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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2026-02-10 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on or before 2026-05-06 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 2026-02-10 has been entered. Claim(s) 1-42 remain pending in this application. Claim(s) 1-5, 8 have been amended. No Claim(s) have been canceled. Claim(s) 41-42 has/have been newly added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2026-02-10 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues with respect to claim 1, that Wang in view of Mok does not disclose control circuitry to control each set of the MEM switches to prevent adjacent LEDs from being illuminated at a same time during testing of the LEDs.
The examiner respectfully disagrees, the test is what the combined teachings of references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. It is not necessary that the inventions of the references be physically combinable to render obvious the invention under review. In the art relied upon, Wang teaches an LED wafter tester and Mok teaches control circuitry containing sets of switches that may be selected in such a way that only one probe to be measured at a time (Para [0060]). This control circuitry configuration would convey to one of ordinary skill in the art the switching of individual sets of switches such that only one circuit is selected allowing, in the combination, only one LED to be illuminated. Or-bach only being relied upon to teach the switches are MEM switches. Refer to 35 USC 103 rejection below.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7, 13 and 41-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (US-20230105201-A1 – From applicant IDS) in view of Mok et al. (US-20100213960-A1) in view of Or-Bach et al. (US-10840239-B2).
Regarding Claim 1, Wang teaches a probe head comprising:
probe needles (Figs 1-6: first and second probes, 220 & 230) that are electrically conductive (Para [0049 teaches the probes 220 and 230 forming a test loop, and that 230 is coupled to ground) and configured to create electrical connections to conductive pads (Figs 1-6: first and second electrode points, 111 & 112) on light emitting diodes (LEDs) (Para [0041-0044] describes the process of manufacturing LEDs on a wafer, and describes the LEDs as being dies with a description that matches the dies of the disclosure) on a wafer under test (Para [0026] describes the apparatus as a wafer inspection apparatus, further Fig 4 shows a matrix region, M1, and Para [0048] describes this as being on a wafer.);
power supplies (Fig 2: Driver, 310) to power the LEDs (Para [0032] with reference to Fig 2 teaches a driver, 310, within the processing module, 300, that supplies a driving current to each of the dies, 110. The dies contain LEDs or are LED dies as taught in Para [0041-0044]);
meters to measure at least one of a voltage across or a current through individual ones of the LEDs (Para [0034] with reference to Fig 2 teaches the logic element, 330, as measuring a voltage across a die); and
switches configured to create an electrical connection to cause the power supply to power the LED while the meter measures the at least one of the voltage across or the current through, the LED (Para [0055] with reference to Fig 2 & 6 teaches switches that create connections between the probes, 230, and dies, the switches allow connection to the driver, 310, to power the dies and Para [0034] teaches the logic element, 330, measures a voltage across the die).
Wang does not teach the meters are multimeters; and
wherein the switches comprise sets of switches, each set of switches being connectable to a same power supply and a same multimeter, each set comprising a first switch to create an electrical connection between a force line of the power supply and a first probe needle, a second switch to create an electrical connection between a return line of the power supply and a second probe needle, a third switch to create an electrical connection between a force sense line of a multimeter and the first probe needle, and a fourth switch to create an electrical connection between a return sense line of the multimeter and the second probe needle; and
control circuitry to control each set of the switches to prevent adjacent LEDs from being illuminated at a same time during testing of the LEDs.
However, Mok teaches multimeters (Para [0049] teaches the meters 110 shown in Fig 2A may be multimeters);
wherein the switches comprise sets of switches (Fig 5A: switches, 241-1, 242-1, 243-1, 244-1), each set of switches being connectable to a same power supply and a same multimeter (Can be seen in Fig 5A with reference to Fig 2A), each set comprising a first switch (Fig 5A: switch, 241-1) to create an electrical connection between a force line of the power supply (Fig 1 and 5A: source meter, 110, connected through force line F+, 121. Para [0064] teaches the meter, 110, applies a fixed current) and a first probe needle (Fig 5A: tester channel terminal, 221-1), a second switch (Fig 5A: switch, 244-2, unlabeled but adjacent to 244-1) to create an electrical connection between a return line (Fig 5A: F-, 124) of the power supply and a second probe needle (Fig 5A: 221-2), a third switch (Fig 5A: 242-1) to create an electrical connection between a force sense line (Fig 5A: S+, 122) of a multimeter and the first probe needle (221-1), and a fourth switch (Fig 5A: 243-2) to create an electrical connection between a return sense line (S-, 123) of the multimeter and the second probe needle (221-2); and
control circuitry to control each set of the switches to prevent adjacent LEDs from being illuminated at a same time during testing of the LEDs (Para [0060] teaches the selection of a single probe can be controlled through switches and therefore, the combination would allow for the control of a single LED).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to replace the meters of Wang with multimeters and make the electrical connections of Mok. A motivation for this combination is to reduce the amount of meters required by allowing one meter device to take multiple different measurements as needed and to disconnect the multimeter when measurements are not required saving power.
The combination of Wang in view of Mok does not teach that the switches are MEM switches. However, Or-Bach teaches MEM switches (col. 52 lines 46-48 teaches MEM switches). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the switches of Wang in view of Mok to be MEM switches as taught in Or-Bach. A motivation for this combination is MEMS devices provide advantages in size, power consumption, speed, and reliability.
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Wang in view of Mok in view of Or-Bach as presented with respect to claim 1 teaches, one or more processing devices (Wang - Figs 1-6: processing module, 300) to control operation of the MEM switches (Wang - Para [0050] teaches the processing module, 300, controls the switches). These features are necessarily taught by the combination.
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Wang in view of Mok in view of Or-Bach as presented with respect to claim 1 teaches, wherein the probe head comprises one multimeter and one power supply for each of multiple sets of MEM switches (Wang - Fig 6 shows a processing module per probe head connected to multiple switches). These features are necessarily taught by the combination.
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Wang in view of Mok in view of Or-Bach as presented with respect to claim 1 teaches, wherein each set of MEM switches comprises MEM switches in addition to the first switch, the second switch, the third switch, and the fourth switch (Mok - Can be seen in Fig 5A);
wherein a subset of the MEM switches in each set of MEM switches are controllable to create electrical connections at a same time (Mok - Para [0060]). These features are necessarily taught by the combination.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Wang in view of Mok in view of Or-Bach as presented with respect to claim 1 teaches, wherein the MEM switches are controlled by the circuitry to cycle through the MEM switches in each set so that, at a same time, an Nth (N>1) MEM switch in each set creates an electrical connection between a probe needle and a power supply or between the probe needle and a multimeter (Wang - Para [0055] teaches the switches are independently controlled). These features are necessarily taught by the combination.
Regarding Claim 7, Wang further teaches wherein the probe needles are arranged on the probe head at an oblique angle relative to a surface of the probe head (Fig 1 shows the probe needles at an oblique angle).
Regarding Claim 13, Wang further teaches wherein the LEDS comprise micro-LEDs or nano-LEDs (Para [0041] describes the LEDs as micro LEDs).
Regarding Claims 41 and 42, the combination of Wang in view of Mok in view of Or-Bach as presented with respect to claim 1 teaches, wherein the control circuitry comprises one or more multiplexers, one or more switches, or a combination of one or more multiplexers and one or more switches, which are configured to route signals to the MEM switches (Mok - Para [0050] teaches the switch array, which is part of the control circuitry, is comprised of multiplexers (Fig 3: 240-1 through 240-n) and switches). These features are necessarily taught by the combination.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Mok in view of Or-Bach and in further view of Govier et al. (US-20130134960-A1).
Regarding Claim 6, The combination of Wang in view of Mok in view of Or-Bach does not teach wherein each multimeter comprises an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) and each power supply comprises a digital-to-analog converter (DAC). However, Govier teaches wherein each multimeter comprises an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) (Fig 7: analog-to-digital converter, 362. Para [0076] teaches the ADC is used in a voltage detection circuit) and each power supply comprises a digital-to-analog converter (DAC) (Fig 7: digital-to-analog converter, 316. Para [0075] teaches the DAC may be built in a power supply). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the multimeters and power supply of the combination to contain an ADC and DAC of Govier respectively. A motivation for this modification is to allow both analog and digital signals to be communicated so as not to be limited to one or the other.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Mok in view of Or-Bach and in further view of Ko et al. (KR-101770384-B1 – Refer to machine translation for cited references).
Regarding Claim 8, The combination of Wang in view of Mok in view of Or-Bach teaches electrically conductive traces electrically connectable to the multimeters (Wang - electrically conductive traces are shown in the schematic figures connecting the circuits).
The combination of Wang in view of Mok in view of Or-Bach does not teach a transceiver to interface between the electrically conductive traces and a communication conduit for enabling communication between the probe head to an external device. However, Ko teaches a transceiver (Fig 2: control module, 180) to interface between the electrically conductive traces and a communication conduit (Fig 2: wireless communication module, 150) for enabling communication between the probe head (Fig 2: Probe device, 100-1) to an external device (Para [0066] teaches the communication module connects to an external device). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the probe head of the combination to include the transceiver of Ko. A motivation for this combination is to allow communication to external devices to receive signals and perform functions based on received signals as taught by Ko in Para [0073-0074].
Claims 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Mok in view of Or-Bach and in further view of Igarashi et al. (TW-I248519-B – Refer to machine translation for cited references).
Regarding Claims 9, 10 and 11 The combination of Wang in view of Mok in view of Or-Bach does not teach wherein the probe head comprises a substrate; and
wherein the probe head further comprises a coupling attached to the substrate, the coupling comprising a magnetically-attracted material.
wherein the coupling comprises a metal plate.
wherein the coupling comprises alignment pins to align to a structure that magnetically attracts the coupling.
However, Igarashi teaches wherein the probe head (Fig 8: probe card, 40) comprises a substrate (Fig 8: connection circuit substrate, 41. Page 36 last line teaches item 41 may be a substrate); and
wherein the probe head further comprises a coupling (Refer to Annotated Figure 8 of Igarashi) attached to the substrate (can be seen in Fig 8), the coupling comprising a magnetically-attracted material (Fig 7 shows a zoomed in portion of the coupling, item 67 is described as a ferro-magnetic substrate on at least page 32, 6th line from bottom.).
wherein the coupling comprises a metal plate (Fig 8: frame, 20. Page 33 line 8 teaches the frame is made of metal).
wherein the coupling comprises alignment pins (Fig 8: guide pins, 43. Page 35 line 6) to align to a structure that magnetically attracts the coupling (Page 35 lines 1-6 with reference to Fig 9 teach the electrodes 31 and 42 are aligned through the magnetic particles, unlabeled in Fig 9 but are labeled 'P' in Fig 7).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the probe head of the combination to incorporate the magnetic material and guide pins of Igarashi. A motivation for this combination is to help ensure proper alignment as taught in Igarashi on page 35 lines 1-6.
PNG
media_image1.png
260
588
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 8 of Igarashi
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Mok in view of Or-Bach and in further view of Kiyofuji et al. (US-20090212800-A1).
Regarding Claim 12, The combination of Wang in view of Mok in view of Or-Bach does not teach a flange configured for connection to a gripper. However, Kiyofuji teaches a flange (Fig 2-3: gripper, 42) configured for connection to a gripper (Para [0062] teaches that the gripper, 42 is gripped and therefore configured for connection to a gripper.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the probe head of the combination to incorporate the flange of Kiyofuji. A motivation for this modification is to allow movement and replacement of the probe head as taught by Kiyofuji in Para [0062].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-29 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding Claim 14, the inclusion of the limitation “a light detector arranged above a test site containing a wafer comprising light emitting diodes (LEDs), the light detector to detect light emitted from the LEDs;
a probe head arranged above the wafer so as not to block a path of light between at least some of the LEDs and the light detector…”
It is these features found in the claim, as they are claimed in the combination that has not been found, taught or suggested by the prior art of record, which makes this claim allowable over the prior art.
The closest prior art is Miyauchi et al. (US-20250067800-A1) which teaches a light detector and test site containing a wafer comprising light emitting diodes (LEDs), the light detector to detect light from the LEDs; a probe head arranged above the wafer, but does not teach these components in the locations as claimed in the instant application.
Regarding Claims 15-29, these claims are allowed as they further limit claim 14.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMIAH J BARRON whose telephone number is (571)272-0902. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 09:30-17:30 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, Lee Rodak can be reached at (571) 270-5628. 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.
/JEREMIAH J BARRON/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/LEE E RODAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights