Attorney Docket Number: MRSI006-PCT-US_MJC
Filing Date: 06/09/2023
Claimed Priority Dates: 12/13/2021 (371 of PCT/US2021/063097)
12/11/2020 (PCT/US2021/063097 claims benefit of PRO 63/124,277)
Inventors: Carew et al.
Examiner: Shamita S. Hanumasagar
DETAILED ACTION
This Office action responds to the amendment filed on 03/17/2026.
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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for a 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.
Amendment Status
The amendment filed on 03/17/2026 in reply to the previous Office action mailed on 11/17/2025 has been entered. The present Office action is made with all the suggested amendments being fully considered. Accordingly, pending in this Office action are claims 1-8, 10-18, and 20.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 1 and 12 are allowable. The restriction set forth in the Office action mailed on 08/28/2025 has been reconsidered in view of the allowability of claims to the elected invention and species pursuant to MPEP § 821.04(a). The restriction is hereby withdrawn as to any claim that requires all the limitations of an allowable claim. Claims 3 and 11, directed to a non-elected invention and/or species, are no longer withdrawn from consideration because the claims require all the limitations of at least one of the allowable claims 1 and 12.
In view of the above noted withdrawal of the restriction requirement, applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application.
Once a restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the features canceled from the claims. It is noted that all dependent claims must inherit the features of and introduce features in addition to the claims from which they depend. No new matter should be entered.
“wherein the inert gas chamber is mounted to a conveyor system of the system for the placement of dies on a substrate using a T-nut configuration”, as recited in claim 3, while “wherein said inert gas chamber is configured for mounting to a thermocompression bonding system via a levelling block comprising levelling screws and set screws, wherein the levelling screws are configured to thread in to said levelling block and press against a surface the levelling block is secured to via the set screws, thereby allowing the inert gas chamber to be levelled”, as recited in claim 1
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the following claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o).
“wherein the inert gas chamber is mounted to a conveyor system of the system for the placement of dies on a substrate using a T-nut configuration”, as recited in claim 3, while “wherein said inert gas chamber is configured for mounting to a thermocompression bonding system via a levelling block comprising levelling screws and set screws, wherein the levelling screws are configured to thread in to said levelling block and press against a surface the levelling block is secured to via the set screws, thereby allowing the inert gas chamber to be levelled”, as recited in claim 1
Appropriate correction is required. No new matter should be added.
Claim Objections
The claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
In lines 1-2 of claim 13, “wherein inert gas chamber is configured…” should read “wherein the inert gas chamber is configured…”
Appropriate correction is required. No new matter should be entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following are quotations of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
(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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Independent claim 1 has been amended to recite at least the new limitation “wherein said inert gas chamber is configured for mounting to a thermocompression bonding system via a levelling block comprising levelling screws and set screws, wherein the levelling screws are configured to thread in to said levelling block and press against a surface the levelling block is secured to via the set screws, thereby allowing the inert gas chamber to be levelled”. Claim 3, dependent on claim 1, further recites at least the limitation “wherein the inert gas chamber is mounted to a conveyor system of the system for the placement of dies on a substrate using a T-nut configuration”. All dependent claims must inherit the features of the claims from which they depend and recite features in addition to the features of the claims from which they depend. Accordingly, the language as recited in the claims suggests that an inert gas chamber mounted to a conveyer system using a T-nut configuration is concurrent with, simultaneous with, and in addition to an inert gas chamber configured for mounting to a thermocompression bonding system via a levelling block comprising levelling screws and set screws, wherein the levelling screws are configured to thread in to said levelling block and press against a surface the levelling block is secured to via the set screws, thereby allowing the inert gas chamber to be levelled. As discussed below, such limitations are directed to New Matter.
Applicant has not alleged where support for the amendments to the claims (i.e., how the limitations of claim 3 may be congruent with the limitations of claim 1) can be found. However, a review of the written description fails to find any support for the claimed simultaneous “T-nut configuration” and “levelling block” / “levelling screws” / “set screws” configuration features. The specification as originally filed instead appears to assert that either a “T-nut configuration” (see, e.g., par.0045 of published application US 2024/0047412) or a “levelling block”/ “levelling screws” / “set screws” configuration (see, e.g., par.0046 of published application US 2024/0047412) may be used to mount the inert gas chamber to various other structures of the claims and thereby fails to identify that such configurations may coexist and be simultaneously and concurrently employed.
Similarly, a review of the Drawings fails to identify an “inert gas chamber… mounted to a conveyor system… using a T-nut configuration”, as recited in claim 3, while “wherein said inert gas chamber is configured for mounting to a thermocompression bonding system via a levelling block comprising levelling screws and set screws, wherein the levelling screws are configured to thread in to said levelling block and press against a surface the levelling block is secured to via the set screws, thereby allowing the inert gas chamber to be levelled”, as recited in claim 1. The Drawings instead appear to show that either a “T-nut configuration” (see, e.g., figs. 2-3) or a “levelling block”/ “levelling screws” / “set screws” configuration (see, e.g., figs. 4-5) may be used to mount the inert gas chamber to various other structures of the claims and thereby fails to identify that such configurations may coexist and be simultaneously and concurrently employed. Accordingly, the newly added limitations are directed to New Matter.
The applicant may cancel the claims, amend the claims, or demonstrate explicit support for the claimed subject matter in the original disclosure (e.g., by citing specific excerpts from Specification or features in Drawings related to the claimed embodiment, as originally filed). A broad statement alleging support for the claimed subject matter will be considered non-persuasive.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 11 recites the limitations “introducing at least one part to be bonded to the inert gas chamber” and “bonding the at least one part to be bonded” before reciting the limitation “removing the plurality of parts from the inert gas chamber”. In the case that only a single part is chosen to be introduced to the gas chamber and bonded, no antecedent basis would exist for a “plurality of parts”, indicating a multiplicity of parts, to be removed from the gas chamber. Accordingly, there is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation “removing the plurality of parts from the inert gas chamber” in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Clams 1-2, 4-8, 10, 12-18, and 20 are allowable.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to the specification, filed on 03/17/2026, have overcome the objections to the drawings under 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) as put forth in the previous Office action mailed on 11/17/2025. Accordingly, the objections to the drawings under 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) as put forth in the previous Office action are hereby withdrawn.
Applicant’s amendments to independent claims 1 and 12 newly resulting in their allowability have necessitated the rejoinder of previously withdrawn claims 3 and 11 (see also “Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment”, filed 03/17/2026: page 9, paragraphs 1-4) and the subsequent new grounds of rejection presented in this Office action. See MPEP § 706.07 and MPEP § 821.04. Applicant’s other arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new grounds 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.
Papers related to this application may be submitted directly to Art Unit 2814 by facsimile transmission. Papers should be faxed to Art Unit 2814 via the Art Unit 2814 Fax Center. The faxing of such papers must conform to the notice published in the Official Gazette, 1096 OG 30 (15 November 1989). The Art Unit 2814 Fax Center number is (571) 273-8300. The Art Unit 2814 Fax Center is to be used only for papers related to Art Unit 2814 applications.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shamita Hanumasagar at (703) 756-1521 and between the hours of 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM (Eastern Standard Time) Monday through Thursday or by e-mail via Shamita.Hanumasagar@uspto.gov. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Wael Fahmy, can be reached on (571) 272-1705.
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 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.
/Shamita S. Hanumasagar/Examiner, Art Unit 2814
/WAEL M FAHMY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2814
Prosecution Insights