CTNF 18/537,885 CTNF 100145 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueda et al. (hereinafter Ueda) (US 20170301604 A1) in view of Marinace (US 3351698 A) and Kume et al. (hereinafter Kume) (JP 2014067809 A) . Examiner notes an attached machine translation will be used for the claim mapping of Kume. See PTO-892 form Regarding claim 1, Ueda discloses in Fig. 1 A laser module [1 Fig. 7] (Para. [0028]) comprising: a laser element [40] (Para. [0029]) that emits a laser beam (Para. [0033]); a first block [10] (Para. [0029]) electrically connected to a first electrode [41] (Para. [0033]) of the laser element [40] (Para. [0033]); and a second block [60] (Para. [0029]) disposed opposite to the first block [10] and electrically connected to a second electrode [42] (Para. [0033]) of the laser element [40] (Para. [0033]), wherein the first block [10] includes a first surface [upper surface of 10] (Para. [0029]) facing the second block [60] and the second block [60] includes a second surface lower surface of 60] (Para. [0029]) facing the first block [10], Ueda fails to disclose, any one of the first surface and the second surface includes a plurality of recesses formed in a region different from a region in which the laser element is disposed when viewed from a direction in which the first block and the second block are stacked, each of the plurality of recesses is provided with a spacer member having insulation properties, the spacer member partly protrudes from the corresponding recesses, and the spacer member is sandwiched between the first block and the second block. Marinace discloses in Fig. 3, A plurality of spacer members [5a,5b] (Col. 3, lines 24-28) formed in a region different from a region in which a laser element [7a] (Col. 5, lines 36-40) is disposed when viewed from a vertical direction (Col. 5, lines 36-40), the spacer members [5a,5b] having insulation properties (Col. 3, lines 24-28) and are sandwiched between a first block [1a,1b] and a second block [3] (Col. 5, lines 19-22) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the insulating spacers of Marinace between the first and second blocks of Ueda for the purpose of supporting the upper member at a parallel, same critical spacing. (Marinace Col. 5, lines 19-22) Ueda in view of Marinace fails to disclose, any one of the first surface and the second surface includes a plurality of recesses formed in a region different from a region in which the laser element is disposed when viewed from a direction in which the first block and the second block are stacked, each of the plurality of recesses is provided with a spacer member having insulation properties, the spacer member partly protrudes from the corresponding recesses, Kume discloses in Fig. 8, an upper surface of a first block [35] (Para. [0023]) including a plurality of recesses [71] (Paras. [0023,0024]) in which spacer members [50] (Para. [0024]) are disposed, the spacer members [50] (Para. [0024]) partly protrudes from the corresponding recesses [71] (Para. [0024]), the spacer members [50] having a spherical shape (Para. [0024]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed application to implement the spacers of the modified device of Ueda in corresponding recesses with a spherical shape as shown in Kume for the purpose of having a desired heat dissipation and for securing the spacer in the recess. (Kume Paras. [0063,0068]) Regarding claim 2, Ueda in view of Marinace and Kume discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses in Ueda Fig. 1, further comprising an insulation layer [30] (Para. [0029]) provided by applying an insulation paste material (Para. [0032]) between the first block [10] and the second block [60] (Para. [0029]). Regarding claim 3, Ueda in view of Marinace and Kume discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses wherein the laser element is disposed on a virtual straight line connecting two of the plurality of recesses [Kume 71 Fig. 8] (Kume Para. 0024]) when viewed from the direction in which the first block and the second block are stacked [viewed from above]. Marinace Fig. 3 shows the spacer [5a,5b] to be directly across from each other with laser 7a between the spacers in a horizontal direction (Marinace Col. 5, lines 35-38). Therefore, the recesses will also be disposed directly across from each other with the laser element between, disposed on a virtual line between the two recesses. Regarding claim 4, Ueda in view of Marinace and Kume discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above and further discloses, wherein the spacer member is formed in a spherical shape (Kume Para. [0024]) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueda in view of Marinace and Kume as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yamashita et al. (hereinafter Yamashita) (US 20140151225 A1) . Regarding claim 5, the modified device of Ueda discloses the device outlined in the rejection of claim 1 above but fails to disclose, wherein at least three of the spacer members are provided. Yamashita discloses, a number of three or more spherical insulating spacer members [50] t(Para. [0053]) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the number of spacer layers as described in Yamashita in the modified device of Ueda for the purpose of ensuring a separating distance between the two blocks. (Yamashita Para. [0053]) Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Examiner notes (US 8486766 B2) which discloses insulating spacer members surrounding a laser element sandwiched by an upper and lower block. See PTO-892 form. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNTER J NELSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5318. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8:30am-5:00 ET. 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, MinSun Harvey can be reached at (571) 272-1835. 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. /H.J.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2828 /TOD T VAN ROY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828 Application/Control Number: 18/537,885 Page 2 Art Unit: 2828 Application/Control Number: 18/537,885 Page 3 Art Unit: 2828 Application/Control Number: 18/537,885 Page 4 Art Unit: 2828 Application/Control Number: 18/537,885 Page 5 Art Unit: 2828 Application/Control Number: 18/537,885 Page 6 Art Unit: 2828 Application/Control Number: 18/537,885 Page 7 Art Unit: 2828 Application/Control Number: 18/537,885 Page 8 Art Unit: 2828
Prosecution Insights