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 .
Response to Amendment
The current Office action is in response to Applicant’s Request for Continued Examination filed on June 18, 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 18, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding the 112(b) rejection, Applicant argues that the indefinite claim language has been corrected. However, the amendment to claim 1 has indefinite claim language.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4, and 9-10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Regarding claim 1, Applicant argues that Takeshita fails to teach calculating a heigh position of a foreign object which is a distance in the height direction from the sensor and the foreign object. However, Takeshita teaches calculating the thickness of a foreign object in the vertical direction in [0008] and claim 6. In Fig. 6, Takeshita shows that the thickness is in the vertical direction.
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 1-4, and 9-10 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 1 recites the limitation "the height direction" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim fails to introduce a limitation directed to “a height direction” . The Examiner has interpreted the limitation “a height direction”. Claims 2-4, and 9-10 are rejected by virtue of their dependency.
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) 1-4, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fukuda (JP 2021050992; notations directed to Translated Fukuda) in view of Takeshita (U.S. 2021/0262949) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Iwao (U.S. 2019/0049394).
Regarding claim 1, as best understood:
Fukuda discloses an X-ray transmission inspection apparatus comprising:
an X-ray source configured to irradiate a sample with X-rays (Translated Fukuda; [0013], radiation generator);
an X-ray sensor (Translated Fukuda; [0014], radiation detector) installed on a side opposite to the X-ray source with respect to the sample (Fig. 3, detector 3 is opposite of source 2) and configured to detect transmitted X-rays when the X-rays pass through the sample (Translated Fukuda; [0014], radiation detector detects X-rays);
a moving mechanism configured to move at least one of the sample, the X-ray source, and the X-ray sensor relative to the X-ray source and the X-ray sensor (Translated Fukuda; [0017] and [0021], moving mechanism); and
a calculation part (Translated Fukuda; [0024], control device),
wherein the X-ray source performs irradiation with the X-rays in a direction tiled with respect to the thickness direction of the sample and a transport direction of the sample (Fig. 1 and Fig. 3, source and detector are tilted),
the moving mechanism is capable of rotating the sample 180° with respect to a rotation axis according to an inspection width direction or a rotation axis according to the transport direction ([0033], 180 degree rotation)
the moving mechanism is capable of moving the sample in a first transport direction orthogonal to the thickness direction (translated Fukuda; [0016], movement mechanism moves samples along the x, y and z axis) and in a second transport direction opposite to the first transport direction (translated Fukuda; [0016], movement mechanism moves samples along the x, y and z axis), and
the moving mechanism is capable of changing an X-ray irradiation angle by moving at least the X-ray source or capable of rotating the sample 180° with respect to a rotation axis according to an inspection width direction or a rotation axis according to the transport direction, and
the moving mechanism is capable of changing an X-ray irradiation angle for the sample when the moving mechanism moves the sample in the first transport direction (Translated Fukuda; [0017] and [0021], moving mechanism moving the sample changes the irradiation angle) and an X-ray irradiation angle for the sample when the moving mechanism moves the sample in the second transport direction by moving the sample relative to one another (Translated Fukuda; [0017] and [0021], moving mechanism moving the sample changes the irradiation angle) or by rotating the sample.
However, Fukuda fails to disclose the moving mechanism is capable of changing an X-ray irradiation angle by moving at least the X-ray source or capable of rotating the sample 180° with respect to a rotation axis according to an inspection width direction or a rotation axis according to the transport direction, and a calculation part configured to calculate a height position of a foreign object in a thickness direction in the sample which is a distance in the height direction from the X-ray sensor to the X-ray foreign object based on the transmitted X-rays detected by the X-ray sensor.
Takeshita teaches a calculation part configured to calculate a height position of a foreign object in a thickness direction in the sample which is a distance in the height direction from the X-ray sensor to the X-ray foreign object based on the transmitted X-rays detected by the X-ray sensor ([0008], thickness of foreign matter is obtained; Claim 6).
Iwao teaches the moving mechanism is capable of changing an X-ray irradiation angle by moving at least the X-ray source or capable of rotating the sample 180° with respect to a rotation axis according to an inspection width direction or a rotation axis according to the transport direction (Fig. 2, W rotates 360 degrees; [0042], object rotation about the vertical axis),
It would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the apparatus of Fukuda with the height calculation taught by Takeshita in order to improve foreign object accuracy by reducing brightness in each pixel (Takeshita; [0008]). KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
It would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the apparatus of Fukuda with the rotation taught by Iwao. It would have been obvious to make such combination in order to improve image quality by allowing more sections of the object to be imaged. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the apparatus of Fukuda with the rotation taught by Iwao to yield predictable results. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Regarding claim 2, as best understood:
The combination of Fukuda, Takeshita, and Iwao discloses the X-ray transmission inspection apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the calculation part calculates the height position of the foreign object by using an amount of misalignment between an X-ray transmission image detected when the sample is moved in the first transport direction and an X-ray transmission image detected when the sample is moved in the second transport direction (Takeshita; [0008], thickness of foreign matter is obtained; Claim 6).
It would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the apparatus of Fukuda with the height calculation taught by Takeshita in order to improve foreign object accuracy by reducing brightness in each pixel (Takeshita; [0008]). KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Regarding claim 3, as understood:
The combination of Fukuda, Takeshita, and Iwao discloses the X-ray transmission inspection apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the X-ray sensor is a TDI sensor (Takeshita; [0023], TDI sensor).
It would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the apparatus of Fukuda with the TDI sensor by Takeshita in order to improve foreign object accuracy by reducing brightness in each pixel (Takeshita; [0008]). KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Regarding claim 4, as best understood:
The combination of Fukuda, Takeshita, and Iwao discloses the X-ray transmission inspection apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the X-ray sensor is a TDI sensor (Takeshita; [0023], TDI sensor).
It would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the apparatus of Fukuda with the TDI sensor by Takeshita in order to improve foreign object accuracy by reducing brightness in each pixel (Takeshita; [0008]). KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Regarding claim 10, as best understood:
The combination of Fukuda, Takeshita, and Iwao discloses an X-ray transmission inspection method using the X-ray transmission inspection apparatus according to claim 1, the method comprising:
a first movement step moving the sample in the first transport direction (Translated Fukuda; [0016], movement mechanism moves samples along the x, y and z axis);
a first passing point detection step detecting a position, as a first passing point, in the first transport direction at which the foreign object in the sample is detected based on the transmitted X-rays detected by the X-ray sensor during the first movement step (Translated Fukuda; [0013], radiation from source);
a second movement step moving the sample in the second transport direction (Translated Fukuda; [0016], movement mechanism moves samples along the x, y and z axis);
a second passing point detection step detecting a position, as a second passing point, in the second transport direction at which the foreign object in the sample is detected based on the transmitted X-rays detected by the X-ray sensor during the second movement step (Translated Fukuda; [0016], movement mechanism moves samples along the x, y and z axis and radiation from source); and
a calculation step calculating the height position of the foreign object in the sample based on the first passing point, the second passing point, the X-ray irradiation angle when the sample is moved in the first transport direction, and the X-ray irradiation angle when the sample is moved in the second transport direction (Takeshita; [0008], thickness of foreign matter is obtained; Claim 6).
It would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the apparatus of Fukuda with the height calculation taught by Takeshita in order to improve foreign object accuracy by reducing brightness in each pixel (Takeshita; [0008]). KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
Allowable Subject Matter
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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:
The closest prior arts are Fukuda (JP 2021050992; notations directed to Translated Fukuda), Iwao (U.S. 2019/0049394), and Takeshita (U.S. 2021/0262949).
Regarding claim 9, as best understood:
The combination of Fukuda, Takeshita, and Iwao discloses the X-ray transmission inspection apparatus according to claim 1.
However, the combination of Fukuda, Takeshita, and Iwao fails to disclose a reference piece installed on a surface of the moving mechanism or the sample, wherein the calculation part calculates the height position of the foreign object by comparing the height position of the foreign object with a height position of the reference piece.
Since the prior art of record fails to teach the details above, nor is there any reason to modify or combine prior art elements absent of applicant’s disclosure, the claim is deemed patentable over the prior art of record, if rewritten in independent form to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOORENA KEFAYATI whose telephone number is (469)295-9078. The examiner can normally be reached M to F, 7:30 am to 4:30 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, David Makiya can be reached at 571-272-2273. 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.
/S.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/DAVID J MAKIYA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884
Prosecution Insights