Final Rejection
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Following a non-final action, applicant filed a response on 6/14/2026 in which the drawings and claim 1 are amended and claims 10-18 are cancelled. Claims 1-9 are pending.
Drawings
The drawing amendment filed 6/14/2026 is accepted. Applicant has corrected the issues noted previously and the drawing objection is withdrawn.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2018/0190520 (“Lin”) in view of either US 2018/0278014 (“Komatsu”) or JP 2006-665191 (“JP ‘519”).
Regarding claim 1, Lin discloses in Figs. 1-3 and the discussion thereof starting at [0038] a laser emission module, comprising:
a laser emitter 30;
a heat conduction substrate 20 comprising a first board surface (top of 20), wherein the first board surface is connected to the laser emitter; and
a first support board 10 comprising a third board surface (top of 10) facing toward the laser emitter, wherein the third board surface has a mounting region 12, and the heat conduction substrate corresponding to the mounting region is mounted on the first support board,
wherein the third board surface is provided with a drive circuit configured to drive the laser emitter to emit light, the drive circuit being distributed on the third board surface in a form of a printed circuit; and the laser emitter is electrically connected to the drive circuit through a wire having a first end connected to the laser emitter and a second end connected to the drive circuit.
Lin does not explain how the laser actually gets power, though it of course needs to be driven somehow, so it is natural to look at other laser chips to see how they are powered and do it in such a way.
Komatsu shows a similar device where a laser 113 and integrated driver circuit are disposed next to each other on a base, with a wire 116a between having first end connected to the drive circuit and second end on the laser. Fig. 2, 3, [0026].
JP ‘519 shows in Fig. 4 a light emitting diode (LEDs are driven similarly to laser diodes and therefore the teachings are analogous) 21 on a similar mount, and wires 23 connect to connection terminals 3a,b on the mount for powering the device. [0097]. The connection terminals on the mount correspond to a printed circuit on the third board surface as they are used to provide power to the device.
This would have been a simple substitution of a known element for another to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143 I.B. Lin is similar to the claim as a base device except does not show how the laser is powered. Komatsu and JP ‘519 each show a similar laser and is powered in a similar way as the claim. This drive circuit would analogously be on the third board surface of Lin. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement the Komatsu or JP ‘519 driving in Lin and the result of the modification would have been predictable. The only change here is that Lin is now driven in a particular way, rather than an unspecified way. Lin already had to be driven somehow, so merely doing it now in a specific way would have the predictable result of Lin operating in much the same way.
Regarding claim 2, as seen in Fig. 3 along a direction parallel to the first board surface, a size of the heat conduction substrate is unequal to a size of the laser emitter, and the difference in size is within a preset range. It is noted that the preset range is not in any way defined or limited in the claim, and no definition should be imported in from the specification. A person of ordinary skill may set the preset range to whatever value they wish, and Lin would then fall within such values. Additionally, along a direction perpendicular to the first board surface, the first board surface (top of 20) is disposed to be flush with the third board surface (top of 10).
Regarding claim 3, heat conduction substrate 20 may be ceramic or aluminum. [0041].
Regarding claim 4, Lin further discloses a first heat conduction member 40, wherein the first heat conduction member is viscous, filled between the laser emitter and the first board surface of the heat conduction substrate, and configured to connect the laser emitter to the heat conduction substrate for transmitting heat of the laser emitter to the heat conduction substrate. It is a metal solder layer, [0042], so it meets the thermal functions and solder may be considered a viscous material, particularly as “viscous” is not in any way defined.
Regarding claim 5, Lin does state the first heat conduction member is a silver paste. The examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the art that a laser and submount may be connected with silver paste. This statement was made in the prior action and was not challenged, therefore it is deemed admitted prior art. MPEP 2144.03 C. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to do so as it provides a sufficient connection while also providing some thermal conductivity, which is clearly the point here in Lin and Li. Additionally, it is generally considered obvious to select known materials and use them for their intended purpose. MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding claim 6, as seen in Fig. 3, the heat conduction substrate further comprises a second board surface (bottom of 20) relative to the first board surface (top of 20), and the first support board further comprises a fourth board surface (bottom of 10) relative to the third board surface (top of 10); and wherein the mounting region (where 20 and 10 meet) is concavely provided with a recess in a direction facing toward the fourth board surface, the recess is a blind recess, the second board surface of the heat conduction substrate is attached to a bottom plane of the recess, and at least part of the heat conduction substrate is embedded in the recess (all clear in Fig. 3).
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0141831 (“Li”) in view of either Komatsu or JP ‘519.
Regarding claim 1, Li discloses in Figs. 3-4 and discussion thereof a laser emission module, comprising:
a laser emitter 120 ([0023]);
a heat conduction substrate 162/172 comprising a first board surface (facing and connected to the laser, 164 or 182), wherein the first board surface is connected to the laser emitter; and
a first support board 110 comprising a third board surface facing toward the laser emitter (bottom of 110, or 112), wherein the third board surface has a mounting region, and the heat conduction substrate corresponding to the mounting region is mounted on the first support board these elements are clearly mounted to each other, see also more specific discussion of mounting region as to claim 6 below).
wherein the third board surface is provided with a drive circuit configured to drive the laser emitter to emit light, the drive circuit being distributed on the third board surface in a form of a printed circuit; and the laser emitter is electrically connected to the drive circuit through a wire having a first end connected to the laser emitter and a second end connected to the drive circuit.
Li does not explain how the laser actually gets power, though it of course needs to be driven somehow, so it is natural to look at other laser chips to see how they are powered and do it in such a way. Li does show wires connecting to “conductive routes” 118 but only says they are to connect to external devices, not what they are actually used for. [0011]-[0012].
Komatsu shows a similar device where a laser 113 and integrated driver circuit are disposed next to each other on a base, with a wire 116a between having first end connected to the drive circuit and second end on the laser. Fig. 2, 3, [0026].
JP ‘519 shows in Fig. 4 a light emitting diode (LEDs are driven similarly to laser diodes and therefore the teachings are analogous) 21 on a similar mount, and wires 23 connect to connection terminals 3a,b on the mount for powering the device. [0097]. The connection terminals on the mount correspond to a printed circuit on the third board surface as they are used to provide power to the device.
This would also have been a simple substitution of a known element for another to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143 I.B. Li is similar to the claim as a base device except does not show how the laser is powered. Komatsu and JP ‘519 each show a similar laser and is powered in a similar way as the claim. This drive circuit would analogously be on the third board surface of Li. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement the Komatsu or JP ‘519 driving in Li and the result of the modification would have been predictable. The only change here is that Li is now driven in a particular way, rather than an unspecified way. Li already had to be driven somehow, so merely doing it now in a specific way would have the predictable result of Li operating in much the same way.
Regarding claim 2, as seen in Fig. 3 along a direction parallel to the first board surface, a size of the heat conduction substrate is unequal to a size of the laser emitter, and the difference in size is within a preset range. It is noted that the preset range is not in any way defined or limited in the claim, and no definition should be imported in from the specification. A person of ordinary skill may set the preset range to whatever value they wish, and Li would then fall within such values. Additionally, along a direction perpendicular to the first board surface, the first board surface (bottom of 162/172, or 164/182) is disposed to be flush with the third board surface (112).
Regarding claim 3, the heat conduction substrate 162/172 may be ceramic or aluminum. [0021]-[0022].
Regarding claim 4, Li further shows a first heat conduction member 134, wherein the first heat conduction member is viscous, filled between the laser emitter 120 and the first board surface 164/182 of the heat conduction substrate, and configured to connect the laser emitter to the heat conduction substrate for transmitting heat of the laser emitter to the heat conduction substrate. See [0013], which discusses 134 as to Fig. 1, but since it is not discussed later this description would also apply to the same element 134 Figs. 3-4. Element 134 is thermally conductive so it meets the claimed function, and it is an epoxy so it may be considered “viscous” as epoxy is viscous, particularly as the amount of viscosity is not in any way defined.
Regarding claim 5, Li does state the first heat conduction member is a silver paste. The examiner takes Official Notice that it is well known in the art that a laser and submount may be connected with silver paste. This statement was made in the prior action and was not challenged, therefore it is deemed admitted prior art. MPEP 2143.03 C. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to do so as it provides a sufficient connection while also providing some thermal conductivity, which is clearly the point here in Lin and Li. Additionally, it is generally considered obvious to select known materials and use them for their intended purpose. MPEP 2144.07.
Regarding claim 6, the heat conduction substrate 162/182 further comprises a second board surface 166/186 relative to the first board surface 164/182, and the first support board further comprises a fourth board surface 114 relative to the third board surface 112; and wherein
the mounting region has a through hole penetrating through the third board surface 112 and the fourth board surface 114, at least part of the heat conduction substrate 162/182 is embedded in the through hole, and the second board surface 166/186 is in one of the following configurations: located inside the through hole, flush with the fourth board surface, or located outside the through hole (all clearly seen in Figs. 3 or 4).
Regarding claim 7, the first through hole limitation is met as in claim 6 above, the second board surface 166/186 of the heat conduction substrate 162/182 comes into contact with a heat dissipation structure 140 via a first heat conduction element 142, the first heat conduction element is configured to transmit heat absorbed by the heat conduction substrate to the heat dissipation structure, and the heat dissipation structure is configured to perform heat dissipation processing on the heat conduction substrate.
Regarding claim 8, as in Fig. 3, the second board surface 166 is flush with the fourth board surface 114, and the heat dissipation structure has a plane structure 142 attached to the second board surface on a side facing toward the second board surface.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li and either Komatsu or JP ‘519 as applied to claim 1, and further in view of US 5,459,639 (“Izumi”).
Li does not show the specifics of the through hole and how the heat conduction substrate relates to it as claimed.
Izumi in Fig. 1 and discussion thereof starting at col. 3 line 25 shows a heat generating element 2A formed on a heat conduction substrate 3, which is in turn mounted on a support board 1. The support board has a through hole with a first sub-hole 1A penetrating through the third board surface (i.e. the top near the heat generating element) and a second sub-hole 1B penetrating through the fourth board surface (i.e. at the bottom), the first sub-hole communicates with the second sub-hole, a diameter of the first sub-hole is greater than a diameter of the second sub-hole to form a stepped structure, and the heat conduction substrate is located in the first sub-hole and supported on a stepped surface of the stepped structure (all clearly seen in Fig. 1). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to use this configuration as it provides stable and efficient heat radiation without making assembly difficult, as taught by Izumi. Col. 1 lines 60-65. This also provides shoulder parts which are an additional way of mounting the heat conduction substrate to the support board, such as via screws or spring mounts. Col. 4 lines 11-27. Additionally this could be considered the simple substitution of one known element for another to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143 I.B. Li is a similar type of device but has a different type of through hole in which the heat conduction substrate is disposed, but this type of through hole in the support board is found in Izumi. A person of ordinary skill could have used the Izumi style of through hole and the result would have been predictable because it essentially does the same exact thing as in Li—is a place for allowing the heat conduction substrate to be within the support board to conduct heat to the bottom away from the heat generating device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed in the response have been considered but are moot in light of the new ground of rejection above. The new ground is to meet the material added by amendment, therefore this action is appropriately made final.
Conclusion
Many references show a driving element and laser on a mount connected by a wire. US 7,106,766, US 5,172,301, US 2024/0006850, US 2021/0265811, US 2010/0243872 are exemplary, some cited previously and some newly cited.
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 James Menefee whose telephone number is (571)272-1944. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-4.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, MinSun Harvey can be reached at (571) 272-1835. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of applications may be obtained from Patent Center. See: 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.
/JAMES A MENEFEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
1 Cited in prior action, translation provided with this action.
Prosecution Insights