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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 2, 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Addiego et al. (US 20210068249 A1, “Addiego”) in view of Sagara et al. (US 5997377 A)
Regarding claim 1, Addiego discloses a circuit board (Abstract) for a high-frequency device, comprising: a glass substrate (abstract) in which a crystal is precipitated (para [0095] & [0099]) such that a region of the glass substrate containing the crystal exhibits an etching rate different from a region of the glass substrate without the crystal when exposed to an etchant, the glass substrate having a dielectric loss tangent at 20° C (para [0214] noted that 20° C - 25° C is considered room temperature) and 10 GHz of 0.0090 or less (Abstract).
Addiego is silent on such that a region of the glass substrate containing the crystal exhibits an etching rate different from a region of the glass substrate without the crystal when exposed to an etchant.
However, Sagara discloses such that a region of the glass substrate containing the crystal exhibits an etching rate different from a region of the glass substrate without the crystal when exposed to an etchant (See Col. 4, Lines: 60 - 64).
Addiego and Sagara are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of substrate Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Addiego to incorporate the teachings of Sagara and provide a region of the glass substrate containing the crystal exhibits an etching rate different from a region of the glass substrate without the crystal when exposed to an etchant (See Col. 4, Lines: 60 - 64). Doing so would give them excellent properties as glass substrate (See Col. 4, Line 64)
Regarding claim 2, Addiego in view of Sagara discloses the circuit board according to claim 1, wherein Addiego further discloses a signal having a frequency of 1 GHz to 100 GHz is transmitted (See example 14: para [0214] – [0216] ).
Regarding claim 5, Addiego in view of Sagara discloses the circuit board according to claim 1, wherein Addiego further discloses comprising: at least one of a passive device and an active device (see para [0206]).
Claim(s) 2 – 4, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Addiego et al. (US 20210068249 A1, “Addiego”) in view of Sagara et al. (US 5997377 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Goessler et al. (US 20220299595 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Addiego in view of Sagara discloses the circuit board according to claim 1,
In the event that a judicial tribunal finds that Addiego in view of Sagara fails to disclose wherein a signal having a frequency of 1 GHz to 100 GHz is transmitted, claim 2 is alternately rejected under 103 over Addiego in view of Sagara and further in view of Goessler.
Goessler discloses a signal having a frequency of 1 GHz to 100 GHz is transmitted (See para [0010]).
Addiego in view of Sagara and Goessler are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of high-frequency circuit board. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Addiego in view of Sagara to incorporate the teachings of Goessler and provide a signal having a frequency of 1 GHz to 100 GHz is transmitted (See para [0010] & [0014]). Doing so would enable high performance and high signal quality in terms of high-frequency signal transmission (para [0005]).
Regarding claim 3, Addiego in view of Sagara discloses the circuit board according to claim 1,
Addiego in view of Sagara is silent on wherein the glass substrate has at least one stereoscopic structure of a through hole, a hollowed-out structure, and a hollow structure.
However, Goessler discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the glass substrate has at least one stereoscopic structure of a through hole (124), a hollowed-out structure, and a hollow structure (para [0033] & [0093]).
Addiego in view of Sagara and Goessler are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of high-frequency circuit board. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Addiego in view of Sagara to incorporate the teachings of Goessler and provide wherein the glass substrate has at least one stereoscopic structure of a through hole (124), a hollowed-out structure, and a hollow structure (para [0033] & [0093]). Doing so would enable coupling between the high-frequency device and other components (para [0092])
Regarding claim 4, Addiego in view of Sagara discloses the circuit board according to claim 1,
Addiego in view of Sagara is silent on further comprising: a transmission line.
However, Goessler discloses (Fig. 1) further comprising: a transmission line {(112), para [0095] – [0097]}.
Addiego in view of Sagara and Goessler are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of high-frequency circuit board. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Addiego in view of Sagara to incorporate the teachings of Goessler and provide further comprising: a transmission line {(112), para [0095] – [0097]}. Doing so would enable high performance and high signal quality in terms of high-frequency signal transmission (para [0005]).
Regarding claim 6, A high-frequency device comprising Addiego in view of Sagara discloses the circuit board according to claim 1.
Addiego in view of Sagara is silent on a high-frequency device comprising the circuit board according to claim 1.
However, Goessler discloses (Fig. 1) a high-frequency device {(108 & 110), para [0091] & [0092]}.
Addiego in view of Sagara and Goessler are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of high-frequency circuit board. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Addiego in view of Sagara to incorporate the teachings of Goessler and provide a high-frequency device {(108 & 110), para [0091] & [0092]} comprising the circuit board according to claim 1. Doing so would enable high performance and high signal quality in terms of high-frequency signal transmission (para [0005]).
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 SIDI MOHAMED MAIGA whose telephone number is (703)756-1870. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am 5 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, Timothy Thompson can be reached on 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.
/SIDI M MAIGA/
Examiner, Art Unit 2847
/STANLEY TSO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847