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 office action is a response to the election of species filed on 3/10/2026.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species A, claims 1-6 and 9-16, in the reply filed on 3/10/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 7 and 8 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 3/10/2026.
Since generic claim 5 is allowable, claims 6-7, directed to the wire path plate for a wire bonding apparatus, previously restricted from the election of species, are now subject to bring rejoined. Claims 1-16 are hereby rejoined and fully examined for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Re. claim 1: The phrase “at least one of the conductive plates” as recited in line 9 appears to be --at least one of the first and second conductive plates--.
Re. claim 7: The phrase “including a first wire stub and a second wire stub” as recited in lines 1-2 appears to be –further comprising a first wire stub and a second wire stub--.
Re. claim 16: The phrase “at least one of the conductive plates” as recited in line 8 appears to be --at least one of the first and second conductive plates--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Re. claim 1: The phrase “the at least one conductive plate” and “the position” as recited in line 10 lacks antecedent basis.
Re. claim 3: The phrase “the at least one conductive plate” as recited in line 3 lacks antecedent basis.
Re. claim 4: The phrase “further comprising at least one non-conductive strip correspondingly mounted on the other of the first and second conductive plates,” as recited in lines 1-3 renders the claim vague and indefinite. According to the limitations as recited in lines 8-11 as recited in line 1, the at least one non-conductive strip is mounted along the upper and/or lower portions of at least one of the conductive plates. It is noted that at least one of the conductive plates can be both the first conductive plate and the second conductive plate, and the at least one non-conductive strip can be mounted along the upper and lower portions of both the first conductive plate and the second conductive plate. Since the at least one non-conductive strip can be mounted along the upper and lower portions of both the first conductive plate and the second conductive plate, it is unclear as to what the other of the first and second conductive plates is indicated.
Re. claim 5: The phrase “the at least one conductive plate” as recited in lines 1-2, “the conductive plate” as recited in line 3, “the conductive plate” as recited in line 4, and ““the conductive plate” as recited in line 5 lacks antecedent basis.
Re. claim 6: The phrase “the gap” as recited in line 2 lacks antecedent basis.
Re. claim 7: The phrase “the at least one conductive plate” as recited in lines 2-3 lacks antecedent basis.
Re. claim 11: The phrase “the at least one conductive plate” as recited in line 3 lacks antecedent basis.
Re. claim 14: The phrase “the lower non- conductive strip” as recited in lines 1-2 lacks antecedent basis.
Re. claim 15: The phrase “the at least one conductive plate” and “the position” as recited in line 9 lacks antecedent basis.
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.
Claims 1-4, 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Applicant Admitted Prior Art (APA hereinafter) in view of Otani (JP 57079628 A).
APA teaches a wire path plate for a wire bonding apparatus, as per claim 1 and claim16, the wire path plate comprising: a first conductive plate (100, Fig. 2, lines 30-34 on page 2) coupled to a second conductive plate (102, Fig. 2, lines 1-3 on page 3) as shown in Fig. 1, each conductive plate comprising an upper portion, a lower portion and a middle portion located between the upper and lower portions as shown in Figs. 2-3; a gap formed between the first and second conductive plates through which a bonding wire (16, Fig. 1, lines 10-12 in page 2) is configured to be passed.
However, APA silent at least one non-conductive strip mounted along the upper and/or lower portions of at least one of the conductive plates for insulating the bonding wire from conductive surfaces of the at least one conductive plate at the position of the at least one non-conductive strip. Otani teaches an electrical device including at least one non-conductive strip (7) mounted along the upper and/or lower portions of at least one of the conductive plates (5) as shown in Fig. 2 for insulating a bonding wire (2) from conductive surfaces of the at least one conductive plate at a position of the at least one non-conductive strip as shown in Fig. 2 (see also abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify a wire path plate for a wire bonding apparatus of APA by at least one non-conductive strip mounted along the upper and/or lower portions of at least one of the conductive plates as taught by Otani in order to provide an insulating property between the bonding wire from conductive surfaces of the at least one conductive plate.
Re. claim 2: Otani also teaches that an upper non-conductive strip (one of the strips 7) is mounted along the upper portion of the at least one conductive plate as shown in Fig. 3.
Re. claim 3: Otani also teaches that a lower non-conductive strip (the other one of the strips 7) is mounted along the lower portion of the at least one conductive plate as shown in Fig. 3.
Re. claim 4: Otani also teaches that at least one non-conductive strip (one of the strips 7) correspondingly mounted on the other of the first and second conductive plates, wherein a pair of non-conductive strips (both strips 7 in Fig. 3) comprising the at least one non-conductive strip of each of the first and second conductive plates facing each other form a space through which the bonding wire passes between the pair of non-conductive strips.
Re. claim 15: Otani silents a material of the at least one non-conductive strip. At the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the at least one non-conductive strip as recited in the claimed invention because Applicant has not disclosed that the at least one non-conductive strip as recited in the claimed invention provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Applicant’s invention to perform equally well with Otani because the at least one non-conductive strip as recited in the claimed invention would perform equally well such as an insulating property between the bonding wire from conductive surfaces of the at least one conductive plate in Otani. Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify the at least one non-conductive strip of Otani to obtain the invention as specified in claim 15.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-14 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Douglass (US PAT. 5,786,979), and Weaver (US PAT. 5,064,384) are cited to further show the state of the art with respect to a system having a wire bonding apparatus.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL D KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-4565. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 6:00 AM-2:00 PM.
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.
/PAUL D KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729
Prosecution Insights