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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 1 contains unnecessary punctuation in the limitation of:
“a substrate formed from a liquid crystal polymer [sic: ,] and an inorganic substance contained in the substrate.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi (WO 2018/225511 A1; see English translation for reference) in view of Harada (US 2009/0294729 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Takahashi teaches an electronic component sealing lid (80c, see Figs. 1-2 and ¶ 0018; also 80t, see Figs. 3-4 and ¶ [0027]) comprising a substrate (81) formed from a liquid crystal polymer (¶ [0019]: resin that is a liquid crystal polymer), and an inorganic substance (¶ [0019]: ceramic, for example, alumina) contained in the substrate
Takahashi further teaches an exposed area (Fig. 2: surfaces of 81p directly contacting 71) at a bonding surface (Fig. 2 shows that surfaces the 81p directly contacting 71 are used to bond 81 to 10) of the substrate and teaches adding the amount of inorganic substance mixed with the liquid crystal polymer to increase strength and durability (¶ [0019]: “The addition of ceramic particles to the resin can increase strength and durability.”)
However, Takahashi does not explicitly teach: wherein
the exposed area percentage for the inorganic substance at the bonding surface of the substrate is at least 5%.
Harada, in the same field of invention, teaches a liquid crystal polymer (¶ [0104]; ¶ [0113]: used in semiconductor applications) wherein at most 250 parts by weight (¶ [0104]: “An amount of these other fillers to be added with respect to 100 parts by weight of the liquid-crystalline polymer may preferably be 0 to 250 parts by weight, more preferably 0 to 150 parts by weight, further preferably 0 to 100 parts by weight”) of inorganic substance (¶ [0104]: alumina fiber, glass fiber, fine silica, etc.) are added. Hence, Takahashi in view of Harada teaches: the exposed area percentage for the inorganic substance at the bonding surface of the substrate is at least 5%.
A person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective date of the claimed invention, will find it obvious to combine the teachings of Harada into the electronic component sealing lid of Takahashi to set the exposed area percentage for the inorganic substrate at the bonding surface of the substrate to be at least 5%. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Takashi in the manner set forth above for at least the purpose of improving the mechanical strength, heat resistance of the liquid crystal polymer, and preventing anisotropic mold shrinkage of the lid (Harada ¶ [0104]), with the ordinary artisan noting that the since Harada teaches increasing the inorganic substance by parts per weight from 0 to at most 250 parts per weight, then that would naturally result to the inorganic substance in occupying at least 5% of the exposed area of the inorganic substrate. See also MPEP § 2114 (I). Ex parte Levengood, 28 USPQ2d 1300 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1993) (reliance on logic and sound scientific reasoning).
Regarding claim 2, the electronic component sealing lid according to Claim 1, wherein an amount of the inorganic substance is at least 10 parts by mass but not more than 60 parts by mass per 100 parts by mass of the liquid crystal polymer (Harada ¶ [0104]: “An amount of these other fillers to be added with respect to 100 parts by weight of the liquid-crystalline polymer may preferably be 0 to 250 parts by weight, more preferably 0 to 150 parts by weight, further preferably 0 to 100 parts by weight.”). See also MPEP § 2144.05 (I).
Regarding claim 3, the electronic component sealing lid according to Claim 1, wherein an adhesive layer (70t, see Takahashi Fig. 3; ¶ [0027]: “[T]he sealing portion 70t includes… an adhesive layer 72t… adhesive layer 72t is a member that changes into a hardened adhesive layer 72c (FIGS. 1 and 2) when it is bonded to the electronic component housing package 10 (FIGS. 1 and 2)”) is laminated onto the bonding surface (Fig. 3 shows 70t directly contacting the bottoms surface of 81p; lamination is known in the art as a process of manufacturing a material in multiple layers using heat, pressure, welding, or adhesives; Takahashi teaches 70t to be made of at least two adhesive layers: 71 and 72t, with the method of creating 71 and 72t using heat. See Takahashi ¶ [0032]-¶ [0035]), and
the adhesive layer comprises a thermosetting resin (Takahashi ¶ [0032], ¶ [0020], ¶ [0009]: “The sealing portion is provided on the base portion and is made of a thermosetting adhesive material containing a thermosetting resin as a main component”) and a curing agent (Takahashi ¶ [0020]: “…and the remainder may be made up of secondary components such as a curing agent”).
Furthermore, claim 3 is a device claim that recites a method step of laminating an adhesive layer onto the bonding surface and hence is a product-by-process claim. Product-By-Process claims are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps.
“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 does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (citations omitted). See MPEP § 2113 (I)
Regarding claim 5, the electronic component sealing lid according to Claim 3, wherein an amount of the thermosetting resin is at least 1% by mass but not more than 80% by mass of a total mass of the adhesive layer (Takahashi ¶ [0020]: “content of the epoxy resin as the main component is preferably 20 to 40 wt % (weight %)”).
Regarding claim 6, the electronic component sealing lid according to Claim 3, wherein a content ratio of the curing agent relative to the thermosetting resin, expressed as an equivalence ratio, is at least 0.2 but not more than 1 (Takahashi ¶ 0020: “the content of the epoxy resin as the main component is preferably 20 to 40 wt % (weight %)… the subcomponents may be, for example, 1 to 10 wt % of a curing agent”; expressed in content ratio, this ranges from 0.025, i.e., 1% curing agent and 40% epoxy resin, to 0.5, i.e., 10% curing agent and 20% epoxy resin).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takahashi (WO 2018/225511 A1) in view of Harada (US 2009/0294729 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Onishi (JP 2816882 B2)
Regarding claim 4, Takahashi in view of Harada teaches the electronic component sealing lid according to Claim 3, and further teaches wherein the adhesive layer comprises a coupling agent (Takahashi ¶ [002]0: “Specifically, the subcomponents may be, for example, … 0.5 to 2 wt % of a coupling agent…”). However, Takahashi in view of Harada does not teach the coupling agent to be comprising of silane.
Onishi, in the same field of invention, teaches a coupling agent to be comprising of silane (Page 7, Line 1 of the translation).
A person of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective date of the claimed invention, will find it obvious to combine the teachings of Onishi into the electronic component sealing lid of Takahashi in view of Harada to use a coupling agent comprising of silane. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Takahashi in view of Harada in the manner set forth above for at least the purpose of substituting the unnamed coupling agent of Takahashi with materials that are known in the art that are used as coupling agents (Onishi Page 7, Line 1 mentions silane and titanium) when manufacturing an adhesive that is primarily comprised of a thermosetting resin (Onishi Page 5, Line 1) mixed with inorganic fillers (Onishi Page 5, Line 5: mica, silica, glass fiber) that are coupled with the resin using the coupling agents for the further purpose of improving the coupling strength of the adhesive when used in coupling translucent lids of program read only memory (PROM) devices and charge coupled (CCD) devices (Onishi Page 2: “the resin is prone to flying off to designated areas of the translucent lid member during the application process. In particular, in the case of a CCD, this results in a decrease in imaging performance.”; Page 3: “without causing the cover member to fly off, crack, chip, or flow away, particularly a translucent cover member”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS YAP whose telephone number is (703)756-1946. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM 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, Zandra Smith can be reached at (571) 272-2429. 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.
/DOUGLAS YAP/Assistant Examiner, Art Unit 2899
/ZANDRA V SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899