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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 6-9 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/11/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by “Singh” (US 2019/0103365).
Regarding claim 1, Singh anticipates 1. An electronic device comprising: a wiring board having a mounting surface (Fig. 1B, [0019]; the package substrate 102 is a wiring board having a mounting surface);
a ground electrode that defines a ground region on the mounting surface (Fig. 1B, [0019]; the ground pad 104(2) is a ground electrode that defines a ground region on the mounting surface of the package substrate 102);
an electronic component that is located on the mounting surface and is disposed in the ground region (Fig. 1B, [0019]; the electronic components 116, 118 are located on the mounting surface and disposed in the ground region);
a conductive component that is disposed adjacent to an outer edge of the ground electrode and is electrically insulated from the ground electrode (Fig. 1B, [0019]; the antenna module 112 is laterally separated from the electronic components 116, 118 and is disposed adjacent to an outer edge of the ground electrode and is electrically insulated from the ground electrode);
an internal insulating protective layer that is disposed in the ground region and covers the electronic component (Fig. 1B, [0020]; the mold body 122 is an internal insulating protective layer that is disposed in the ground region and covers the electronic components 116, 118);
an external insulating protective layer that is disposed outside the ground region and covers the conductive component (Fig. 1B, [0020]; the mold body 136 is external insulating protective layer that is disposed outside the ground region and covers the antenna module 112);
and an electromagnetic wave shielding layer that is provided to extend over the internal insulating protective layer and the ground electrode and that covers the internal insulating protective layer and is electrically connected to the ground electrode, the electromagnetic wave shielding layer being a solidified product of an ink for forming an electromagnetic wave shielding layer (Fig. 1B, [0022]; the shielding layer 134 is an electromagnetic wave shielding layer that is provided to extend over the mold body 122 and the ground pad 104(2) and that covers the mold body 122 and is electrically connected to the ground pad 104(2). Examiner’s note: the limitation: “the electromagnetic wave shielding layer being a solidified product of an ink for forming an electromagnetic wave shielding layer” is a process limitation in a product claim and is treated in accordance with MPEP 2113. As this process limitation uses a product structure that is the same as the product of Singh, this limitation is therefore anticipated by Singh.).
Regarding claim 5, Singh anticipates 5. The electronic device according to claim 1, wherein the internal insulating protective layer contains an acrylic resin and the external insulating protective layer contains an acrylic resin,
or the internal insulating protective layer contains an epoxy resin and the external insulating protective layer contains an epoxy resin (Fig. 1B, [0021]; the mold body portions 122 and 136 are made of an encapsulant material such as multi-aromatic type epoxy resin).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh in view of “Kamata” (US 2023/0238219).
Regarding claim 2, Singh discloses the claimed invention as applied to claim 1, above.
Singh does not disclose the limitations of claim 2.
Kamata discloses 2. The electronic device according to claim 1, wherein a closest distance between the outer edge of the ground electrode and an edge of the conductive component is 0.1 mm to 10.0 mm (Fig. 7, [0049]; the distance between the lower ground electrode 51 and the backside surface of the substrate W is preferably 0.5 mm to 3 mm).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have constructed Singh’s electronic device with Kamata’s ground electrode in order to have a function of concentrating an electric field between the lower ground electrode 51 and the end part of the backside surface of the substrate W with a dielectric or a space interposed therebetween, as suggested by Kamata at [0049].
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh in view of “Joimel” (US 2021/0159449).
Regarding claim 3, Singh discloses the claimed invention as applied to claim 1, above.
Singh does not disclose the limitations of claim 3.
Joimel discloses 3. The electronic device according to claim 1, wherein a thickness T1 of the external insulating protective layer on the conductive component is 2 μm to 200 μm (Fig. 3, [0068]; the thickness of the encapsulation layer 66 covering organic electronic component 18 is in the range from 1 μm to 50 μm).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have constructed Singh’s electronic device with Joimel’s protective layer in order to improve the resistance to aging of organic electronic component 18, as suggested by Joimel at 0063].
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh in view of “Wei” (US 11,324,115).
Regarding claim 4, Singh discloses the claimed invention as applied to claim 1, above.
Singh does not disclose the limitations of claim 4.
Wei discloses 4. The electronic device according to claim 1, wherein a thickness T1 of the external insulating protective layer on the conductive component is thinner than a thickness T2 of the internal insulating protective layer on the electronic component (Fig. 5, col. 6, lines 25-32; a thickness of the first insulating layer 11a and a thickness of the third insulating layer 11c may be adjusted as needed).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have constructed Singh’s electronic device with Wei’s adjustable thickness of the insulating layer in order to accommodate the embedding of electronic components of different thicknesses, as suggested by Wei at col. 6, lines 25-30.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STANLEY TSO whose telephone number is (571)270-0723. The examiner can normally be reached Tu-Thurs 6am-6pm, alt M 6am-2pm.
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, Tim Thompson can be reached at 571-272-2342. 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.
/STANLEY TSO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights