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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 10 – 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention II (method claims), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/15/2025.
Drawings
Figure 1A and Figure 1B should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated (see [0025,0026,0056,0058] “conventional”). See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 states “seamless” connected however this would seem to have a grammatical error and should instead read as “seamlessly”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 – 4, 9 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pen (US 2016/0278208 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Pen (US 2016/0278208 A1) discloses a multilayer structure for a printed wiring board (PWB) (Fig 6-12), the multilayer structure comprising: a plurality of insulating layers (104,106; [0028]) interleaved with a plurality of conductive layers (108; [0028]) comprising one or more inner conductive layers (108), a top conductive layer (upper 108), and a bottom conductive layer (lower 108); at least one through-hole (110) through the plurality of insulating layers (106,104) and the plurality of conductive layers (108); at least one secondary material layer (118) formed on at least one inner conductive trace or a terminating land (inner 108 at 110) having a surface (see Fig 9 showing surface of 108 at 110) and an edge (see Fig 9 showing inner edge of inner 108 at 110) near one of the at least one through-hole (110), the at least one secondary material layer (118) (after being removed partially (see Fig 9)) defining a recess (115; [0028-0029]) that allows plating (112’,112; [0033-0037]) on both the edge (see Fig 10-12) and the surface (see Fig 10-12) of the at least one inner conductive trace or the terminating land (108); wherein the at least one through-hole (110) comprises a first (plated) segment (segment or portion or part of 112 or 112’ above 118; note that the structural limits of this claimed segment are not structurally claimed) seamless connected to a second (plated) segment (segment or portion or part of 112 or 112’ at 115; note that the structural limits of this claimed segment are not structurally claimed) wrapped over the edge of the at least one inner conductive trace or terminating land (108) and extending (see Fog 10-12) at least a portion of the surface of the at least one inner conductive trace or terminating land (inner 108).
In accordance to MPEP 2113, the method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight. Please note that even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product, i.e. “plated” and “after being removed partially”, does not depend on its method of production, i.e. ----. In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Federal Circuit 1985).
Regarding Claim 2, Pen further discloses the multilayer structure (Fig 6-12) of claim 1, wherein the at least one secondary material layer (118) comprises a material ([0031]) different from the plurality of conductive layers.
Regarding Claim 3, T Pen further discloses the multilayer structure (Fig 6-12) of claim 1, wherein the at least one secondary material layer (118) circumferentially surrounds ([0034]) the at least one through-hole (115).
Regarding Claim 4, Pen further discloses the multilayer structure (Fig 6-12) of claim 1, wherein the plurality of insulating layers (104,106) comprise a dielectric material ([0028]).
Regarding Claim 9, Pen further discloses the multilayer structure (Fig 6-12) of claim 1, wherein the top conductive layer (upper 108) is over one of the plurality of insulating layers (106), and the bottom conductive layer (lower 108) is under another one of the plurality of insulating layers (106).
Regarding Claim 21, Pen further discloses the multilayer structure (Fig 6-12) of claim 1, further comprising a spot face (portion about 114) to expose one of the plurality of insulating layers (106) and to break electrical connection to either the top or the bottom conductive layer (108) of the multilayer structure.
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.
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(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pen (US 2016/0278208 A1) as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 5, Pen discloses the limitations of the preceding claim.
Pen does not explicitly disclose the multilayer structure of claim 1, wherein the plurality of conductive layers (108) comprise copper ([0003]).
However Pen teaches of a multilayer structure ([0003]), wherein a plurality of conductive layers (“conductive sheets”) comprise copper ([0003]). Pen further teaches that copper is an electrically conductive material ([0004]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the structure as disclosed by Pen, wherein the plurality of conductive layers comprise copper as taught by Pen, as both limitations are provided by the same publication, in order to provide an electrically conductive material (Pen, [0003-0004]) and furthermore since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice to provide an electrically conductive material. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim(s) 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pen (US 2016/0278208 A1) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Kamei (U 2008/0217048 A1).
Regarding Claim 6, Pen discloses the limitations of the preceding claim.
Pen does not disclose the multilayer structure of claim 1, wherein the at least one secondary material layer comprises a metal selected from one of a group consisting of tin (Sn) and lead (Pb) alloy, Sn, nickel (Ni), and aluminum (Al).
Kamei (U 2008/0217048 A1) teaches of at least one secondary material layer (5) comprises a metal selected from one of a group consisting of tin (Sn) ([0069]) and lead (Pb) alloy, Sn ([0069]), nickel (Ni) ([0069]), and aluminum (Al).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the structure as disclosed by Pen, wherein the at least one secondary material layer comprises a metal selected from one of a group consisting of tin (Sn) and lead (Pb) alloy, Sn, nickel (Ni), and aluminum (Al) as taught by Kamei, in order to prevent unwanted plating, prevent corrosion, and prevent discoloration (Kamei, [0013-0017,0069]) and furthermore since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice to prevent unwanted plating, prevent corrosion, and prevent discoloration. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Please note that in the instant application, [0118,0173], Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
Regarding Claim 7, Pen discloses the limitations of the preceding claim.
Pen does not explicitly disclose the multilayer structure of claim 1, wherein the at least one secondary material layer comprises one or more organic materials of different solubility from that of PWB laminate materials including base laminate, conductive polymers, and primary conductor material.
Kamei (U 2008/0217048 A1) teaches of at least one secondary material layer (5) comprises one or more organic materials of different solubility from that of PWB laminate materials including base laminate, conductive polymers, and primary conductor material ([0069]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the structure as disclosed by Pen, wherein the at least one secondary material layer comprises one or more organic materials of different solubility from that of PWB laminate materials including base laminate, conductive polymers, and primary conductor material as taught by Kamei, in order to prevent unwanted plating, prevent corrosion, and prevent discoloration (Kamei, [0013-0017,0069]) and furthermore since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice to prevent unwanted plating, prevent corrosion, and prevent discoloration. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Please note that in the instant application, [0171], Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pen (US 2016/0278208 A1) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Iketani (US 2014/0262455 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, Pen discloses the limitations of the preceding claim.
Pen does not disclose the multilayer structure of claim 1, wherein the at least one secondary material layer has a thickness ranging from 0.1 mils to 5.0 mils.
Iketani (US 2014/0262455 A1) teaches of a multilayer structure (Fig 12), wherein at least one secondary material layer (1270) has a thickness ranging from 0.1 mils to 5.0 mils ([0079]).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the structure as disclosed by Pen, wherein the at least one secondary material layer has a thickness ranging from 0.1 mils to 5.0 mils as taught by Iketani, in order to provide an effective partition and effective electrical isolation (Iketani, [0079-0086]) and since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art in order to provide an effective partition and effective electrical isolation. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Kuczynski (US 2010/0044096 A1) which teaches of a multilayer structure for a printed wiring board (PWB) (Fig 2), the multilayer structure comprising: a plurality of insulating layers ([0028]) interleaved with a plurality of conductive layers comprising one or more inner conductive layers (212,210,211), a top conductive layer (254), and a bottom conductive layer (255); at least one through-hole (202) through the plurality of insulating layers and the plurality of conductive layers; at least one secondary material layer (216; 230,232) formed on at least one inner conductive trace (210) or a terminating land having a surface and an edge near one of the at least one through-hole. This could be used in a 103 Rejection.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROSHN K VARGHESE whose telephone number is (571)270-7975. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 900 am-300 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, Jessica Han can be reached at 571-272-2078. 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.
/ROSHN K VARGHESE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896