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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-10, 13-17, and 20-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Isaacs et al. (US 2023/0067845 A1; hereinafter “Isaacs”).
Regarding claim 1, Isaacs teaches an information handling resource comprising: a circuit board (a printed circuit board PCB 110/200) comprising an electrically-conductive pad (mounting pads 204/408/508) (Figs. 1-6 and paragraphs 21-31); a circuit package (a quad flat no-lead QFN 130) comprising an electrically-conductive pin (mounting pads of 130) (Figs. 1-6 and paragraphs 21-31); and reflowed solder (a solder paste after a soldering/reflowing process) electrically coupling the electrically-conductive pad to the electrically-conductive pin, the reflowed solder having embedded therein at least one bead (standoff particles 302/402/502/602) configured to provide mechanical standoff between the pad and the pin (Figs. 3-6 and 8 and paragraphs 17-31 and 34).
Regarding claim 2, Isaacs teaches wherein the at least one bead has a melting temperature higher than that of the reflowed solder (paragraph 25).
Regarding claim 3, Isaacs teaches wherein the at least one bead is made of copper (paragraph 25).
Regarding claim 6, Isaacs teaches wherein the at least one bead is spherical in shape (paragraph 25).
Regarding claim 7, Isaacs teaches wherein the circuit package is a bottom-terminated component (paragraphs 19-21).
Regarding claim 8, Isaacs teaches an information handling system comprising: a processor (a processor 115) (Fig. 1 and paragraph 21); and an information handling resource comprising: a circuit board (a printed circuit board PCB 110/200) comprising an electrically-conductive pad (mounting pads 204/408/508) (Figs. 1-6 and paragraphs 21-31); a circuit package (a quad flat no-lead QFN 130) comprising an electrically-conductive pin (mounting pads of 130) (Figs. 1-6 and paragraphs 21-31); and reflowed solder (a solder paste after a soldering/reflowing process) electrically coupling the electrically-conductive pad to the electrically-conductive pin, the reflowed solder having embedded therein at least one bead (standoff particles 302/402/502/602) configured to provide mechanical standoff between the pad and the pin (Figs. 3-6 and 8 and paragraphs 17-31 and 34).
Regarding claim 9, Isaacs teaches wherein the at least one bead has a melting temperature higher than that of the reflowed solder (paragraph 25).
Regarding claim 10, Isaacs teaches wherein the at least one bead is made of copper (paragraph 25).
Regarding claim 13, Isaacs teaches wherein the at least one bead is spherical in shape (paragraph 25).
Regarding claim 14, Isaacs teaches wherein the circuit package is a bottom-terminated component (paragraphs 19-21).
Regarding claim 15, Isaacs teaches a method comprising: placing solder (a solder paste prior to a soldering/reflowing process) on an electrically-conductive pad (mounting pads 204/408/508) of a circuit board (a printed circuit board PCB 110/200), the solder having embedded therein at least one bead (standoff particles 302/402/502/602) (Figs. 3-6 and 8 and paragraphs 17-31 and 34); aligning (aligning as shown in Figs. 4-6) an electrically-conductive pin (mounting pads of 130) of a circuit package (a quad flat no-lead QFN 130) with the solder and the pad; and applying heat (the soldering/reflowing process) to the solder to create reflowed solder (the solder paste after the soldering/reflowing process) to electrically couple the electrically-conductive pad to the electrically-conductive pin such that the at least one bead provides mechanical standoff between the electrically-conductive pad and the electrically-conductive pin (Figs. 3-6 and 8 and paragraphs 17-31 and 34).
Regarding claim 16, Isaacs teaches wherein the at least one bead has a melting temperature higher than that of the reflowed solder (paragraph 25).
Regarding claim 17, Isaacs teaches wherein the at least one bead is made of copper (paragraph 25).
Regarding claim 20, Isaacs teaches wherein the at least one bead is spherical in shape (paragraph 25).
Regarding claim 21, Isaacs teaches wherein the circuit package is a bottom-terminated component (paragraphs 19-21).
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.
Claims 4-5, 11-12, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Isaacs.
Regarding claims 4, 11, and 18, Isaacs teaches that the at least one bead is made of various materials such as copper for not melting during the solder reflowing process to preventing solder collapsing, etc. (paragraphs 17 and 25). While Isaacs does not also teach a material choice copper-plated polymer for the at least one bead, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize various materials, including the claimed copper-plated polymer, for forming the bead (the standoff particles) from Isaacs in order to provide the standoff particles with similar characteristics such as not melting during the solder reflowing process to preventing solder collapsing.
Regarding claims 5, 12, and 19, Isaacs teaches that a physical dimension of the at least one bead (a particle size or a diameter of the standoff particles) is application specific such as based on what types of components are being mounted to the PCB and provides an example that the diameter of the standoff particle is 4 mil (paragraphs 26-28). Then, while Isaacs does not explicitly teach the dimension of the bead to be between approximately 2 mils and approximately 3 mils as claimed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the particle size or the diameter of the bead, including the claimed range between approximately 2 mils and approximately 3 mils, as a routine skill in the art for obtaining the optimal size of the solder paste containing the standoff particles based on the application specific as discussed in Isaacs. Furthermore, it has held that discovering an optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL B WHALEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3418. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 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, Sue Purvis can be reached on (571)272-1236. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANIEL WHALEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893