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 .
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) 1, 3 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito (US2010/0156732A1) in view of Funakoshi (WO2019/188378A1).
Ito discloses the claimed invention as follows (limitations not disclosed by Ito are crossed out, below):
Claim 1. A method for producing a laminate comprising:
a step of applying
wherein the antenna and the magnetic pattern portion are provided on the same surface1 of the substrate (see Figs. 1 and 10).
Claim 3. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 1, wherein the magnetic pattern portion is present on an entire periphery of the antenna. See Fig. 1 and 10. Additionally, 15 can be made of ferrite. See [0036].
Claim 7. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 1,
Claim 8. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 1, wherein the magnetic particles are magnetic particles
Claim 9. A method for producing an antenna-in-package (see Fig. 1), comprising:
a step of applying
wherein the antenna and the magnetic pattern portion are provided on the same surface (see footnote 1) of the substrate (see Figs. 1 and 10).
Ito discloses magnetic material portions 16, but does not disclose forming these magnetic portions by the claimed process.
Funakoshi shows it is known to form patterned magnetic regions using a photolithography technique (e.g. exposure and developing). Specifically, a resin layer A containing alkali-soluble resin and magnetic particles is laminated with a photosensitive layer B comprising alkali-soluble resin and photopolymerization initiator (see abstract). The photo-patterning can be performed by exposing the laminate and then developing (see [0017]). See [0021]. The average diameter of the magnetic particles is preferably 0.1 to 0 µm, i.e. 100 nm to 10,000 nm (see [0027]), numerous examples of magnetic materials being given in [0024], and including at least one of Fe, Ni and Co. A film thickness of layer A is 1 to 150 µm (see [0105]).
In view of the teachings of Funakoshi, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to utilize the technique disclosed by Funakoshi to form the magnetic material portions 16 of Ito, as a matter of selecting from conventional techniques of forming magnetic material patterns on a substrate, with predictable results.
Regarding claim 7, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to try a layer thickness between 1 and 150 µm, as discloses by Funakoshi, since the disclosed process is useful with such thicknesses, and adjusting the thickness as needed to obtain desirable magnetic properties.
Regarding claim 8, Ito does not mention a specific magnetic material. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to select from among the many magnetic materials and particle sizes disclosed by Funakoshi, based on the suitability for the particular application.
Claim(s) 2, 4-6 and 12-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito in view of Funakoshi, further in view of APA (admitted prior art).
Ito further discloses the claimed invention as follows (limitations not disclosed are crossed out):
Claim 2. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 1,
Claim 4. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 1,
Claim 5. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 1,
Claim 6. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 1, wherein the magnetic pattern portion is composed of a combination of a line and a space (see Figs. 3 and 4),
Claim 12. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 2, wherein the magnetic pattern portion is present on an entire periphery of the antenna. See Figs. 1 and 10.
Claim 13. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 2,
Claim 14. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 2, w
Claim 15. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 2,
Claim 16. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 2,
Claim 17. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 2,
Claim 18. A method for producing an antenna-in-package
Claim 19. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 3,
Claim 20. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 3,
Regarding claims 2 and 18, the examiner previously took official notice of the fact it is well known in the art to dispose semiconductor elements on PCBs, to manufacture useful electronic devices. Since Applicant did not traverse the examiner’s assertion of official notice, the above asserted-to fact is taken as admitted prior art (see MPEP 2144.03(C)). Whereas Ito does not describe what types of components are disposed on PCB 11, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to add various passible and active components, such as semiconductor elements, to create a useful electronic device.
Regarding claims 4-6, 13-15, 19 and 20, Ito teaches disposing the magnetic elements in an array, as seen in the various figures, but does not mention a particular spacing and dimensions. The examiner previously took official notice of the fact that in the antenna field it is well known to form antenna elements which are dimensioned so as to be multiples of ¼ of the wavelength, as well as spaced multiples of a quarter of the wavelength apart (for array antennas), to take advantage of resonance at a particular frequency. Since Applicant did not traverse the examiner’s assertion of official notice, the above asserted-to fact is taken as admitted prior art (see MPEP 2144.03(C)). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to apply the same concept to the sizing and spacing of the magnetic elements of Ito, such that the magnetic shielding absorbs particularly the target frequency.
Regarding claims 16 and 17, the same rationale applies as discussed above for claims 7 and 8.
Claim(s) 1, 3 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito (second interpretation) in view of Funakoshi.
Ito discloses the claimed invention as follows (limitations not disclosed by Ito are crossed out, below):
Claim 1. A method for producing a laminate comprising:
a step of applying
wherein the antenna and the magnetic pattern portion are provided on the same surface of the substrate (see Figs. 1 and 10).
Claim 3. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 1, wherein the magnetic pattern portion is present on an entire periphery of the antenna. See Fig. 1 and 10. See [0036] and [0048].
Claim 7. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 1,
Claim 8. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 1, wherein the magnetic particles are magnetic particles
Claim 9. A method for producing an antenna-in-package (see Fig. 1 and 10), comprising:
a step of applying
wherein the antenna and the magnetic pattern portion are provided on the same surface (see footnote 1) of the substrate (see Figs. 1 and 10).
Ito discloses magnetic material portions 16, 26, but does not disclose forming these magnetic portions by the claimed process.
Funakoshi shows it is known to form patterned magnetic regions using a photolithography technique (e.g. exposure and developing). Specifically, a resin layer A containing alkali-soluble resin and magnetic particles is laminated with a photosensitive layer B comprising alkali-soluble resin and photopolymerization initiator (see abstract). The photo-patterning can be performed by exposing the laminate and then developing (see [0017]). See [0021]. The average diameter of the magnetic particles is preferably 0.1 to 0 µm, i.e. 100 nm to 10,000 nm (see [0027]), numerous examples of magnetic materials being given in [0024], and including at least one of Fe, Ni and Co. A film thickness of layer A is 1 to 150 µm (see [0105]).
In view of the teachings of Funakoshi, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to utilize the technique disclosed by Funakoshi to form the magnetic material portions 16 and 26 of Ito, as a matter of selecting from conventional techniques of forming magnetic material patterns on a substrate, with predictable results.
Regarding claim 7, one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to try a layer thickness between 1 and 150 µm, as discloses by Funakoshi, since the disclosed process is useful with such thicknesses, and adjusting the thickness as needed to obtain desirable magnetic properties.
Regarding claim 8, Ito does not mention a specific magnetic material. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to select from among the many magnetic materials and particle sizes disclosed by Funakoshi, based on the suitability for the particular application.
Claim(s) 4-6, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito (second interpretation) in view of Funakoshi, further in view of APA (admitted prior art).
Ito further discloses the claimed invention as follows (limitations not disclosed are crossed out):
Claim 4. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 1,
Claim 5. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 1,
Claim 6. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 1, wherein the magnetic pattern portion is composed of a combination of a line and a space (see Figs. 3 and 4),
Claim 19. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 3,
Claim 20. The method for producing a laminate according to claim 3,
Regarding claims 4-6, 19 and 20, Ito teaches disposing the magnetic elements in an array, as seen in the various figures, but does not mention a particular spacing and dimensions. The examiner previously took official notice of the fact that in the antenna field it is well known to form antenna elements which are dimensioned so as to be multiples of ¼ of the wavelength, as well as spaced multiples of a quarter of the wavelength apart (for array antennas), to take advantage of resonance at a particular frequency. Since Applicant did not traverse the examiner’s assertion of official notice, the above asserted-to fact is taken as admitted prior art (see MPEP 2144.03(C)). One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to apply the same concept to the sizing and spacing of the magnetic elements of Ito, such that the magnetic shielding absorbs particularly the target frequency.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 21 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.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 LIVIUS R CAZAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8032. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday noon-8:30 pm ET.
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.
/LIVIUS R. CAZAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729
1 The current claim language does not require the antenna and magnetic pattern portion to both be in direct contact with the same surface of the substrate. The term “on” does not preclude the presence of a layer between the antenna and the substrate, as both the antenna and the isolating material 14 are on the upper surface of the substrate.
Prosecution Insights