DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered.
Applicant argues
PNG
media_image1.png
176
694
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner does not find this persuasive because this is an intended use. Applicant claims a device. Circuit boards do not have implicit sizes. Thus while, e.g., a funnel for popcorn might imply a specific size for the funnel, a widget for circuit boards does not similarly imply a specific size for the widget.
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.
Claim(s) 16-24 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
In reference to claim 16, it is unclear what size the spacer is required to be.
The structure of the spacer, a solid metal core and insulated covering, as claimed, reads on a typical wire except for the context of use.
Applicant alleges that the context of use in the claim is sufficient to define specific structure of the spacer such that it has a reasonably certain and definite size. See arguments, e.g.:
PNG
media_image1.png
176
694
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Upon review of the present specification there is no limitation placed on the solder ball, grid array, or other relevant elements. Thus, it is impossible to determine what, if any, size is required by the claim.
Note: Claims 17-24 are also rejected by virtue of their dependence on claim 16.
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 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.
Claim 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OFFICIAL NOTICE
In reference to claim 16, a loop of common copper wire comprises a solid metal core and a molded insulating covering. This meets the claim, as claimed.
Wires come in many sizes. Wire sizes overlap with size to fit on a single connection as claimed. Also, it would be obvious to use a wire that fits on a single connection in order to not short circuit the connection to another neighboring connection.
E.g., see image below, the top and sides of the wire are insulated, while the two bottom surface ends are connected to a ball grid array. This would serve as a spacer.
PNG
media_image2.png
476
495
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Examiner acknowledges that the intended invention is as shown in Figure 1, e.g., an encapsulated short cylinder, however, the claim must be examined as claimed. A loop of wire meets the claim as further explained in more detail below.
1. The Core
Claim Requirement: “a core defining a top surface, a bottom surface, and one or more side surfaces”
Wire Comparison: The copper metal wire acts as the core. When formed into a loop or donut shape (toroid), the copper material structurally defines a top surface, a bottom surface, an outer side surface, and an inner side surface.
The Covering
Claim Requirement: “a molded covering that covers at least the top surface of the spacer, the molded covering comprising an insulation material”
Wire Comparison: The plastic or enamel insulation surrounding the wire serves as the insulating covering. Because the insulation fully wraps the wire, it inherently covers the top surface.
The "Molded" Caveat: Commercially, wire insulation is typically extruded rather than molded. However, since the prompt specifies to ignore the process of making, the physical result—a plastic outer layer tightly conforming to the shape of the copper core—satisfies the structural requirement of an insulation covering.
PNG
media_image3.png
722
753
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS KRASNOW whose telephone number is (571)270-1154. The examiner can normally be reached M-R: 8am-5pm.
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, Xiao Zhao can be reached at 571-270-5343. 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.
/NICHOLAS KRASNOW/Examiner, Art Unit 1744
