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 .
Note by the Examiner
For clarity, the reference to specific claim numbers are presented in bold. Cited claim limitations are presented in bold the first time they are associated with a particular prior art disclosing the cited limitations, and subsequent reference to the already disclosed claim limitations are presented un-bolded. Certain elements from prior art which are not required by the claims are also presented un-bolded if they are particularly pertinent to understanding how the references are being combined. Item-to-item matching and Examiner explanations for 102 and/or 103 rejections have been provided in parenthesis.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities: within Claim 1 line 12, the phrase “caa p” is informal and being interpreted to mean the cap mentioned prior. 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.
Claim 13 is 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.
Regarding Claim 13, the phrase "for example" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 13 recites the acronym of “LCP” which is not expanded and defined within the claim or within the specification. Proper explanation of acronym is required.
Claim 17 is 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.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the one or more opaque regions" in line 7 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 19-22 are rejected as failing to define the invention in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
The claims are narrative in form and replete with indefinite language. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. The claim must be in one sentence form only. Note the format of the claims in the patent(s) cited.
Claim 19 is indefinite in defining the process of the cap formation in relation to the method described in Claim 14. Claim 19 does not further define how the cap is formed within the claim and merely states the cap is formed. In line 1, the claim recites the limitation “comprises forming the cap” which is indefinite as the process is not further explained within the claim or specification. Claims 20-22 are included due to their dependency on Claim 19.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-10, 13-19, 22, and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zheng (CN 105870070 A, see attached translated reference), hereinafter as Z1.
Regarding Claim 1, Z1 discloses an optical system (see [Technical Field] “the invention claims an optical system package structure”) comprising:
a circuit board (see FIG. 1, element 1, and pg. 3 par. 1 “the substrate 1 may be a circuit board structure”);
an optical emitter device mounted on the circuit board (see FIG. 1, element 6, and pg. 3 par. 3 “the LED chip 6 can be mounted on the substrate 1”);
and a cap mounted on the circuit board (see FIG. 1, elements 1, 7 and 8, and pg. 3 par. “referring to FIG. 1 and FIG. 2, the present invention provides an optical sensor package structure including an opaque packaged package, the packaged package including a substrate 1” and pg. 3 par. 4 “first light transmissive plate 7...second light transmissive plate 8” which form a cap on and including the substrate 1) wherein the cap and the circuit board together define a chamber therebetween, the chamber enclosing the optical emitter device (see FIG. 1, element 3, pg. 3 par. 1 “on the substrate 1 provided with the first cavity 3 and the second cavity 4…the first cavity 3 and the second cavity 4 being separated by a space portion 2” and pg. 3 par. 3 “the LED chip 6 is disposed in the second cavity 4”)
wherein the cap comprises one or more opaque regions (see FIG. 1 and 2, and pg. 3 par. 1 “FIG. 1 and FIG. 2, the present invention provides an optical sensor package structure including an opaque packaged package” where the opaque packaged package is the diagonal-lined area that encompassed in the structure defined in FIG. 2, see attached image below) and one or more transparent regions (see FIG. 1, elements 7 and 8, and pg. 3 par. 4 “first light-transmitting plate 7 and the second light-transmitting plate 8”),
PNG
media_image1.png
369
562
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein the one or more opaque regions (opaque packaged package of FIG. 2, shown above) of the cap are configured to prevent light emitted from the optical emitter device from travelling out of the chamber in one or more undesirable directions (this is an inherent property of opaque materials and therefore applies to the aforementioned opaque areas),
wherein the one or more transparent regions of the cap (FIG. 1, elements 7 and 8) are configured to allow light emitted from the optical emitter device (element 6) to travel out of the chamber in one or more desirable directions (see FIG. 1, this is an inherent property of transparent materials and therefore applies to the aforementioned transparent areas, allowing light to leave the chamber from the optical emitter), and wherein
the language the cap is formed by rendering one or more selected regions of a transparent substrate to be opaque, or by forming one or more opaque features on a transparent substrate is directed towards the process of manufacturing the optical system. It is well settled that “product by process” limitations in claims drawn to structure are directed to the product, per se, no matter how actually made. In re Hirao, 190 USPQ 15 at 17 (footnote 3). See also, In re Brown, 173 USPQ 685; In re Luck, 177 USPQ 523; In re Fessmann, 180 USPQ 324; In re Pilkington 162 USPQ 145, 147; In re Avery, 186 USPQ 161; In re Wethheim, 191 USPQ 90 (209 USPQ 554 does not deal with this issue); In re Marosi et al., 218 USPQ 289; and particularly In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, all of which make it clear that it is the patentability of the final product per se which must be determined in a “product by process” claim, and not the patentability of the process, and that an old or obvious product produced by a new method is not patentable as a product, whether claimed in “product by process” claims or otherwise. The above case law further makes clear that applicant has the burden of showing that the method language necessarily produces a structural difference. The applicant must show that different methods of manufacturing produce articles having inherently different characteristics, Ex parte Skinner 2 USPQ 2d 1788.
The final product as claimed is an opaque feature disposed on a transparent substrate. As such, the claim language does not distinguish the invention from Z1, who teaches the structure as claimed;
Z1 discloses one or more opaque features on a transparent substrate (See FIG. 3, element 15, pg. 4 par. 3 “opaque coating 15 is further disposed at the upper ends of the first transparent plate 7 and the second transparent plate 8” where opaque features are on the transparent plates shown in FIG. 1.)
Regarding Claim 3, Z1 discloses the optical system as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of: each optical emitter device comprises a light emitting surface area (see FIG. 1, element 6 and pg. 3 par. 2 “LED chip 6 emits optical signal” which is light emission across the top surface of the LED chip that has a light emitting surface area).
Regarding Claim 4, Z1 discloses the optical system as claimed in any claim 1, wherein the cap defines one or more recesses in a surface thereof (see FIG. 1, elements 3 and 4, pg. 3 par. 1 “the first cavity 3 and the second cavity 4 being separated by a space portion 2” where the cavities 3 and 4 are recess on the surface), one or more of the transparent regions of the cap are located at a closed end of each recess (see FIG. 1, elements 7 and 8, where they are at the closed end of the cavities described prior), an open end of each recess is disposed towards the circuit board (see FIG. 1 elements 1, 3 and 4 where the open cavities 3 and 4 are disposed towards the substrate 1), and the open end of each recess is located over a corresponding optical emitter device (see FIG. 1 elements 4 and 6, pg. 3 par. 3“the LED chip 6 is disposed in the second cavity 4”) so that each recess and the circuit board together define the corresponding chamber enclosing the corresponding optical emitter device (see FIG. 1 where the second cavity 4 encloses the LED chip).
Regarding Claim 5, Z1 discloses an optical (see [Technical Field] “the invention claims an optical system package structure”) comprising: a circuit board see (see FIG. 1, element 1, and pg. 3 par. 1 “the substrate 1 may be a circuit board structure”);
an optical detector device (see FIG. 1, element 5, and pg. 3 par 2 “optical sensor chip 5”) mounted on the circuit board (see FIG. 1 and pg. 3 par. 3 “optical sensor chip 5 and the LED chip 6 can be mounted on the substrate 1” where the substrate 1 can be a circuit board as mentioned prior);
and a cap mounted on the circuit board (see FIG. 1, elements 1, 7 and 8, and pg. 3 par. “referring to FIG. 1 and FIG. 2, the present invention provides an optical sensor package structure including an opaque packaged package, the packaged package including a substrate 1” and pg. 3 par. 4 “first light transmissive plate 7...second light transmissive plate 8” which form a cap on and including the substrate 1), wherein the cap and the circuit board together define a chamber therebetween, the chamber enclosing the optical detector device (see FIG. 1, element 3, pg. 3 par. 1 “on the substrate 1 provided with the first cavity 3 and the second cavity 4…the first cavity 3 and the second cavity 4 being separated by a space portion 2” and pg. 3 par. 3 “the optical sensor chip 5 is disposed in the first cavity 3”),
wherein the cap comprises one or more opaque regions (see FIG. 1 and 2, and pg. 3 par. 1 “FIG. 1 and FIG. 2, the present invention provides an optical sensor package structure including an opaque packaged package” and see the attached image on page 5 of this document) and one or more transparent regions (see FIG. 1, elements 7 and 8, and pg. 3 par. 4 “first light-transmitting plate 7 and the second light-transmitting plate 8”),
wherein the one or more opaque regions of the cap (see attached image on page 5 of this document for outline opaque regions) are configured to prevent light from travelling into the chamber from one or more undesirable directions (see FIG. 1 as this is an inherent property of opaque materials and therefore applies to the aforementioned opaque areas),
wherein the one or more transparent regions (FIG. 1 and elements 7 and 8) of the cap are configured to allow light to travel into the chamber and to impinge on the optical detector device (element 5) in the chamber from one or more desirable directions (see FIG. 1 as this is an inherent property of transparent materials and therefore applies to the aforementioned transparent areas, allowing light to enter towards the optical detector), and wherein
The language the cap is formed by rendering one or more selected regions of a transparent substrate to be opaque, or by forming one or more opaque features on a transparent substrate is directed towards the process of manufacturing the optical system. It is well settled that “product by process” limitations in claims drawn to structure are directed to the product, per se, no matter how actually made. In re Hirao, 190 USPQ 15 at 17 (footnote 3). See also, In re Brown, 173 USPQ 685; In re Luck, 177 USPQ 523; In re Fessmann, 180 USPQ 324; In re Pilkington 162 USPQ 145, 147; In re Avery, 186 USPQ 161; In re Wethheim, 191 USPQ 90 (209 USPQ 554 does not deal with this issue); In re Marosi et al., 218 USPQ 289; and particularly In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, all of which make it clear that it is the patentability of the final product per se which must be determined in a “product by process” claim, and not the patentability of the process, and that an old or obvious product produced by a new method is not patentable as a product, whether claimed in “product by process” claims or otherwise. The above case law further makes clear that applicant has the burden of showing that the method language necessarily produces a structural difference. The applicant must show that different methods of manufacturing produce articles having inherently different characteristics, Ex parte Skinner 2 USPQ 2d 1788.
The final product as claimed is an opaque feature disposed on a transparent substrate. As such, the claim language does not distinguish the invention from Z1, who teaches the structure as claimed;
Z1 discloses one or more opaque features on a transparent substrate (See FIG. 3, element 15, pg. 4 par. 3 “opaque coating 15 is further disposed at the upper ends of the first transparent plate 7 and the second transparent plate 8” where opaque features are on the transparent plates shown in FIG. 1.)
Regarding Claim 7, Z1 discloses the optical system as claimed in claim 5, wherein each optical detector device comprises a light receiving surface area (see FIG. 1, elements 5 and 11, and pg. 3 par. 2 “the optical sensor chip 5 has an optical area 11 through which the optical sensor chip 5 receives external optical signals).
Regarding Claim 8, Z1 discloses the optical system as claimed claim 4, wherein the cap defines one or more recesses in a surface thereof (see FIG. 1, elements 3 and 4, pg. 3 par. 1 “the first cavity 3 and the second cavity 4 being separated by a space portion 2” where the cavity is formed by the light-transmitting plates 7 and 8 closing off the packaged package), one or more of the transparent regions of the cap are located at a closed end of each recess (see FIG. 1, elements 7 and 8, where they are at the closed end of the cavities described prior), an open end of each recess is disposed towards the circuit board (see FIG. 1 elements 1, 3 and 4 where the open cavities 3 and 4 are disposed towards the substrate 1), and the open end of each recess is located over a corresponding optical detector device so that each recess and the circuit board together define the corresponding chamber enclosing the corresponding optical detector device (see FIG. 1 where the second cavity 3 encloses the optical sensor chip 5 and optical area 11).
Regarding Claim 9, Z1 discloses an optical system comprising (see [Technical Field] “the invention claims an optical system package structure”):
a circuit board (see FIG. 1, element 1, and pg. 3 par. 1 “the substrate 1 may be a circuit board structure”);
an optical emitter (element 6) device mounted on the circuit board (see FIG. 1, element 6, and pg. 3 par. 3 “the LED chip 6 can be mounted on the substrate 1”) and an optical detector device (element 5) mounted on the circuit board (see FIG. 1, element 5 and pg. 3 par. 3 “the optical sensor chip 5…can be mounted on the substrate 1);
and a cap mounted on the circuit board (see FIG. 1, elements 1, 7 and 8, and pg. 3 par. “referring to FIG. 1 and FIG. 2, the present invention provides an optical sensor package structure including an opaque packaged package, the packaged package including a substrate 1” and pg. 3 par. 4 “first light transmissive plate 7...second light transmissive plate 8” which form a cap on and including the substrate 1), wherein the cap and the circuit board together define first and second chambers (elements 3 and 4) therebetween, the first chamber enclosing the optical emitter device and the second chamber enclosing the optical detector device (see FIG. 1, element 3, pg. 3 par. 1 “on the substrate 1 provided with the first cavity 3 and the second cavity 4…the first cavity 3 and the second cavity 4 being separated by a space portion 2” and pg. 3 par. 3 “the optical sensor chip 5 is disposed in the first cavity 3, and the LED chip 6 is disposed in the second cavity 4”),
wherein the cap comprises one or more opaque regions (see FIG. 1 and 2, and pg. 3 par. 1 “FIG. 1 and FIG. 2, the present invention provides an optical sensor package structure including an opaque packaged package” where the diagonal-lines structure in FIG. 2 is the packaged package and see attached image on page 5 of this document), and first and second transparent regions (see FIG. 1, elements 7 and 8, and pg. 3 par. 4 “first light-transmitting plate 7 and the second light-transmitting plate 8”),
wherein the one or more opaque regions of the cap (see attached image on page 5 of this document of the opaque packaged package) are configured to prevent light emitted from the optical emitter device (element 6) from travelling out of the first chamber (element 3) in one or more undesirable directions and to prevent light from travelling into the second chamber (element 4) from one or more undesirable directions (inherent property of the opaque packaged package described prior),
wherein the first transparent region of the cap (see FIG. 1, element 8) is configured to allow light emitted from the optical emitter device (element 6) to travel out of the first chamber (element 4) in one or more desirable directions, and the second transparent region of the cap (see FIG. 1, element 7) is configured to allow light to travel into the second chamber (element 3) and to impinge on the optical detector device (element 5) in the second chamber from one or more desirable directions (this inherent property of light-transmissive plates 7 and 8, therefore applying as such), and
The language wherein the cap is formed by rendering one or more selected regions of a transparent substrate to be opaque, or by forming one or more opaque features on a transparent substrate is directed towards the process of manufacturing the optical system. It is well settled that “product by process” limitations in claims drawn to structure are directed to the product, per se, no matter how actually made. In re Hirao, 190 USPQ 15 at 17 (footnote 3). See also, In re Brown, 173 USPQ 685; In re Luck, 177 USPQ 523; In re Fessmann, 180 USPQ 324; In re Pilkington 162 USPQ 145, 147; In re Avery, 186 USPQ 161; In re Wethheim, 191 USPQ 90 (209 USPQ 554 does not deal with this issue); In re Marosi et al., 218 USPQ 289; and particularly In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, all of which make it clear that it is the patentability of the final product per se which must be determined in a “product by process” claim, and not the patentability of the process, and that an old or obvious product produced by a new method is not patentable as a product, whether claimed in “product by process” claims or otherwise. The above case law further makes clear that applicant has the burden of showing that the method language necessarily produces a structural difference. The applicant must show that different methods of manufacturing produce articles having inherently different characteristics, Ex parte Skinner 2 USPQ 2d 1788.
The final product as claimed is an opaque feature disposed on a transparent substrate. As such, the claim language does not distinguish the invention from Z1, who teaches the structure as claimed;
Z1 discloses one or more opaque features on a transparent substrate (See FIG. 3, element 15, pg. 4 par. 3 “opaque coating 15 is further disposed at the upper ends of the first transparent plate 7 and the second transparent plate 8” where opaque features are on the transparent plates shown in FIG. 1.)
Z1 discloses the one or more opaque features formed on the substrate (see FIG. 3 where the opaque coating 15 is formed on the transparent plates 7 and 8 shown in FIG. 1), and so that the first transparent region of the cap comprises a first transparent region (element 7) of the substrate and the second transparent region (element 8) of the cap comprises a second transparent region of the substrate (see FIG. 1 where the light-transmissive plates 7 and 8 on the disposed the substrate 1)
Regarding Claim 10, Z1 discloses the optical system as claimed in claim 1, wherein at least one of: the cap comprises an electrically insulating material (see pg. 3 par. 1 “the package tube is made of a ceramic material” which is a known insulator and a part of the cap structure represented by the included image on page 5 of this document).
Regarding Claim 13, Z1 discloses the optical system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the one or more opaque features are
The language formed on the transparent substrate by a molding process, for example by injection molding a material such as LCP or by transfer molding a material such as an opaque epoxy is directed towards the process of manufacturing the optical system. It is well settled that “product by process” limitations in claims drawn to structure are directed to the product, per se, no matter how actually made. In re Hirao, 190 USPQ 15 at 17 (footnote 3). See also, In re Brown, 173 USPQ 685; In re Luck, 177 USPQ 523; In re Fessmann, 180 USPQ 324; In re Pilkington 162 USPQ 145, 147; In re Avery, 186 USPQ 161; In re Wethheim, 191 USPQ 90 (209 USPQ 554 does not deal with this issue); In re Marosi et al., 218 USPQ 289; and particularly In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, all of which make it clear that it is the patentability of the final product per se which must be determined in a “product by process” claim, and not the patentability of the process, and that an old or obvious product produced by a new method is not patentable as a product, whether claimed in “product by process” claims or otherwise. The above case law further makes clear that applicant has the burden of showing that the method language necessarily produces a structural difference. The applicant must show that different methods of manufacturing produce articles having inherently different characteristics, Ex parte Skinner 2 USPQ 2d 1788.
The final product as claimed is an opaque feature disposed on a transparent substrate. As such, the claim language does not distinguish the invention from Z1, who teaches the structure as claimed;
Z1 discloses one or more opaque features are formed on a transparent substrate (See FIG. 3, element 15, pg. 4 par. 3 “opaque coating 15 is further disposed at the upper ends of the first transparent plate 7 and the second transparent plate 8” where opaque features are on the transparent plates shown in FIG. 1)
Regarding Claim 14, Z1 discloses a method of manufacturing an optical system (see [Technical Field] “the invention claims an optical system package structure”), the method comprising: mounting an optical emitter device on a circuit board (see FIG. 1, elements 1 and 6, and pg. 3 par. 1 “the substrate 1 may be a circuit board structure” and pg. 3 par. 3 “the LED chip 6 can be mounted on the substrate 1”);
and mounting a cap on the circuit board (see FIG. 1, elements 1, 7 and 8, and pg. 3 par. “referring to FIG. 1 and FIG. 2, the present invention provides an optical sensor package structure including an opaque packaged package, the packaged package including a substrate 1” which is shown above on page 5 and pg. 3 par. 4 “first light transmissive plate 7...second light transmissive plate 8” which form a cap on and including the substrate 1),
wherein the cap and the circuit board together define a chamber therebetween, the chamber enclosing the optical emitter device (see FIG. 1, pg. 3 par. 1 “on the substrate 1 provided with the first cavity 3 and the second cavity 4…the first cavity 3 and the second cavity 4 being separated by a space portion 2” and pg. 3 par. 3 “the LED chip 6 is disposed in the second cavity 4”),
wherein the cap comprises one or more opaque regions (see FIG. 1 and 2, and pg. 3 par. 1 “FIG. 1 and FIG. 2, the present invention provides an optical sensor package structure including an opaque packaged package” and the included image on page 5 with the side walls of the substrate 1 being described as opaque) and one or more transparent regions (see FIG. 1, elements 7 and 8, and pg. 3 par. 4 “first light-transmitting plate 7 and the second light-transmitting plate 8”),
wherein the one or more opaque regions (see the included image on page 5 of this document for the opaque packaged package) of the cap are configured to prevent light emitted from the optical emitter device from travelling out of the chamber in one or more undesirable directions (inherent property of the opaque packaged package described prior),
wherein the one or more transparent regions (FIG. 1, elements 7 and 8) of the cap are configured to allow light emitted from the optical emitter device to travel out of the chamber in one or more desirable directions (this inherent property of light-transmissive plates 7 and 8, therefore applying as such), and
wherein the cap is formed by forming one or more opaque features on a transparent substrate (see FIG. 3, element 15, pg. 4 par. 3 “opaque coating 15 is further disposed at the upper ends of the first transparent plate 7 and the second transparent plate 8” where opaque features are formed on the transparent plates shown in FIG. 1), so that the one or more opaque features formed on the substrate (see FIG. 3 where the opaque coating 15 is formed on the transparent plates 7 and 8 shown in FIG. 1), and so that the one or more transparent regions of the cap comprise one or more transparent regions of the substrate (see FIG. 3 where there are multiple transparent plates 7 and 8).
Regarding Claim 16, Z1 discloses a method of manufacturing an optical system (see [Technical Field] “the invention claims an optical system package structure”), the method comprising: mounting an optical detector device on a circuit board (see FIG. 1, element 5, and pg. 3 par. 3 “optical sensor chip 5 and the LED chip 6 can be mounted on the substrate 1”); and
mounting a cap on the circuit board (see FIG. 1, elements 1, 7 and 8, and pg. 3 par. “referring to FIG. 1 and FIG. 2, the present invention provides an optical sensor package structure including an opaque packaged package, the packaged package including a substrate 1” and pg. 3 par. 4 “first light transmissive plate 7...second light transmissive plate 8” which form a cap on and including the substrate 1),
wherein the cap and the circuit board together define a chamber therebetween, the chamber enclosing the optical detector device (see FIG. 1, elements 3 and 4, pg. 3 par. 1 “on the substrate 1 provided with the first cavity 3 and the second cavity 4…the first cavity 3 and the second cavity 4 being separated by a space portion 2” and pg. 3 par. 3 “the optical sensor chip 5 is disposed in the first cavity 3”),
wherein the cap comprises one or more opaque regions (see FIG. 1 and 2, and pg. 3 par. 1 “FIG. 1 and FIG. 2, the present invention provides an optical sensor package structure including an opaque packaged package” and see the included image on page 5 of this document for opaque regions of the described packaged package) and one or more transparent regions (see FIG. 1, elements 7 and 8, and pg. 3 par. 4 “first light-transmitting plate 7 and the second light-transmitting plate 8”),
wherein the one or more opaque regions of the cap (see the included image on page 5 of this document for opaque regions of the described packaged package) are configured to prevent light from travelling into the chamber from one or more undesirable directions (inherent property of the opaque packaged package described prior),
wherein the one or more transparent regions (FIG. 1, elements 7 and 8) of the cap are configured to allow light to travel into the chamber and to impinge on the optical detector device in the chamber from one or more desirable directions (this inherent property of light-transmissive plates 7 and 8, therefore applying as such), and
wherein the cap is formed by forming one or more opaque features on a transparent substrate (see FIG. 3, element 15, pg. 4 par. 3 “opaque coating 15 is further disposed at the upper ends of the first transparent plate 7 and the second transparent plate 8” where opaque features are formed on the transparent plates), so that the one or more opaque features formed on the substrate (see FIG. 3 where the opaque coating 15 is formed on the transparent plates 7 and 8 shown in FIG. 1), and so that the one or more transparent regions of the cap comprise one or more transparent regions of the substrate (see FIG. 3 where there are multiple opaque layers 15 and multiple transparent plates 7 and 8).
Regarding Claim 17, Z1 discloses a method of manufacturing an optical system (see [Technical Field] “the invention claims an optical system package structure”), the method comprising:
mounting a plurality of optical detector devices on a circuit board (see FIG. 4 and FIG. 1, elements 1 and 5, pg. 3 par. 1 “the substrate 1 may be a circuit board structure” and pg. 3 par. 3 “optical sensor chip 5 and the LED chip 6 can be mounted on the substrate 1” where the elements as seen in FIG. 1 can be seen in FIG. 4, see pg. 4 par. 5 “with reference to FIG. 4, for example, a plurality of LED chips 6 optical sensor chips 5 are simultaneously mounted in the packaged package”. Since Z1 does not re-label the elements in FIG. 4 and for easier understanding between the connection of FIG. 1 to FIG. 4, an annotated image of FIG. 4 is attached below Claim 17 on page. 20); and
mounting a cap on the circuit board (see FIG. 1 and FIG. 4, elements 1, 7 and 8, and pg. 3 par. “referring to FIG. 1 and FIG. 2, the present invention provides an optical sensor package structure including an opaque packaged package, the packaged package including a substrate 1” see structure as mentioned on page 5 of this document, and pg. 3 par. 4 “first light transmissive plate 7...second light transmissive plate 8” which form a cap on and including the substrate 1 with said elements included in FIG. 4), wherein the cap and the circuit board together define a plurality of chambers therebetween, each chamber enclosing a corresponding one of the optical detector devices device (see FIGs. 1 and 4, element 3, and 4, pg. 3 par. 1 “on the substrate 1 provided with the first cavity 3”, pg. 3 par. 3 “the optical sensor chip 5 is disposed in the first cavity 3” and pg. 4 par. 5 “with reference to FIG. 4, for example, a plurality of LED chips 6 optical sensor chips 5 are simultaneously mounted in the packaged package” where FIG. 4 has a plurality of cavities 3 and 4 housing optical sensor chips 5),
wherein the cap comprises a plurality of transparent regions (see FIG. 1 and FIG. 4, elements 7 and 8, pg. 3 par. 4 “first light-transmitting plate 7 and the second light-transmitting plate 8” and pg. 4 par. 5 “with reference to FIG. 4…first light-transmitting plate and the second light-transmitting plate constitute a plurality of optical sensor package structures” are first shown in FIG. 1 and disposed in the same areas in FIG. 4),
wherein the one or more opaque regions (see FIG. 1 and FIG. 4, pg. 3 par. 1 “FIG. 1 and FIG. 2, the present invention provides an optical sensor package structure including an opaque packaged package” which is the same package as seen in FIG. 4) of the cap are configured to prevent light from travelling into each chamber and from impinging on the corresponding optical detector device (element 5) in each chamber from one or more undesirable directions (inherent property of aforementioned opaque elements),
wherein each transparent region of the cap (elements 7 and 8) is configured to allow light to travel into a corresponding chamber and to impinge on the corresponding optical detector device (element 5) in the corresponding chamber from one or more desirable directions (inherent property of aforementioned transparent elements), and
wherein the cap is formed by forming one or more opaque features on a transparent substrate (see FIG. 3 and FIG. 4, element 15, pg. 4 par. 3 “opaque coating 15 is further disposed at the upper ends of the first transparent plate 7 and the second transparent plate 8” where opaque features are formed on the transparent plates), so that the one or more opaque features formed on the substrate (see FIG. 3 and FIG. 4 where the opaque coating 15 is formed on the transparent plates 7 and 8 shown in FIG. 1), and so that each of the transparent regions of the cap comprises a corresponding transparent region of the substrate (see FIG. 3 where there are multiple transparent plates 7 and 8).
PNG
media_image2.png
565
1060
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 18, Z1 discloses a method of manufacturing an optical system comprising (see [Technical Field] “the invention claims an optical system package structure”):
mounting an optical emitter device on a circuit board (see FIG. 1, elements 1 and 6, pg. 3 par. 1 “the substrate 1 may be a circuit board structure” and pg. 3 par. 3 “the LED chip 6 can be mounted on the substrate 1”);
mounting an optical detector device on the circuit board (see FIG. 1 and pg. 3 par. 3 “optical sensor chip 5 and the LED chip 6 can be mounted on the substrate 1”); and
mounting a cap on the circuit board (see FIG. 1, elements 1, 7 and 8, and pg. 3 par. “referring to FIG. 1 and FIG. 2, the present invention provides an optical sensor package structure including an opaque packaged package, the packaged package including a substrate 1” see attached image on page 5 of this document, and pg. 3 par. 4 “first light transmissive plate 7...second light transmissive plate 8” which form a cap on and including the substrate 1),
wherein the cap and the circuit board together define first and second chambers therebetween (elements 3 and 4), the first chamber enclosing the optical emitter device and the second chamber enclosing the optical detector device (see FIG. 1, element 3 and 4, pg. 3 par. 1 “on the substrate 1 provided with the first cavity 3 and the second cavity 4…the first cavity 3 and the second cavity 4 being separated by a space portion 2” and pg. 3 par. 3 “the optical sensor chip 5 is disposed in the first cavity 3, and the LED chip 6 is disposed in the second cavity 4”),
wherein the cap comprises one or more opaque regions (see FIG. 1 and 2, and pg. 3 par. 1 “FIG. 1 and FIG. 2, the present invention provides an optical sensor package structure including an opaque packaged package” and included image on page 5 where the opaque regions are further defined), and first and second transparent regions (see FIG. 1, elements 7 and 8, and pg. 3 par. 4 “first light-transmitting plate 7 and the second light-transmitting plate 8”),
wherein the one or more opaque regions (see image on page 5 of this document) of the cap are configured to prevent light emitted from the optical emitter device from travelling out of the first chamber (element 4) in one or more undesirable directions and to prevent light from travelling into the second chamber (element 3) from one or more undesirable directions (this is an inherent property of opaque materials and therefore applies to the aforementioned opaque areas),
wherein the first transparent region (element 8) of the cap is configured to allow light emitted from the optical emitter device (element 6) to travel out of the first chamber in one or more desirable directions, and the second transparent region (element 7) of the cap is configured to allow light to travel into the second chamber and to impinge on the optical detector device (element 5) in the second chamber from one or more desirable directions (this inherent property of light-transmissive plates 7 and 8, therefore applying as such), and
wherein the cap is formed by forming one or more opaque features on a transparent substrate, (see FIG. 3, element 15, pg. 4 par. 3 “opaque coating 15 is further disposed at the upper ends of the first transparent plate 7 and the second transparent plate 8” where opaque features are formed on the transparent plates), so that the one or more opaque features formed on the substrate (see FIG. 3 where the opaque coating 15 is formed on the transparent plates 7 and 8 shown in FIG. 1), and so that the first transparent region (element 7) of the cap comprises a first transparent region of the substrate and the second transparent region (element 8) of the cap comprises a second transparent region of the substrate (see FIG. 3 where there multiple transparent plates 7 and 8).
Regarding Claim 19, Z1 discloses the method as claimed in claim 14, comprising forming the cap (see FIG. 1 where the aforementioned packaged package as attached on page 5 of this document is comprised with the first and second transparent plates 7 and 8 to form a cap).
Regarding Claim 22, Z1 discloses the method as claimed in claim 19, wherein forming the cap comprises forming the one or more opaque features on the transparent substrate (see FIG. 3, element 15, pg. 4 par. 3 “opaque coating 15 is further disposed at the upper ends of the first transparent plate 7 and the second transparent plate 8” where opaque features are formed on the transparent plates).
Regarding Claim 25, Z1 discloses an optical system as claimed in claim 1, wherein each optical emitter device (element 6) comprises a surface emitting optical emitter device such as a surface emitting LED device (see FIG. 1 and pg. 3 par. 2 “LED chip 6 emits optical signal”).
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.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng (CN 105870070 A, see attached translated reference), hereinafter as Z1, in view of Matsui et al. (US 2020/0028031 A1) hereinafter as M1.
Regarding Claim 11, Z1 discloses the optical system as claimed in claim 1, however Z1 does not explicitly disclose wherein the cap is monolithic.
M1 discloses wherein the cap (see FIG. 3, elements 2, 3, and 10, [0043] “top wall 2, a side wall 3”, [0048] “FIG. 3 illustrates a synthetic quartz glass cavity lid 10”) is monolithic (see FIG. 4 where the top and side walls 2 and 3 of the cavity lid shown in FIG. 3 form a single and solid element over an optical device 7 in FIG. 4, see [0048] “optical device 7”).
The formation of a monolithic cap as disclosed by M1 is incorporated into the disclosure of the cap found in Z1. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Z1 and M1 because the combination is combining prior elements of the art to known methods to yield predictable results-formation of a monolithic cap for package management and structure can streamline manufacturing by allowing the attachment of a single piece instead of multiple, which cuts manufacturing time while keeping the needed structure of the package. Said use of a monolithic structure for ease of manufacturing is known in the art and yields predictable results (see M1 [0036]).
Claims 12, 20, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zheng (CN 105870070 A, see attached translated reference), hereinafter as Z1, in view of Barnett (US 9917242 B2), hereinafter as B1.
Regarding Claim 12, Z1 discloses the optical system as claimed in claim 1, but does not disclose the photosensitive material comprises a photosensitive glass material which is configurable from a transparent glass state to an opaque ceramic state.
B1 discloses the photosensitive material comprises a photosensitive glass material which is configurable from a transparent glass state to an opaque ceramic state (see FIG. 1C, element 120, and col. 7 ln. 22 “the hermetic package 120 can include a ceramic structure formed from a photodefinable (photo-structurable) glass…the photodefinable glass layer can be exposed to light, baked, and etched to form a hermetic package 120” see also col 7 ln. 45 “a silicon-based package may be used instead of ceramic” where both the ceramic and silicon-based options for the composition of the hermetic package 120 are materials understood in the art to be opaque. The hermetic package undergoes a transformation from a glass state to and opaque state through one of the processes listed).
The rendering of the substrate from transparent to opaque as disclosed by B1 is incorporated into the disclosure of the substrate found in Z1. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Z1 and B1 because the combination is combining prior elements of the art to known methods to yield predictable results-including the transparent to opaque material is a known method within the art for containing and releasing optical signals at a measured rate and yields predictable results (see Z1 pg. 2 par. 5 and B1 col. 1 ln. 52)
Regarding Claim 20, Z1 discloses the method as claimed in claim 19, but does not explicitly disclose wherein forming the cap comprises rendering the one or more selected regions of the transparent substrate to be opaque.
B1 discloses wherein forming the cap comprises rendering the one or more selected regions of the transparent substrate to be opaque (see FIG. 1C elements 120 and 122, and col. 7 ln. 32 “photodefinable glass layer can be exposed to light, baked, and etched to form a hermetic package 120 suitable for defining cavity 140 and supporting a package lid 122” where the rendering of the hermetic package 120 from a glass to a ceramic or silicon structure, which are in opaque states, and allows for the package lid 122 to be formed therein).
The rendering of the substrate from transparent to opaque as disclosed by B1 is incorporated into the disclosure of the substrate found in Z1. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Z1 and B1 because the combination is combining prior elements of the art to known methods to yield predictable results-including the transparent to opaque material is a known method within the art for containing and releasing optical signals at a measured rate and yields predictable results (see Z1 pg. 2 par. 5 and B1 col. ln. 52)
Regarding Claim 21, Z1 and B1 disclose the method as claimed in claim 20, B1 discloses wherein forming the cap comprises forming one or more recesses (see B1 FIG. 1C, element 140, and col. 4 ln. 40 “cavity 140”) in the transparent substrate (see FIG. 1C where the cavity 140 is between the package lid 122 and the hermetic package 120 previously described as transparent glass), each recess being configured to accommodate a corresponding optical emitter device or a corresponding optical detector device (see B1 FIG. 1C, element 100, and col. 4 ln. 15 “sensor device 100” disposed in the cavity 140).
The rendering of the substrate to be transparent disclosed by B1 is incorporated into the disclosure of the substrate found in Z1. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate the teachings of Z1 and B1 because the combination is combining prior elements of the art to known methods to yield predictable results-including the transparent material for the substrate is a known method within the art for optical signals at a measured rate and yields predictable results (see Z1 pg. 2 par. 5 and B1 col. 1 ln. 52)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRENNEN STUART CUDA whose telephone number is (571)272-6563. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 5:00 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, Steven Loke can be reached at (571) 272-1657. 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.
/B.S.C./Examiner, Art Unit 2818
/STEVEN H LOKE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights