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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 13 November 2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 8 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0204879 to Kim et al.
In regards to claim 1, Kim recites a method of fabricating an electronic device (Figures 6A-F & 7), the method comprising: connecting a photonic die (110) to a substrate (101); temporarily attaching a removable protection apparatus (126) to the substrate; attaching a photonic connector (111) to the photonic die; disposing at least a portion of the photonic connector inside a housing (within body 114) of the protection apparatus; performing a fabrication process (bonding) with the photonic connector disposed at least partially inside the housing while the photonic connector is attached to the photonic die; and removing [0078] the photonic connector from the housing after completion of the fabrication process.
In regards to claim 2, Kim recites the fabrication processing further comprises reflowing solder connections. [0059]
In regards to claim 3, Kim recites attaching the protection apparatus to the substrate comprises: attaching support posts of the protection apparatus to a stiffener (114); and attaching the stiffener to the substrate. [0066, 0079]
In regards to claim 4, Kim recites attaching the protection apparatus comprises attaching support posts to the substrate and coupling the housing to the support posts.
In regards to claim 6, Kim recites the housing is coupled to the support posts using arms.
In regards to claim 8, Kim recites the substrate is a package substrate.
In regards to claim 9, Kim recites the substrate is a printed circuit board. [0059]
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 5 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2023/0204879 to Kim et al.
In regards to claim 5, although Kim does not expressly recite the support posts are attached to threaded inserts in the substrate, Kim does recite the support posts to be fiducials to be supported in a substrate to aid in alignment. Threaded inserts are known in the art as accepted and known alternatives to support fiducials to further secure and align optical components. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have provided the support ports attached to threaded inserts in the substrate in order to secure the optical components.
In regards to claims 10, although Kim does not expressly recite attaching the protection apparatus to the printed circuit board comprises: gripping the photonic device by a pair of arms, Kim does teach a pick and place assembly machine for the purpose of placement. Typical pick and place assembly machines have gripping components, such as a pair of arms to pick up and place components. Therefore, although not expressly stated, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art for gripping the photonic device by a pair of arms.
In regards to claim 11, although Kim does not expressly recite coupling a protection apparatus to the printed circuit board comprises attaching a support tray of the protection apparatus adjacent to the printed circuit board, the addition of support components, such as a tray, to aid in the fabrication of the device is a common technique. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art for coupling a protection apparatus to the printed circuit board comprises attaching a support tray of the protection apparatus adjacent to the printed circuit board.
In regards to claim 12, although Kim does not expressly recite routing the photonic connector around a cable guide, the step of routing a photonic connector around a cable guide is well known for the purpose of keeping components organized. Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date to a person having ordinary skill in the art to route the photonic connector around a cable guide.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The prior art of record fails to disclose or reasonably suggest disposing at least the portion of the photonic connector comprises disposing at least the portion of the photonic connector in a first housing portion coupled to a second housing portion in addition to the accompanying features of the independent claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 13-16 and 18-20 are allowed. The prior art of record fails to disclose or reasonably suggest an electronic assembly, comprising: a chip package having: a substrate; a photonic die mounted to the substrate; and a photonic connector attached a first side of the photonic die; and a first protective housing mount disposed on the substrate on a first side of the photonic connector and a second protective housing mount disposed on the substrate on a side of the photonic connector opposite the first side, the first and second protective housing mounts configured to receive a removable protective housing for temporarily enclosing at least a portion of the photonic connector; and a stiffener attached to the substrate and surrounding the photonic die, the protective housing mounts integrated with the stiffener in addition to the accompanying features of the independent claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TINA M WONG whose telephone number is (571)272-2352. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:30.
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, Uyen-Chau Le can be reached at (571) 272-2397. 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.
/TINA WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874