and 5C, [0016, 0032]).
Shimoichi is deficient in disclosing an electronic component package comprising: a sealed container including the terminal according to Claim 1; and an electronic component element that is in the sealed container while being electrically connected to the electrode portion.
Poff discloses an electronic component package (battery package, 100) comprising: a sealed container (casing, 105) including an electronic component element (battery fuel cell gauge, 130) that is in the sealed container (casing, 105) (Figure 1, [0011]). Poff further discloses that the electronic component element (battery fuel cell gauge, 130) may include microcontroller chips (124) which are electrically coupled to battery cells, 120) (Figure 1, [0011]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to utilize the chip of Shimoichi, which includes the terminal of Claim 1, as a microcontroller chip in an electronic component package as described by Poff, as such a configuration is known in the art as a suitable use for a chip such as the one described by Shimoichi, as taught by Poff. Furthermore, the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon the above modification, all of the limitations of Claim 7 are met.
In Regards to Claim 13 (Dependent Upon Claim 2):
Shimoichi discloses the terminal of Claim 2 as set forth above. Shimoichi further discloses a chip component (1) comprising the terminal (Figures 1 and 5C, [0016, 0032]).
Shimoichi is deficient in disclosing an electronic component package comprising: a sealed container including the terminal according to Claim 2; and an electronic component element that is in the sealed container while being electrically connected to the electrode portion.
Poff discloses an electronic component package (battery package, 100) comprising: a sealed container (casing, 105) including an electronic component element (battery fuel cell gauge, 130) that is in the sealed container (casing, 105) (Figure 1, [0011]). Poff further discloses that the electronic component element (battery fuel cell gauge, 130) may include microcontroller chips (124) which are electrically coupled to battery cells, 120) (Figure 1, [0011]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to utilize the chip of Shimoichi, which includes the terminal of Claim 2, as a microcontroller chip in an electronic component package as described by Poff, as such a configuration is known in the art as a suitable use for a chip such as the one described by Shimoichi, as taught by Poff. Furthermore, the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon the above modification, all of the limitations of Claim 13 are met.
In Regards to Claim 16 (Dependent Upon Claim 5):
Shimoichi discloses the terminal of Claim 5 as set forth above. Shimoichi further discloses a chip component (1) comprising the terminal (Figures 1 and 5C, [0016, 0032]).
Shimoichi is deficient in disclosing an electronic component package comprising: a sealed container including the terminal according to Claim 5; and an electronic component element that is in the sealed container while being electrically connected to the electrode portion.
Poff discloses an electronic component package (battery package, 100) comprising: a sealed container (casing, 105) including an electronic component element (battery fuel cell gauge, 130) that is in the sealed container (casing, 105) (Figure 1, [0011]). Poff further discloses that the electronic component element (battery fuel cell gauge, 130) may include microcontroller chips (124) which are electrically coupled to battery cells, 120) (Figure 1, [0011]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to utilize the chip of Shimoichi, which includes the terminal of Claim 5, as a microcontroller chip in an electronic component package as described by Poff, as such a configuration is known in the art as a suitable use for a chip such as the one described by Shimoichi, as taught by Poff. Furthermore, the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon the above modification, all of the limitations of Claim 16 are met.
In Regards to Claim 17 (Dependent Upon Claim 6):
Shimoichi discloses the terminal of Claim 6 as set forth above. Shimoichi further discloses a chip component (1) comprising the terminal (Figures 1 and 5C, [0016, 0032]).
Shimoichi is deficient in disclosing an electronic component package comprising: a sealed container including the terminal according to Claim 6; and an electronic component element that is in the sealed container while being electrically connected to the electrode portion.
Poff discloses an electronic component package (battery package, 100) comprising: a sealed container (casing, 105) including an electronic component element (battery fuel cell gauge, 130) that is in the sealed container (casing, 105) (Figure 1, [0011]). Poff further discloses that the electronic component element (battery fuel cell gauge, 130) may include microcontroller chips (124) which are electrically coupled to battery cells, 120) (Figure 1, [0011]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to utilize the chip of Shimoichi, which includes the terminal of Claim 6, as a microcontroller chip in an electronic component package as described by Poff, as such a configuration is known in the art as a suitable use for a chip such as the one described by Shimoichi, as taught by Poff. Furthermore, the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon the above modification, all of the limitations of Claim 17 are met.
New Rejections
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 5-6, 18, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Maniwa (JP 2016122713 A) (disclosed by Applicant on IDS dated 12/05/2022) (citations made in reference to English translation provided by Applicant attached to IDS dated 12/05/2022).
Regarding Claim 1, Maniwa discloses a terminal comprising: a substrate (die pad, 7) made of metal (copper); an electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) that is made of a same material (copper) as the substrate (die pad, 7) and functions as an electrode (Figure 1B, [0001, 0007-0009, 0033-0034]). Maniwa further discloses that the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) is surrounded by the substrate (die pad, 7) in a view from a thickness direction (view shown in Figure 1B), and overlapping the substrate (die pad, 7) in a view from a plane direction (see annotated Figure 1B below). Maniwa further discloses an insulating resin (9) that is between the substrate (die pad, 7) and the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5), surrounds the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) in a top to bottom direction of the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) in the view point shown in Figure 1B (Figure 1B, [0042]). Maniwa further discloses that the insulating resin (9) electrically insulates the substrate (die pad, 7) and the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) from each other (Figure 1B, [0017-0020, 0039]).
The examiner notes that the terms “a thickness direction” and “a plane direction” as written are broad limitations and are subject to the broadest reasonable interpretation during the review of the prior art. As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the direction of the viewpoint shown in Figure 1B of Maniwa may be considered a thickness direction. Likewise, the direction indicated in annotated Figure 1B below may be considered a plane direction. Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 1 are met.
PNG
media_image1.png
466
1119
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1B (Maniwa JP 2016122713 A)
Regarding Claim 5, Maniwa further discloses a metal film (plating layer, 10) that covers at least a part of the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) (Figure 1B, [0048]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 5 are met.
Regarding Claim 6, Maniwa further discloses that the metal film (plating layer, 10) includes Ni and Au (Figure1B, [0048]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 6 are met.
Regarding Claim 18, Maniwa discloses a manufacturing method of a terminal comprising: a substrate (die pad, 7) made of metal (copper); an electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) that is made of a same material (copper) as the substrate (die pad, 7) and is configured to function as an electrode (Figure 1B, [0001, 0007-0009, 0033-0042]). Maniwa further discloses an insulating resin (9) that is between the substrate (die pad, 7) and the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) to surround the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) in a top to bottom direction of the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) in the view point shown in Figure 1B (Figure 1B, [0042]). Maniwa further discloses that the insulating resin (9) insulates the substrate (die pad, 7) and the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) from each other (Figure 1B, [0017-0020, 0039]). Maniwa further discloses that the manufacturing method comprises: providing a groove (metal-removed portion) for dividing a mother substrate (metal substrate, 1) made of metal (copper) into the substrate (die pad, 7) and the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) (Figure 1B, [0034-0035]). Maniwa further discloses a step of disposing the insulating resin (9) in the groove (metal-removed portion) (Figure 1B, [0039-0042]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 18 are met.
Regarding Claim 21, Maniwa further discloses that the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) is surrounded by the substrate (die pad, 7) in a view from a thickness direction (view shown in Figure 1B), and overlapping the substrate (die pad, 7) in a view from a plane direction (see annotated Figure 1B below). Maniwa further discloses an insulating resin (9) that surrounds the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) in a top to bottom direction of the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) in the view point shown in Figure 1B (Figure 1B, [0042]). Maniwa further discloses that the insulating resin (9) electrically insulates the substrate (die pad, 7) and the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) from each other (Figure 1B, [0017-0020, 0039]).
The examiner notes that the terms “a thickness direction” and “a plane direction” as written are broad limitations and are subject to the broadest reasonable interpretation during the review of the prior art. As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the direction of the viewpoint shown in Figure 1B of Maniwa may be considered a thickness direction. Likewise, the direction indicated in annotated Figure 1B below may be considered a plane direction. Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 21 are met.
PNG
media_image1.png
466
1119
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1B (Maniwa JP 2016122713 A)
Regarding Claim 22, Maniwa further discloses a metal film (plating layer, 10) that covers at least a part of the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) (Figure 1B, [0048]). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 22 are met.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 2-4, 8, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maniwa (JP 2016122713 A) (disclosed by Applicant on IDS dated 12/05/2022) (citations made in reference to English translation provided by Applicant attached to IDS dated 12/05/2022), as applied to Claims 1 and 18 above, further in view of Shimoichi (JP 2019161170 A) (citations made in reference to the English translation attached to the previous office action, Non-Final Rejection dated 01/16/2026).
In Regards to Claim 2 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Maniwa discloses the terminal of Claim 1 as set forth above. Maniwa further discloses that the outer circumference of the substrate (die pad, 7) is tapered to increase the contact area with the insulating resin (9) (Figure 1B, [0034]). As such, it can be seen from Figure 1B that the insulating resin (9) is on a part (tapered part) of a surface of the substrate (die pad, 7) and a part of a surface of the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) on a first main surface side (see annotated Figure 1B below) of the substrate (die pad, 7) (Figure 1B). Maniwa further discloses that the insulating resin (9) is an epoxy resin (Figure 1B, [0039]).
Maniwa is deficient in disclosing an insulating film between the insulating resin on the first main surface side of the substrate and the substrate and between the insulating resin on the first main surface side of the substrate and the electrode portion.
Shimoichi discloses a terminal comprising: a substrate (first electrode film, 7) made of metal; an electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) that is made of a same material as the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and functions as an electrode (Figure 5C, [0024, 0034-0035]). Shimoichi further discloses that the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) is surrounded by the substrate (first electrode film, 7) in a view from a thickness direction, and overlapping the substrate (first electrode film, 7) in a view from a plane direction (see Figure 5C). Shimoichi further discloses an insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) that is between the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8), surrounds the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8), and electrically insulates the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) from each other (Figure 5C, [0035-0036]). Shimoichi further discloses that the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) is on a part of a surface of the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and a part of a surface of the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) on a first main surface side (top surface relative to Figure 5C) of the substrate (first electrode film, 7) (Figure 5C, [0035-0036]). Shimoichi further discloses that the terminal further comprises: an insulating film (first insulating film, 11) between the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) on the first main surface side (top surface relative to Figure 5C) of the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and between the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) on the first main surface side (top surface relative to Figure 5C) of the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) (Figure 5C, [0035-0036]). Shimoichi further discloses that the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) may be a photosensitive polyimide resin or a photosensitive epoxy resin (Figure 5C, [0036, 0055-0056]). Shimoichi further discloses that the insulating film (first insulating film, 11) may be an oxide film (Figure 5C, [0022]). Shimoichi further discloses that the insulating film (first insulating film, 11) and the insulating resin (second insulating film, 12) together form insulating layer (10) (Figure 5C, [0022]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the terminal of Maniwa to include between the insulating resin and the other components of the terminal on the first main side of the substrate, an insulating film layer, as it is known in the art that forming an insulating film between an insulating resin (which may be an epoxy resin) and other components of a terminal is a suitable configuration for providing an adequate insulating layer for a terminal, as taught by Shimoichi. Furthermore, the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon the above modification, all of the limitations of Claim 2 are met.
PNG
media_image2.png
657
959
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1B (Maniwa JP 2016122713 A)
In Regards to Claim 3 (Dependent Upon Claim 2):
Maniwa as modified by Shimoichi discloses the terminal of Claim 2 as set forth above. Upon the modification detailed above in the rejection of Claim 2, modified Maniwa includes an insulating film intervening entirely between the insulating resin (9) and the other components of the terminal, including the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8), on the first main surface side (see annotated Figure 1B above) of the substrate (first electrode film, 7) (Figure 1B).
As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the insulating film is at a position where the insulating film covers at least the insulating resin (9) on a second main surface side (see annotated Figure 1B above) facing a first main surface side (see annotated Figure 1B above) of the substrate (first electrode film, 7) (Figure 1B). In other words, when the arrow indicating the second main surface side (see annotated Figure 1B above) is drawn down the page in Figure 1B, the arrow will hit the insulating film before hitting the insulating resin. Thus, the insulating film covers the insulating resin (9) from a second main surface side (see annotated Figure 1B above). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 3 are met.
In Regards to Claim 4 (Dependent Upon Claim 2):
Maniwa as modified by Shimoichi discloses the terminal of Claim 2 as set forth above. Upon the modification detailed above in the rejection of Claim 2, modified Maniwa includes an insulating film intervening entirely between the insulating resin (9) and the other components of the terminal, including the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) (Figure 1B).
As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the insulating film would necessarily be between the insulating resin (9) which surrounds the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) (in a top to bottom direction of the electrode pad, 5, in the view point shown in Figure 1B) and the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) (Figure 1B). Likewise, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the insulating film is between the insulating resin (9) which surrounds the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) (in a top to bottom direction of the electrode pad, 5, in the view point shown in Figure 1B) and the substrate (first electrode film, 7) (Figure 1B). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 4 are met.
In Regards to Claim 8 (Dependent Upon Claim 3):
Maniwa as modified by Shimoichi discloses the terminal of Claim 3 as set forth above. Upon the modification detailed above in the rejection of Claim 2, modified Maniwa includes an insulating film intervening entirely between the insulating resin (9) and the other components of the terminal, including the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) (Figure 1B).
As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the insulating film would necessarily be between the insulating resin (9) which surrounds the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) (in a top to bottom direction of the electrode pad, 5, in the view point shown in Figure 1B) and the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) (Figure 1B). Likewise, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the insulating film is between the insulating resin (9) which surrounds the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5) (in a top to bottom direction of the electrode pad, 5, in the view point shown in Figure 1B) and the substrate (first electrode film, 7) (Figure 1B). Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 8 are met.
In Regards to Claim 19 (Dependent Upon Claim 18):
Maniwa discloses the manufacturing method of Claim 18 as set forth above.
Maniwa is deficient in disclosing that before the providing of the groove, a step of providing an insulating film on a surface of the mother substrate.
Shimoichi discloses a manufacturing method of a terminal, the terminal including a substrate (first electrode film, 7) made of metal, an electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) that is configured of a same material as the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and is configured to function as an electrode (Figure 5C, [0024, 0032, 0034-0035]). Shimoichi further discloses an insulating resin (first insulating film, 11) that is between the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) to surround the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8), and insulates the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) from each other (Figure 5C, [0035]). Shimoichi further discloses that the manufacturing method comprises: providing a groove (portions of base electrode film removed during etching) for dividing a mother substrate (base electrode film) made of metal into the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8); and disposing the insulating resin (first insulating film, 11) in the groove (portions of base electrode film removed during etching) (Figure 5C, [0035]). Shimoichi further discloses that before the providing of the groove (portions of base electrode film removed during etching), a step of providing an insulating film (surface insulating film, 6) on a surface (lower surface relative to Figure 5C) of the mother substrate (base electrode film) (Figure 5C, [0032-0035]). Shimoichi further discloses that the insulating film (surface insulating film, 6) may be an oxide film (Figure 5C, [0019]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the terminal of Maniwa to provide an insulating film on a surface of the mother substrate prior to forming the groove, as it is known in the art that forming an insulating film on a surface of the mother substrate which is then used to form an electrode portion is a suitable configuration and process for providing an adequate insulating layer for a terminal, as taught by Shimoichi. Furthermore, the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon the above modification, all of the limitations of Claim 19 are met.
In Regards to Claim 20 (Dependent Upon Claim 19):
Maniwa as modified by Shimoichi discloses the manufacturing method of Claim 19 as set forth above. As detailed above in the rejection of Claim 18, Maniwa discloses that the manufacturing method comprises: providing a groove (metal-removed portion) for dividing a mother substrate (metal substrate, 1) made of metal (copper) into the substrate (die pad, 7) and the electrode portion (electrode pad, 5), and then disposing the insulating resin (9) in the groove (metal-removed portion) (Figure 1B, [0034-0035, 0039-0042]). Upon the modification detailed above in the rejection of Claim 19, the skilled artisan would appreciate that since the insulation film is formed prior to the forming of the groove, the insulating film would necessarily be provided before providing the insulating resin (9).
As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that insulating film may only be provided on the surface of the groove (metal-removed portion) after the groove (metal-removed portion) is provided (i.e., after the groove is provided, the surface insulating film is exposed such that it is provided on what then may be considered the bottom surface of the groove). The examiner notes that the instant claim does not require that the insulating film is present on the entire surface of the groove. Thus, all of the limitations of Claim 20 are met.
Claims 7 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maniwa (JP 2016122713 A) (disclosed by Applicant on IDS dated 12/05/2022) (citations made in reference to English translation provided by Applicant attached to IDS dated 12/05/2022), as applied to Claims 1 and 5-6 above, further in view of Momo et al. (US 2016/0351975 A1).
In Regards to Claim 7 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Maniwa discloses the terminal of Claim 1 as set forth above. Maniwa further discloses that the terminal may be utilized as semiconductor substrate for an application such as a memory or CPU [0001-0002].
Maniwa is deficient in disclosing an electronic component package comprising: a sealed container including the terminal according to Claim 1; and an electronic component element that is in the sealed container while being electrically connected to the electrode portion.
Momo discloses an electronic component package (device, 10) comprising: a sealed container (housing, 5000) including an electronic component element (CPU, 11) that is in the sealed container (housing, 5000) (Figures 1 and 12A-12F, [0049-0051, 0060, 0259-0260]). Momo further discloses that the electronic component element (CPU, 11) may comprise an oxide semiconductor transistor in a memory cell within the electronic component element (CPU, 11) (Figure 1, [0060]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to utilize the semiconductor substrate of Maniwa, which is the terminal of Claim 1, as a semiconductor substrate for a CPU in an electronic component package as described by Momo, as such a configuration is known in the art as a suitable use for a semiconductor element such as the one described by Maniwa, as taught by Momo. Furthermore, the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon the above modification, all of the limitations of Claim 7 are met.
In Regards to Claim 16 (Dependent Upon Claim 5):
Maniwa discloses the terminal of Claim 5 as set forth above. Maniwa further discloses that the terminal may be utilized as semiconductor substrate for an application such as a memory or CPU [0001-0002].
Maniwa is deficient in disclosing an electronic component package comprising: a sealed container including the terminal according to Claim 5; and an electronic component element that is in the sealed container while being electrically connected to the electrode portion.
Momo discloses an electronic component package (device, 10) comprising: a sealed container (housing, 5000) including an electronic component element (CPU, 11) that is in the sealed container (housing, 5000) (Figures 1 and 12A-12F, [0049-0051, 0060, 0259-0260]). Momo further discloses that the electronic component element (CPU, 11) may comprise an oxide semiconductor transistor in a memory cell within the electronic component element (CPU, 11) (Figure 1, [0060]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to utilize the semiconductor substrate of Maniwa, which is the terminal of Claim 5, as a semiconductor substrate for a CPU in an electronic component package as described by Momo, as such a configuration is known in the art as a suitable use for a semiconductor element such as the one described by Maniwa, as taught by Momo. Furthermore, the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon the above modification, all of the limitations of Claim 16 are met.
In Regards to Claim 17 (Dependent Upon Claim 6):
Maniwa discloses the terminal of Claim 6 as set forth above. Maniwa further discloses that the terminal may be utilized as semiconductor substrate for an application such as a memory or CPU [0001-0002].
Maniwa is deficient in disclosing an electronic component package comprising: a sealed container including the terminal according to Claim 6; and an electronic component element that is in the sealed container while being electrically connected to the electrode portion.
Momo discloses an electronic component package (device, 10) comprising: a sealed container (housing, 5000) including an electronic component element (CPU, 11) that is in the sealed container (housing, 5000) (Figures 1 and 12A-12F, [0049-0051, 0060, 0259-0260]). Momo further discloses that the electronic component element (CPU, 11) may comprise an oxide semiconductor transistor in a memory cell within the electronic component element (CPU, 11) (Figure 1, [0060]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to utilize the semiconductor substrate of Maniwa, which is the terminal of Claim 6, as a semiconductor substrate for a CPU in an electronic component package as described by Momo, as such a configuration is known in the art as a suitable use for a semiconductor element such as the one described by Maniwa, as taught by Momo. Furthermore, the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon the above modification, all of the limitations of Claim 17 are met.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maniwa (JP 2016122713 A) (disclosed by Applicant on IDS dated 12/05/2022) (citations made in reference to English translation provided by Applicant attached to IDS dated 12/05/2022), as modified by Shimoichi (JP 2019161170 A) (citations made in reference to the English translation attached to the previous office action, Non-Final Rejection dated 01/16/2026), as applied to Claim 2 above, further in view of Momo et al. (US 2016/0351975 A1).
In Regards to Claim 13 (Dependent Upon Claim 2):
Maniwa as modified by Shimoichi discloses the terminal of Claim 2 as set forth above. Maniwa further discloses that the terminal may be utilized as semiconductor substrate for an application such as a memory or CPU [0001-0002].
Maniwa is deficient in disclosing an electronic component package comprising: a sealed container including the terminal according to Claim 2; and an electronic component element that is in the sealed container while being electrically connected to the electrode portion.
Momo discloses an electronic component package (device, 10) comprising: a sealed container (housing, 5000) including an electronic component element (CPU, 11) that is in the sealed container (housing, 5000) (Figures 1 and 12A-12F, [0049-0051, 0060, 0259-0260]). Momo further discloses that the electronic component element (CPU, 11) may comprise an oxide semiconductor transistor in a memory cell within the electronic component element (CPU, 11) (Figure 1, [0060]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to utilize the semiconductor substrate of Maniwa, which is the terminal of Claim 2, as a semiconductor substrate for a CPU in an electronic component package as described by Momo, as such a configuration is known in the art as a suitable use for a semiconductor element such as the one described by Maniwa, as taught by Momo. Furthermore, the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon the above modification, all of the limitations of Claim 13 are met.
Claims 23-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Maniwa (JP 2016122713 A) (disclosed by Applicant on IDS dated 12/05/2022) (citations made in reference to English translation provided by Applicant attached to IDS dated 12/05/2022), as applied to Claims 1 and 18 above, further in view Furuta et al. (US 2020/0035783 A1).
In Regards to Claim 23 (Dependent Upon Claim 1):
Maniwa discloses the terminal of Claim 1 as set forth above. Maniwa further discloses that the terminal may be utilized as semiconductor substrate for an application such as a memory or CPU [0001-0002].
Maniwa is deficient in disclosing that the insulating resin surrounds an entire periphery of the electrode portion.
The examiner notes that the term “an entire periphery” as written is a broad limitation and is subject to the broadest reasonable interpretation during the review of prior art.
Furuta discloses a terminal (semiconductor device, 1) comprising: a substrate (base electrode, 16) made of metal (aluminum); an electrode portion (emitter electrode, 15) that is made of a same material (aluminum) as the substrate (base electrode, 16) and functions as an electrode (Figures 1(a) and 1(b), [0018-0019]). Furuta further discloses that the electrode portion (emitter electrode, 15) is surrounded by the substrate (base electrode, 16) in a view from a thickness direction (as shown in Figure 1(a)), and overlapping the substrate (base electrode, 16) in a view from a plane direction (as shown in Figure 1(b)) (see Figures 1(a) and 1(b)). Furuta further discloses an insulating layer (17) that is between the substrate (base electrode, 16) and the electrode portion (emitter electrode, 15), surrounds the electrode portion (emitter electrode, 15), and electrically insulates the substrate (base electrode, 16) and the electrode portion (emitter electrode, 15) from each other (Figure 1(a), [0018-0019]). Figure 1(a) of Furuta displays that the insulating layer (17) surrounds an entire periphery of the electrode portion (emitter electrode, 15) (Figure 1(a)).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the terminal of Maniwa to have the insulating resin surrounding the entire periphery of the electrode portion, as it is known in the art as a suitable configuration for an insulating material in contact with an electrode portion in a terminal, as taught by Furuta. Furthermore, the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon the above modification, all of the limitations of Claim 23 are met.
In Regards to Claim 24 (Dependent Upon Claim 23):
Maniwa as modified by Furuta discloses the terminal of Claim 23 as set forth above.
Maniwa is deficient in disclosing that the substrate surrounds an entire periphery of the insulating resin.
Figure 1(a) of Furuta displays that the substrate (base electrode, 16) surrounds an entire periphery of the insulating layer (17) (Figure 1(a)).
The examiner notes that the term “an entire periphery” as written is a broad limitation and is subject to the broadest reasonable interpretation during the review of prior art.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the terminal of Maniwa to have the substrate surrounding an entire periphery of the insulating resin, as it is known in the art as a suitable configuration for a substrate in contact with an insulating material in a terminal, as taught by Furuta. Furthermore, the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon the above modification, all of the limitations of Claim 24 are met.
In Regards to Claim 25 (Dependent Upon Claim 18):
Maniwa discloses the terminal of Claim 18 as set forth above. Maniwa further discloses that the terminal may be utilized as semiconductor substrate for an application such as a memory or CPU [0001-0002].
Maniwa is deficient in disclosing that the insulating resin surrounds an entire periphery of the electrode portion.
The examiner notes that the term “an entire periphery” as written is a broad limitation and is subject to the broadest reasonable interpretation during the review of prior art.
Furuta discloses a terminal (semiconductor device, 1) comprising: a substrate (base electrode, 16) made of metal (aluminum); an electrode portion (emitter electrode, 15) that is made of a same material (aluminum) as the substrate (base electrode, 16) and functions as an electrode (Figures 1(a) and 1(b), [0018-0019]). Furuta further discloses that the electrode portion (emitter electrode, 15) is surrounded by the substrate (base electrode, 16) in a view from a thickness direction (as shown in Figure 1(a)), and overlapping the substrate (base electrode, 16) in a view from a plane direction (as shown in Figure 1(b)) (see Figures 1(a) and 1(b)). Furuta further discloses an insulating layer (17) that is between the substrate (base electrode, 16) and the electrode portion (emitter electrode, 15), surrounds the electrode portion (emitter electrode, 15), and electrically insulates the substrate (base electrode, 16) and the electrode portion (emitter electrode, 15) from each other (Figure 1(a), [0018-0019]). Figure 1(a) of Furuta displays that the insulating layer (17) surrounds an entire periphery of the electrode portion (emitter electrode, 15) (Figure 1(a)).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the terminal of Maniwa to have the insulating resin surrounding the entire periphery of the electrode portion, as it is known in the art as a suitable configuration for an insulating material in contact with an electrode portion in a terminal, as taught by Furuta. Furthermore, the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon the above modification, all of the limitations of Claim 25 are met.
In Regards to Claim 26 (Dependent Upon Claim 25):
Maniwa as modified by Furuta discloses the terminal of Claim 25 as set forth above.
Maniwa is deficient in disclosing that the substrate surrounds an entire periphery of the insulating resin.
Figure 1(a) of Furuta displays that the substrate (base electrode, 16) surrounds an entire periphery of the insulating layer (17) (Figure 1(a)).
The examiner notes that the term “an entire periphery” as written is a broad limitation and is subject to the broadest reasonable interpretation during the review of prior art.
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify the terminal of Maniwa to have the substrate surrounding an entire periphery of the insulating resin, as it is known in the art as a suitable configuration for a substrate in contact with an insulating material in a terminal, as taught by Furuta. Furthermore, the selection of a known configuration based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07). Upon the above modification, all of the limitations of Claim 26 are met.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that second insulating film (12) of Shimoichi (JP 2019161170 A) does not electrically insulate the first electrode film (7) from the second electrode film (8).
The examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner acknowledges that additional paragraphs of Shimoichi could have been cited to provide a clearer picture to how Shimoichi anticipates the instant claims, however the examiner maintains that Shimoichi indeed anticipates the independent instant claims.
Shimoichi discloses an insulating layer (10) comprised of a first insulating film (11) and a second insulating film (12), wherein the insulating layer (10) covers the first electrode film (7) and the second electrode film (8) [0022]. Shimoichi further discloses that even when openings (13/14) may be formed to expose portions of the first electrode film (7) and the second electrode film (8), the edges of the first electrode film (7) and the second electrode film (8) are not exposed [0023]. Shimoichi further discloses that the first insulating film (11) may be an oxide film such as (SiO2) and the second insulating film (12) may be an insulating resin such as a polyimide [0022]. Thus, it is clear that Shimoichi provides an adequate electrical insulation between various components of the terminal, including between the first electrode film (7) and the second electrode film (8), via the two-layer insulating layer (10) which includes the second insulating film (12).
Furthermore, Shimoichi further discloses that the first insulating film (11) may have a thickness between 0.5 µm and 2 µm and the second insulating film (12) may have a thickness between 1.5 µm and 50 µm [0022]. As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate how different the thicknesses of the first insulating film (11) and the second insulating film (12) may be. For example, if each layer has a thickness at the upper limit of their respective ranges (i.e., the thickness of the first insulating film is 2 µm, and the thickness of the second insulating film is 50 µm), the second insulating film (12) would be 48 µm thicker than the first insulating film (11). The skilled artisan would appreciate that with the relatively small thickness of the first insulating film (11) (2 µm), the possibility of low coverage areas or pinholes forming in the first insulating film (11) increases. In such a situation, the provision of the second insulating film (12) improves the likelihood of maintaining electrical insulation between various components of the terminal.
Additionally, Shimoichi discloses in the embodiment of the terminal shown in Figure 5E, a first external electrode (15) and a second external electrode (17) may be formed to be in direct contact with first electrode film (7) and second electrode film (8), respectively (Figure 5E, [0024-0025]). Shimoichi further discloses that second insulating film (12) directly intervenes between the first external electrode (15) and the second external electrode (17) (Figure 5E, [0024-0025, 0037]). The examiner notes that the instant claims do not require that the insulating resin electrically insulates the substrate and the electrode portion from each other in such a manner that the insulating resin must be in direct contact with each of the substrate and the electrode portion. As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that in the embodiment of the terminal shown in Figure 5E of Shimoichi, the second insulating film (12) electrically insulates the first electrode film (7) and the second electrode film (8) from one another via connection with the first external electrode (15) and the second external electrode (17).
The Applicant further argues that the first electrode film (7) of Shimoichi does not surround the second electrode film (8), nor does the second insulating film (12) surround the second electrode film (8). The Applicant recites a common definition of the term “surround”, which is “to enclose on all sides”. The Applicant highlights instant Figures 1A and 1B which depict that the insulating resin (3) encloses the electrode (2) on all sides.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. The examiner notes that Claim 1 requires “the electrode portion being surrounded by the substrate in a view from a thickness direction” (lines 4-5) and “an insulating resin that is between the substrate and the electrode portion, surrounds the electrode portion….” (lines 6-7).
Regarding the Applicant’s argument that the first electrode film (7) does not surround the second electrode film (8), as detailed above in the rejection of Claim 1 (in view of Shimoichi), Shimoichi discloses a terminal comprising: a substrate (first electrode film, 7) made of metal; an electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) that is made of a same material as the substrate (first electrode film, 7) and functions as an electrode (Figure 5C, [0024, 0034-0035]). Shimoichi further discloses that the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) is surrounded by the substrate (first electrode film, 7) in a view from a thickness direction, and overlapping the substrate (first electrode film, 7) in a view from a plane direction (see Figure 5C).
The examiner notes that the terms “a thickness direction” as written is a broad limitation and is subject to the broadest reasonable interpretation during the review of the prior art. As such, the skilled artisan would appreciate that the direction of the viewpoint shown in Figure 5C of Shimoichi may be considered a thickness direction, and thus the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) is indeed surrounded by the substrate (first electrode film, 7) in a view from a thickness direction.
Regarding the Applicant’s argument that the second insulating film (12) does not surround the second electrode film (8), the examiner notes that the independent instant claims do not specify any specific viewpoint/direction from which the insulating resin surrounds the electrode portion, nor do the instant claims require that the insulating resin and the electrode portion are in the same plane. From Figure 5C of Shimoichi, it can be seen that from the thickness direction (direction of the viewpoint shown in Figure 5C of Shimoichi), the insulating resin (first insulating film, 11) surrounds the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) as the insulating resin (first insulating film, 11) exists on both sides of the electrode portion (second electrode film, 8) from in the thickness direction (direction of the viewpoint shown in Figure 5C of Shimoichi) (see annotated Figure 5C below).
PNG
media_image3.png
671
1215
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 5C (Shimoichi JP 2019161170 A)
The Applicant argues that a common definition of the term “surround” is “to enclose on all sides”, to which the Applicant highlights instant Figures 1A and 1B. The examiner acknowledges the Applicant’s highlighted definition, and how the Applicant points to instant Figures 1A and 1B to depict the Applicant’s intended meaning of the word “surround”. However, the examiner notes that instant Claim 1 specifically requires “the electrode portion being surrounded by the substrate in a view from a thickness direction” (lines 4-5). As addressed above, the examiner maintains that Shimoichi meets this limitation. Furthermore, the examiner notes that “to enclose on all sides” would suggest that the electrode portion (2) would be surrounded by the substrate (3) on all sides, including the “upper” side and “lower” side, which does not appear to be the case as shown in instant Figures 1A and 1B, as it appears the electrode portion (2) is exposed beyond the substrate (3) on the “upper” and “lower” sides.
The examiner further notes that newly added claims, and in particular Claims 23 and 25, also appear to suggest that there is some level of broadness in the term “surround” as written in Claims 1 and 18. Specifically, if the term “surround” as written in Claims 1 and 18 were to mean “enclose on all sides” (i.e., around the entire periphery thereof), it would be unclear to the skilled artisan how the subject matter of Claims 23-26 further limits the claims.
The Applicant further argues that the rejections made in the previous office action (Non-Final Rejection dated 01/16/2026) fail to clearly cite how Shimoichi teaches that the first electrode film (7) surrounds the second electrode film (8), how the second insulating film (12) electrically insulates the first electrode film (7) and the second electrode film (8) from one another, and how the second insulating film (12) surrounds the second electrode film (8).
As detailed above, the examiner acknowledges that additional paragraphs of Shimoichi could have been cited to provide a clearer picture to how Shimoichi anticipates the instant claims, however the examiner maintains that Shimoichi indeed anticipates the independent instant claims.
The examiner notes that newly added Claims 23 and 25 are rejected herein in view of the previously cited Shimoichi (JP 2019161170 A). However, Shimoichi does not teach the subject matter of Claims 24 and 26.
The examiner further notes that as an effort to promote compact prosecution, a new grounds of rejection is additionally made in view of Maniwa (JP 2016122713 A), Shimoichi (JP 2019161170 A), Momo et al. (US 2016/0351975 A1), and Furuta et al. (US 2020/0035783 A1).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 EMILY E FREEMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1498. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Miriam Stagg can be reached at (571)-270-5256. 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.E.F./Examiner, Art Unit 1724 /BRIAN R OHARA/ Examiner, Art Unit 1724
Prosecution Insights