Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/388,599

SPRING CONTACT IN A TESTING APPARATUS FOR INTEGRATED CIRCUITS

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Nov 10, 2023
Examiner
PATEL, PARESH H
Art Unit
2858
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Jf Microtechnology Sdn Bhd
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allow Rate
737 granted / 928 resolved
+11.4% vs TC avg
Minimal -2% lift
Without
With
+-1.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
26 currently pending
Career history
954
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
38.2%
-1.8% vs TC avg
§102
38.0%
-2.0% vs TC avg
§112
14.1%
-25.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 928 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . Claim Objections Claims 2-11 are objected to because of the following informalities: the phrase “An electrical contact” at line 1, should read --The electrical contact--. 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. Claims 8 are 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 8 recites the limitation "the stopper" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. To expedite the process of the prosecution it is assumed that claim 8 depends on claim 4. 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. Claim(s) 1-5 and 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foong et al. (US 2017/0244189 A1), hereafter Foong in view of Nakano et al. (US 6471524 B1), hereafter Nakano. Regarding claim 1, Foong at fig. 1-2 and ¶0029 discloses an electrical contact [fig. 1a] for use in an integrated circuit testing apparatus, comprising: a central spine 10 formed of a vertical row of horizontal sections 110 connected to each other with curved sections [as shown], resulting in the central spine having a compressible [see last line of Abstract], the vertical axis being a movement axis of the electrical contact during a test [“When the contact is compressed during testing” see ¶0010]; a top section 20 having a first arm 22 and a second arm 24 extending downwards from opposing sides of said top section [as shown], thus said first and second arms substantially enveloping the said central spine 10 on opposing sides [as shown], and an upper end 100 of said central spine connected to the top section in between where the said first and second arms extend [as shown]; and a bottom section 30 connected to a lower end 120 of said central spine, said bottom section provided with a first recess 32 and a second recess 34, each said recess adapted to loosely receive a first tip 221 of said first arm 22 and a second tip 241 of said second arm 24, respectively. Foong is silent about the central spine having sinuous shape. Nakano in similar environment at fig. 8 and 3 discloses the electric contact 42 having the central spine [spring section 52 as an example] having sinuous shape [“the first and second spring sections are elongated and have sinuous configurations.” Lines 5-11 of column 2 and as shown] to apply pressure at both ends 46/48 of the electric contact to ensure good electrical contacts during testing. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the shape of the central spine of Foong as taught by Nakano to obtain advantages as mentioned above, as further taught by Nakano and to obtain the claim invention. Regarding claim 2, Modified Foong, particularly Foong at ¶0011 discloses an electrical contact for use in an integrated circuit testing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the central spine, top section and bottom section are made from a single piece of an electrically conductive material [“The entire electrical contact is constructed from a single piece of electrically conductive material.”]. Regarding claim 3, Modified Foong, particularly Foong at ¶0030 discloses an electrical contact for use in an integrated circuit testing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the central spine is designed such that it compresses in a vertical direction without any bulging in a horizontal direction [“The said central spine (10) is designed such that it compresses in a vertical direction without any bulging in a horizontal direction.”]. Regarding claim 4, Modified Foong discloses an electrical contact for use in an integrated circuit testing apparatus according to claim 1. Foong is silent about claimed stopper. Nakano at fig. 13 discloses a stopper [flange 50, see fig. 13] comprising a pair of horizontal members protruding from opposing sides of said top section [54, Referring to FIG. 13 in conjunction with FIG. 8, it can be seen that retention section 50 of each terminal 42 is enlarged laterally to define a pair of outwardly projecting flanges 50a which are sandwiched between housing segments 4b and 4c of inner housing 4.], said stopper 50a adapted to engage with a stationary part 4b/4c of the testing apparatus. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add stopper to the electrical contact of Foong, in order to obtain advantages that Nakano have to offer i.e. to fix the electrical contacts in the housing 4b/4c recess 44 (see “Each terminal includes an enlarged intermediate retention section 50 for fixing the terminal in its respective passage 44 “ and “fixes terminals within their respective terminal-receiving passages 44 in the housing segments.”). Modified Foong discloses a pair of horizontal members protruding from opposing sides of said top section above where the said first and second arms extend from said top section, said stopper adapted to engage with a stationary part of the testing apparatus when the contact is installed so as to create a preload in the central spine leading up to a test. Regarding claim 5, Modified Foong discloses an electrical contact for use in an integrated circuit testing apparatus according to claim 4, wherein said engagement of the stopper to the stationary part of the testing apparatus causes the contact to be aligned substantially to the vertical axis. Regarding claim 8, Modified Foong discloses an electrical contact for use in an integrated circuit testing apparatus according to claim 1. Nakano at fig. 8 discloses a length from the stopper 50 to the top of the contact [top of 42 at 48] is at least 20% of the total height of the contact [as shown]. Regarding claim 9, Modified Foong discloses an electrical contact for use in an integrated circuit testing apparatus according to claim 1, particularly Foong discloses wherein the first recess and second recess are formed from a third arm [upper left portion of 30 near 221] and a fourth arm [upper right portion of 30 near 241], respectively, said third and fourth arms protruding out from opposing sides of the bottom section 30. Regarding claim 10, Modified Foong discloses an electrical contact for use in an integrated circuit testing apparatus according to claim 9. Foong discloses wherein a length of the portion of the bottom section [length of 30 below 221/241] below the third and fourth arms is at least 8% of the total height of the contact [as shown]. Regarding claim 11, Modified Foong discloses an electrical contact for use in an integrated circuit testing apparatus according to claim 1. Nakano discloses the contact is installed into the testing apparatus using the following steps: a. place a retainer 4b onto a cover plate 4c, both being in an upside down orientation; b. thread each contact 42 through eyelets 44 in the retainer; and c. lower a socket housing 4a onto the cover plate, such that each contact is threaded through through-holes [44 in 4a] provided on the socket housing. Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foong and Nakano as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Haga et al. (US 2002/0000821 A1), hereafter Haga. Regarding claim 6, Modified Foong discloses an electrical contact for use in an integrated circuit testing apparatus according to claim 1. They are silent about an enclosure adapted to prevent the first and second arms from any excessive bending that causes the tips to skip out of the recesses. Use of the enclosure to protect/shield the electrical contacts are old and well known in the art. Haga at ¶0070-71 discloses cylindrical member 8 as the enclosure that plays the role of the guide unit. Also, since cylindrical member 8 is basically formed of a conductor, it also serves to shield spring unit 2 (i.e. of the electrical contact 52). Haga also discloses cylindrical member 8 is not limited in its cylindrical configuration, and may have a cross section other than a circle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the before the effective filing date add the enclosure to the contact of modified Foong to shield the electrical contact for protection. Modified Foong discloses said enclosure adapted to prevent the first and second arms from any excessive bending that causes the tips to skip out of the recesses. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 7 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: No prior art has been found that meets the limitations of claim 7 calling for an electrical contact for use in an integrated circuit testing apparatus comprising: wherein the enclosure is joined to the bottom section and rises to form two bars, each said bar located on opposite sides of the arms near the tips, the bars not touching the first and second arms or tips during a normal operation of the apparatus, but located closely enough to said arms and tips so as to prevent their excessive movement, thus keeping the tips within the recesses. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PARESH PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-1968. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am to 4:00pm. 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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at 571-272-4448. 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. /PARESH PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858 October 8, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 10, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601761
VERTICAL PROBE CARD AND OPEN-TYPE PROBE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601760
PROBE CARD DEVICE AND TUNNEL-TYPE PROBE THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601762
TEST TERMINAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596147
ALIGNMENT CHIP FOR PROBE CARD, PROBE CARD AND PROBE CARD REPAIR METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596146
SOCKET, JIG, SOCKET MAINTENANCE SET, AND DISASSEMBLY METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (-1.8%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 928 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month