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 .
Double Patenting
Please note that US Patent #12,464,642 is not currently being applied in a Non-Statutory Obviousness type Double Patenting rejection against the instant claims (1, 3 and 9); however, the scope of the patented claims is very close to that of the instant claims. In order to avoid the potential for a future Double Patenting rejection, the Applicant is strongly encouraged to amend the instant claims to better differentiate them from the already patented subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-4 and 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shibata (JP 2022-078438; translation provided concurrently by Examiner, citations below are based upon said provided translation).
Regarding claim 1, Shibata discloses a wiring circuit board (fig. 1: X1) comprising: a metal supporting board (10); a first metal thin film (21) disposed on one surface (fig. 2: top, as viewed) of the metal supporting board in a thickness direction; an insulating layer (22) disposed on one surface (top) of the first metal thin film in the thickness direction and having a through hole (22a) penetrating in the thickness direction; a second metal thin film (23) disposed on one surface (top) of the insulating layer; and a conductive layer (24) disposed on one surface (top) of the second metal thin film, wherein, in the through hole, the first metal thin film and the second metal thin film are disposed between the metal supporting board and the conductive layer, the other surface of the first metal thin film is in contact with the one surface of the metal supporting board, the other surface of the second metal thin film is in contact with the one surface of the first metal thin film, and the other surface of the conductive layer is in contact with the one surface of the second metal thin film (all of the above: fig. 2; Abstract; pg. 2, “Description of Embodiments” section, lines 1-8; pg. 3, lines 29-35), and wherein, at least, a material of the first metal thin film is an alloy containing chromium (pg. 3, lines 17-19).
Regarding claim 3, Shibata discloses the wiring circuit board according to claim 1, wherein the alloy further contains at least one metal selected from the group consisting of nickel, titanium, tungsten, and molybdenum (pg. 3, lines 17-19: nickel and titanium).
Regarding claim 4, Shibata discloses the wiring circuit board according to claim 1, wherein a material of the second metal thin film is a second alloy containing chromium (pg. 4, lines 4-6).
Regarding claim 6, Shibata discloses the wiring circuit board according to claim 4, wherein the second alloy further contains at least one metal selected from the group consisting of nickel, titanium, tungsten, and molybdenum (pg. 4, lines 4-6: nickel and titanium).
Regarding claim 7, Shibata discloses the wiring circuit board according to claim 4, wherein the alloy and the second alloy are composed of the same composition (e.g. alloys of chromium and nickel or titanium) (pg. 3, lines 17-19; pg. 4, lines 4-6).
Regarding claim 8, Shibata discloses the wiring circuit board according to claim 1, wherein the first metal thin film includes: a first metal layer; and a first oxidized layer disposed on one surface of the first metal layer in the thickness direction (pg. 8, lines 13-14).
Regarding claim 9, Shibata discloses the wiring circuit board according to claim 1, wherein the metal supporting board includes: a metal supporting layer (11); and a surface metal layer (12) disposed on one surface of the metal supporting layer in the thickness direction and having higher electrical conductivity than electrical conductivity of the metal supporting layer (figs. 1-2; pg. 6, lines 27-35).
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 of this title, 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 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shibata, in view of Kawaguchi et al. (US 2011/0147053 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Shibata discloses all of the elements of the current invention as detailed above with respect to claim 1. Shibata, however, does not explicitly disclose that the content ratio of the chromium in the alloy is 50% by mass or less.
Kawaguchi teaches that it is well known to provide a similar wiring circuit board (Title; Abstract; fig. 1), wherein chromium alloy is applied and the content ratio of the chromium in the alloy is 50% by mass or less (par. 0082).
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the current invention of Shibata to incorporate the preferred weight percentage of chromium of Kawaguchi since it has been held by the courts that selection of a prior art material on the basis of its suitability for its intended purpose is within the level of ordinary skill. POSITA would have realized that lower than 50% chromium alloys can be easily and readily formed and applied by any number well understood techniques and that selecting the weight ratio to achieve the desired conductivity, resistance to corrosion, adhesion, and/or resistance to cracking or other deleterious environmental effects. Moreover, there is no indication in the instant disclosure that any special alloy composition was devised or that any surprising results were derived from simply using the old wiring circuit board of Shibata with the well-known weight percentage of chromium in the alloy of Kawaguchi. This combination would have been easily performed with knowledge of the commonly understood advantages and with reasonable expectations of success.
Regarding claim 5, Shibata discloses all of the elements of the current invention as detailed above with respect to claim 4. Shibata, however, does not explicitly disclose that the content ratio of the chromium in the second alloy is 50% by mass or less.
Kawaguchi teaches that it is well known to provide a similar wiring circuit board (Title; Abstract; fig. 1), wherein chromium alloy is applied and the content ratio of the chromium in the second alloy is 50% by mass or less (par. 0082).
Regarding the rationale for combination of references, please refer to claim 2, above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please refer to the concurrently mailed PTO-892, as all of those cited references are considered to be pertinent to the claimed invention. For example, Matsuzaki (JP-2003069185-A) is held to disclose most, if not all, of the limitations of at least claim 1. The Matsuzaki reference is not currently applied as an anticipation rejection due to the completeness of the above applied art, and in order to avoid an overly long Office Action or duplicative rejections.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeffrey T Carley whose telephone number is (571)270-5609. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 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, Sunil Singh can be reached at (571)272-3460. 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.
/JEFFREY T CARLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729
Prosecution Insights