Detailed Action
This office action is in response to the amendment filed on June 1st, 2026. Claims 1-3 and 5-10 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 1st, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues (pgs. 5-7, “Remarks”) that the contacts 54 of Cottet actually protrude from a front of the module 10 and then are turned up, therefore, the terminals 54 do not protrude from a top side of the encasement 60 of the power semiconductor module.
The examiner agrees that the contacts 54 of Cottet initially directly protrude from the front of the encasement 60, however, the contacts 54 are then turned up to indirectly protrude from the top side of the encasement 60.
Therefore, applicant’s arguments are not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Rejection Note: Italicized claim limitations indicate that the corresponding limitations are addressed with a secondary reference/embodiment in an obviousness analysis.
Claims 1-3 and 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mao et al. (CN 113295913 A; hereinafter Mao) in view of Mohn et al. (2017/0263527 A1; hereinafter Mohn) and Cottet et al. (2019/0304946 A1; hereinafter Cottet).
Regarding Claim 1, Mao (figs. 4-8) teaches a system comprising:
a semiconductor power module ([0038]/[n0019], see fig. 4) encased in a plastic compound ([0038]/[n0019], 2) for a pulse inverter of an electric vehicle ([0009]/[n0005], power modules are used in inverters in vehicles), the plastic compound forming an encasement (2) of the semiconductor power module, wherein
a busbar ([0038]/[n0019], 4),
an integrated circuit for current metering ([0038]/[n0019], 5) arranged on a circuit board ([0038]/[n0019], 10), and
a U-shaped shield plate ([0038]/[n0019], 9) surrounding the busbar (4) and the circuit board (10) are at least partially embedded in the plastic compound of the encasement (2) of the semiconductor power module, while
one end of the busbar (4) and electrical terminal contacts ([0039]/[n0020], 11) associated with the circuit board (10) protrude from the plastic compound of the encasement (2) of the semiconductor power module, wherein
the integrated circuit for current metering and the circuit board are completely encapsulated in the plastic compound, and wherein
the electrical terminal contacts (11) associated with the circuit board (10) protrude from a top side (top of fig. 6) of the encasement (2) of the semiconductor power module in a location outboard of the integrated circuit for current metering near a front face of the encasement of the semiconductor power module.
Mao doesn’t teach that the integrated circuit for current metering and the circuit board are completely encapsulated in the plastic compound.
However, Mohn (fig. 1) teaches the integrated circuit for current metering ([0039], current sensor may also be encapsulated into the mold encasing and connected to the circuit board) and the circuit board ([0065], 30) are completely encapsulated ([0069]-[0070], may be covered completely by 42 and 44) in the plastic compound ([0069], 42, 44) while yielding the predictable results of forming a functional current sensor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to completely encapsulate the integrated circuit and circuit board since this limitation is one of a finite number of identified, predictable potential solutions. This is an appropriate rationale to support a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Mao doesn’t teach the electrical terminal contacts associated with the circuit board protrude from a top side of the semiconductor power module in a location outboard of the integrated circuit for current metering near a front face of the encasement of the semiconductor power module.
However, Cottet (fig. 1) teaches the electrical terminal contacts ([0064], 54) associated with the circuit board ([0055], 12) protrude from a top side of the semiconductor power module ([0055], top of 10, see fig. 1) in a location outboard (54 is outboard of 12 where sensors may be housed) of the integrated circuit ([0064], some of the plurality of 54 may be used to connect to a temperature sensor which is on 12, not shown) for current metering near a front face of the encasement ([0066], 60, see fig. 2) of the semiconductor power module (right side 10, see fig. 1) while still maintaining the function of providing external electrical contacts. One of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted the terminal contacts of Cottet for the terminal contacts of Mao and yielded the predictable results of providing external electrical contact.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the terminal contacts of Cottet for the terminal contacts of Mao, since simple substitution of terminal contacts for another is an appropriate rationale to support a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding Claim 2, Mao (figs. 4-8) teaches the system according to claim 1, wherein terminal lugs ([0039]/[n0020], 12) for the electrical contacting of the semiconductor power module protrude from the plastic compound of the encasement (2) of the semiconductor power module.
Regarding Claim 3, Mao (figs. 4-8) teaches the system according to claim 1, wherein the end of the busbar (4) protrudes from the front face (bottom of fig. 5) of the encasement (2) of the semiconductor power module.
Regarding Claim 5, Mao doesn’t explicitly teach the system according to claim 2, wherein the terminal lugs for the electrical contacting of the semiconductor power module protrude from another front face of the encasement of the semiconductor power module.
However, Cottet (fig. 1) teaches the terminal lugs ([0062], 46) for the electrical contacting of the semiconductor power module ([0055], 10) protrude from another (46 protrudes from a different portion of the front face than 54) front face (right side of fig. 1) of the encasement (60) of the semiconductor power module (10) while still maintaining the function of providing external electrical contacts. One of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted the terminal lugs of Cottet for the terminal lugs of Mao and yielded the predictable results of providing external electrical contact.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the terminal lugs of Cottet for the terminal lugs of Mao, since simple substitution of terminal lugs for another is an appropriate rationale to support a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding Claim 6, Cottet (fig. 1) teaches the system according to claim 5, wherein the terminal lugs (46) are bent upward (see fig. 1) and their ends point in the direction of the top side (top of fig. 1) of the encasement (60) of the semiconductor power module (10).
Regarding Claim 7, Mao (figs. 4-8) teaches the system according to claim 1, further comprising: a drive circuit board ([0039]/[n0020], 3) for the semiconductor power module, wherein the integrated circuit for current metering (5) is connected in electrically conductive manner by the electrical terminal contacts (11) to the drive circuit board (3).
Regarding Claim 8, Mao (figs. 4-8) teaches the system according to claim 7, wherein the semiconductor power module is connected in electrically conductive manner by the terminal lugs (12) for the electrical contacting of the semiconductor power module to the drive circuit board (3).
Regarding Claim 9, Mao (figs. 4-8) teaches a method for manufacturing a system comprising:
a semiconductor power module ([0038]/[n0019], see fig. 4) encased in a plastic compound ([0038]/[n0019], 2) for a pulse inverter of an electric vehicle ([0009]/[n0005], power modules are used in inverters in vehicles), the plastic compound forming an encasement (2) of the semiconductor power module, wherein
a busbar ([0038]/[n0019], 4),
an integrated circuit for current metering ([0038]/[n0019], 5) arranged on a circuit board ([0038]/[n0019], 10), and
a U-shaped shield plate ([0038]/[n0019], 9) surrounding the busbar (4) and the circuit board (10) are at least partially embedded in the plastic compound of the encasement (2) of the semiconductor power module, while
one end of the busbar (4) and electrical terminal contacts ([0039]/[n0020], 11) associated with the circuit board (10) protrude from the plastic compound (2), and
a drive circuit board ([0039]/[n0020], 3) for the semiconductor power module, wherein the integrated circuit for current metering (5) is connected in electrically conductive manner by the electrical terminal contacts (11) to the drive circuit board (3), wherein
the integrated circuit for current metering and the circuit board are completely encapsulated in the plastic compound of the encasement of the semiconductor power module, and wherein
the electrical terminal contacts (11) associated with the circuit board (10) protrude from a top side (top of fig. 6) of the encasement (2) of the semiconductor power module in a location outboard of the integrated circuit for current metering near a front face of the encasement of the semiconductor power module, the method comprising:
mounting the semiconductor power module ([0039]/[n0020], see fig. 8) on the drive circuit board (3); and
securing the electrical terminal contacts (11) associated with the circuit board (10) in corresponding openings of the drive circuit board (3) by press-fit ([0040]/[n0021]).
Mao doesn’t teach that the integrated circuit for current metering and the circuit board are completely encapsulated in the plastic compound of the encasement of the semiconductor power module.
However, Mohn (fig. 1) teaches the integrated circuit for current metering ([0039], current sensor may also be encapsulated into the mold encasing and connected to the circuit board) and the circuit board ([0065], 30) are completely encapsulated ([0069]-[0070], may be covered completely by 42 and 44) in the plastic compound of the encasement ([0069], 42, 44) of the semiconductor power module while yielding the predictable results of forming a functional current sensor.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to completely encapsulate the integrated circuit and circuit board since this limitation is one of a finite number of identified, predictable potential solutions. This is an appropriate rationale to support a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Mao doesn’t teach the electrical terminal contacts associated with the circuit board protrude from a top side of the encasement of the semiconductor power module in a location outboard of the integrated circuit for current metering near a front face of the encasement of the semiconductor power module.
However, Cottet (fig. 1) teaches the electrical terminal contacts ([0064], 54) associated with the circuit board ([0055], 12) protrude from a top side of the encasement ([0066], 60, see fig. 2) of the semiconductor power module ([0055], top of 10, see fig. 1) in a location outboard (54 is outboard of 12 where sensors may be housed) of the integrated circuit ([0064], some of the plurality of 54 may be used to connect to a temperature sensor which is on 12, not shown) for current metering near a front face of the encasement (60) of the semiconductor power module (right side 10, see fig. 1) while still maintaining the function of providing external electrical contacts. One of ordinary skill in the art could have substituted the terminal contacts of Cottet for the terminal contacts of Mao and yielded the predictable results of providing external electrical contact.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the terminal contacts of Cottet for the terminal contacts of Mao, since simple substitution of terminal contacts for another is an appropriate rationale to support a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding Claim 10, Mao (figs. 4-8) teaches the method according to claim 9, in which terminal lugs ([0038]/[n0019], 12) for the electrical contacting of the semiconductor power module are secured in corresponding openings (see fig. 8) of the drive circuit board (3) by press-fit.
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 ADIN HRNJIC whose telephone number is (571)270-1794. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 AM - 4:30 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, Kretelia Graham can be reached at (571) 272-5055. 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.
/A.H./Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/Kretelia Graham/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Prosecution Insights