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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on September 7, 2023, and April 16, 2024, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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.
(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, 6, 16 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a2)as being anticipated by Nasu (US 20190261514 A1).
Regarding Claim 1 – Nasu discloses: a supporting layer(fig 2, J1-J4, S1-S4), having a first surface and a second surface opposite to the first surface(fig 2); a circuit layer((fig 2, 23), wherein the supporting layer supports the circuit layer, and the circuit layer, having a first protruding part, disposed on the first surface; a second protruding part, disposed on the second surface(fig 2, 15); and a connecting part, disposed between the first protruding part and the second protruding part, wherein the first protruding part is connected to the second protruding part through the connecting part(fig 2, 25a, 26, 17, 18); and a protective layer, covering the first protruding part (Fig 2; probe pads 23; Nasu [0063] states “externally exposed surfaces of, at least, the pads for probe 23… are coated with a nickel film and a gold film”).
Regarding Claim 6 – Nasu discloses wherein the supporting layer is a single layer or multiple layers(fig 2, J1-J4. S1-S4).
Regarding Claim 16 – Nasu discloses: A test component(para 0002, 0003), having a supporting layer(fig 2, J1-J4, S1-S4), having a first surface and a second surface opposite to the first surface(fig 2); a circuit layer((fig 2, 23), wherein the supporting layer supports the circuit layer, and the circuit layer, having a first protruding part, disposed on the first surface; a second protruding part, disposed on the second surface(fig 2, 15); and a connecting part, disposed between the first protruding part and the second protruding part, wherein the first protruding part is connected to the second protruding part through the connecting part(fig 2, 25a, 26, 17, 18); and a protective layer, covering the first protruding part (Fig 2; probe pads 23; Nasu [0063] states “externally exposed surfaces of, at least, the pads for probe 23… are coated with a nickel film and a gold film”).
Regarding Claim 20 – Nasu discloses wherein the supporting layer is a single layer or multiple layers (fig 2, J1-J4. S1-S4).
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, 6, 16, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang et al. (US 20160155697 A1) in view of Nasu (US 20190261514 A1)
Regarding Claim 1 – Liang discloses a conductive film (Fig 4; 100), comprising: a supporting layer, having a first surface and a second surface opposite to the first surface (Figs 3-4; 110 having sides 112 and 114; Liang [0003] states “conductive layer on a top surface of the substrate… conductive pillars each extending from a bottom surface of the substrate”); a circuit layer, wherein the supporting layer supports the circuit layer (Figs 3-4; metallization layers 140 + conductive pillars 150/152; Liang [0003] quoted above), and the circuit layer comprises: a first protruding part, disposed on the first surface (Fig 4; 230); a second protruding part, disposed on the second surface (Figs 3-4; 152 conductive pillars; Liang [0003] quoted above); and a connecting part, disposed between the first protruding part and the second protruding part, wherein the first protruding part is connected to the second protruding part through the connecting part (Figs 3-4, 140; Liang [0003] states “conductive pillars… extending from a bottom surface… through the substrate to the conductive layer”).
Liang does not explicitly disclose a protective layer, covering the first protruding part.
Nasu teaches a protective layer, covering the first protruding part (Fig 2; probe pads 23; Nasu [0063] states “externally exposed surfaces of, at least, the pads for probe 23… are coated with a nickel film and a gold film”).
It would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device of Liang with a protective layer, covering the first protruding part as taught by Nasu because Nasu is directed to a wiring substrate for an inspection apparatus and teaches that externally exposed probe-contact pads are “coated with a nickel film and a gold film” so that the substrate can be used in an inspection apparatus to “accurately” inspect electrical characteristics (Nasu [0063, 0064]); thus Nasu provides a known pad-protection technique suitable for application to the exposed contact feature of Lang.
Regarding Claim 6 – Liang in view of Nasu teaches the conductive film according to claim 1, wherein the supporting layer is a single layer or multiple layers (fig 3-4, 130)
Regarding Claim 16 – Liang teaches a test component (Fig 9; 810), comprising: a circuit board (Liang [0023] states “an interconnection with a “mother board” PCB (printed circuit board)”); a bonding pad (Fig 2; 155; Liang [0023]); and a conductive film, electrically connected to the circuit board through the bonding pad (Liang [0023]), wherein the conductive film (Fig 4; 100) comprises: a supporting layer, having a first surface and a second surface opposite to the first surface (Figs 3-4; 110 having sides 112 and 114; Liang [0003]); a circuit layer, wherein the supporting layer supports the circuit layer (Figs 3-4; metallization layers 140 + conductive pillars 150/152; Liang [0003] quoted above), and the circuit layer comprises: a first protruding part, disposed on the first surface (Fig 4; 230); a second protruding part, disposed on the second surface (Figs 3-4; conductive pillars; Liang [0003] quoted above); and a connecting part, disposed between the first protruding part and the second protruding part, wherein the first protruding part is connected to the second protruding part through the connecting part (Figs 3-4; Liang [0003] quoted above).
Liang does not explicitly disclose a protective layer, covering the first protruding part.
Nasu teaches a protective layer, covering the first protruding part (Fig 2; probe pads 23; Nasu [0063] quoted above).
It would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device of Liang with a protective layer, covering the first protruding part as taught by Nasu because Nasu is directed to a wiring substrate for an inspection apparatus and teaches that externally exposed probe-contact pads are “coated with a nickel film and a gold film” so that the substrate can be used in an inspection apparatus to “accurately” inspect electrical characteristics (Nasu [0063, 0064]); thus Nasu provides a known pad-protection technique suitable for application to the exposed contact feature of Lang.
Regarding Claim 20 – Liang in view of Nasu teaches the conductive film according to claim 16, wherein the supporting layer is a single layer or multiple layers (Nasu Fig2; ceramic layers s1 to s4).
Claim(s) 2-3, 13, 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang et al. (US 20160155697 A1) in view of Nasu (US 20190261514 A1) and in further view of Funaya et al. (US 20110155433 A1)
Regarding Claim 2 – Liang in view of Nasu discloses conductive film according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein in a normal direction of the supporting layer, a height of the first protruding part is greater than a height of the second protruding part.
Liang teaches the first side protrusion and that its height is intentionally tuned (Figs 7-8; Liang [0031] states “the process step of adding metallization… should be adjusted to ensure that sufficient height of the protruding pillars remains”).
Funaya confirms terminal height is a routine design parameter (Funaya [0081] states “The electrode terminal… having a height of 5 μm to 50 μm”).
It would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device of Liang in view of Nasu with in a normal direction of the supporting layer, a height of the first protruding part is greater than a height of the second protruding part because Funaya shows that terminal height is a selectable design parameter, and Liang expressly teaches adjusting processing to achieve and preserve sufficient protrusion height; therefore, selecting the relative heights of opposing protruding features would have been a predictable dimensional optimization.
Regarding Claim 3 – Liang in view of Nasu teaches the conductive film according to claim 1, wherein the first protruding part overlaps the first surface to form a first overlapping region (Fig 1D; Nasu [0049] states “pads for probe 23 are disposed… on a resin front-surface 21a… in plan view”), the second protruding part overlaps the second surface to form a second overlapping region (Fig 2; Nasu [0050-0051] states “an upper surface 12 and a lower surface 13 located on opposite sides” and that “lower-surface connection terminals 15 are formed on the lower surface 13”), but fails to disclose the second overlapping region is larger than the first overlapping region.
Funaya teaches the second overlapping region is larger than the first overlapping region (Funaya [0092] describes forming “a pattern (8.5 mm by 8.5 mm) larger than the outer shape… when the outer area… is 8 mm by 8 mm” and states “This also protects the functional element”; Funaya [0093] further teaches that “the heat releasing pattern can be freely designed so as to mitigate the stress”).
It would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device of Liang in view of Nasu with the second overlapping region is larger than the first overlapping region as taught by Funaya because Funaya teaches that making a pattern larger than another is a predictable design selection used for protection/reliability and stress mitigation (Funaya [0092-0093]).
Regarding Claim 13 – Liang in view of Nasu teaches the conductive film according to claim 1, but fails to disclose further comprising: a buffer layer, disposed on the first surface of the supporting layer and covering a part of a side surface of the first protruding part.
Funaya teaches a buffer layer, disposed on the first surface of the supporting layer and covering a part of a side surface of the first protruding part (Funaya [0126] states “when the electrode terminals are buried under the insulating resin layer 9, the surface is protected”; also, Funaya [0090] states “forming a fine concavo-convex pattern… on the sides of the electrode terminal… and the reliability can be further increased”).
It would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device of Liang in view of Nasu with a buffer layer, disposed on the first surface of the supporting layer and covering a part of a side surface of the first protruding part as taught by Funaya because Funaya teaches using insulating resin coverage to protect exposed terminal surfaces (Funaya [0123]) and teaches improving reliability through resin interaction at the side surfaces of terminals (Funaya [0090]).
Regarding Claim 17 – Liang in view of Nasu discloses conductive film according to claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose wherein in a normal direction of the supporting layer, a height of the first protruding part is greater than a height of the second protruding part.
Liang teaches the first side protrusion and that its height is intentionally tuned (Figs 7-8; Liang [0031] quoted above).
Funaya confirms terminal height is a routine design parameter (Funaya [0081] quoted above).
It would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device of Liang in view of Nasu with in a normal direction of the supporting layer, a height of the first protruding part is greater than a height of the second protruding part because Funaya shows that terminal height is a selectable design parameter, and Liang expressly teaches adjusting processing to achieve and preserve sufficient protrusion height; therefore, selecting the relative heights of opposing protruding features would have been a predictable dimensional optimization.
Regarding Claim 18 – Liang in view of Nasu teaches the conductive film according to claim 16, wherein the first protruding part overlaps the first surface to form a first overlapping region (Fig 1D; Nasu [0049] quoted above), the second protruding part overlaps the second surface to form a second overlapping region (Fig 2; Nasu [0050-0051] quoted above), but fails to disclose the second overlapping region is larger than the first overlapping region.
Funaya teaches the second overlapping region is larger than the first overlapping region (Funaya [0092, 0093] quoted above).
It would have been obvious for a person with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the device of Liang in view of Nasu with the second overlapping region is larger than the first overlapping region as taught by Funaya because Funaya teaches that making a pattern larger than another is a predictable design selection used for protection/reliability and stress mitigation (Funaya [0092-0093]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADITYA SHARMA whose telephone number is (571)270-7246. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 5:30.
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, Timothy 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.
/ADITYA SHARMA/ Examiner, Art Unit 2847
/TIMOTHY J THOMPSON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2847