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 § 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, and 7 – 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ito (US 2014/0124242 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Ito (US 2014/0124242 A1) discloses a board (Fig 1-11) comprising: a base material (33); a wiring pattern (T1,34; [0050-0054]) provided on the base material; an insulating member (4; [0055]) covering (see Fig 2,7 showing 4 covering sides of T1; [0010]) the base material (33) and the wiring pattern (T1), and having an opening (opening in 4 exposing T1,M) corresponding to a bump ([0005,0054] “solder”) forming portion (portion of T1 exposed at 4 in Fig 9; note that the claim has not structurally limited nor defined this claimed region or portion) of the wiring pattern (T1); and a covering portion (5; [0048-0056]) formed of a material ([0048-0056]) having a solder contact angle larger than (5 is formed from solder resist and so would have less wettability compared to the wiring pattern at T1; [0050-0056]) that of the bump forming portion (portion of T1 exposed at 4 in Fig 9) in the opening (opening in 4 exposing T1,M), formed (5 is formed on 4) on the insulating member (4), and formed on a part of the bump forming portion (5 extends to cover a part of T1 and covers a portion of T1 exposed at 4 in Fig 9) to cover the part (part of T1 is covered by 5) in the opening of the insulating member (4).
Regarding Claim 2, Ito further discloses the board (Fig 1-11) according to claim 1, wherein the bump forming portion ([0005,0054]; portion of T1 exposed at 4 in Fig 9; note that the claim has not structurally limited nor defined this claimed region or portion) has a rectangular shape (e.g. see rectangular dotted line in Fig 3(a) showing a rectangular in shape), and the covering portion (portion of 5) is provided at both ends (at left and right ends of a portion of T1 in Fig 3) of the bump forming portion ([0005,0054]; portion of T1 exposed at 4 in Fig 9; note that the claim has not structurally limited nor defined this claimed region or portion) in a longitudinal direction.
Regarding Claim 7, Ito further discloses an electronic device (Fig 1-11; [0005,0054-0056]) comprising: the board (Fig 1-11) according to claim 1; and an electronic component ([0054-0056] “chip”) connected to a solder bump ([0054-0056] “solder“) formed in the bump forming portion ([0056]; portion of T1 exposed at 4 in Fig 9; note that the claim has not structurally limited nor defined this claimed region or portion).
Regarding Claim 8, Ito further discloses the board (Fig 1-11) according to claim 1, wherein the covering portion (5) forms an opening (at 5a) between portions covering ends of the bump forming portion (portion of T1) in a longitudinal direction (left-right direction in Fig 2) of the bump forming portion and extending in a width direction (up-down direction in Fig 1) of the bump forming portion across the opening (opening in 4 exposing T1,M) of the insulating member (4).
Regarding Claim 9, Ito further discloses the board (Fig 1-11) according to claim 1, wherein the bump forming portion (a portion of T1 exposed at 4 in Fig 9; note that the claim has not structurally limited nor defined this claimed region or portion) is disposed entirely within the opening (opening in 4 exposing T1,M) of the insulating member (4).
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.
Claim(s) 3, 4, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito (US 2014/0124242 A1) as applied to claims 2 and 1 above, and further in view of Partosa (US 8,766,461 B1).
Regarding Claim 3, Ito discloses the limitations of the preceding claim.
Ito does not disclose the board according to claim 2, wherein the covering portion has protruding shapes from the ends toward a central portion of the bump forming portion.
Partosa (US 8,766,461 B1) teaches of a board (Fig 8), wherein a covering portion (192; note that the claim has not structurally defined the limits of this claimed “portion”) has protruding shapes (ends of 192 about 196,198) from the ends toward a central portion of a bump forming portion (portion of 194; Column 4, lines 1-38).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the board as disclosed by Ito, wherein the covering portion has protruding shapes from the ends toward a central portion of the bump forming portion in order to provide better solder isolation, prevent shorting, and form traps (Partosa, Column 4, line 54-Column 5, line 38).
Regarding Claim 4, Ito in view of Partosa teaches the limitations of the preceding claim and Partosa further teaches the board (Fig 8) according to claim 3, wherein a planar shape (upper surface of 192 is planar) of a portion of the covering portion (192) covering the bump forming portion (194) is triangular (see Fig 8 showing ends of the portions of 192 is a triangular extension), polygonal (see Fig 7), or semicircular.
Regarding Claim 10, Ito discloses the limitations of the preceding claim.
Ito does not disclose the board according to claim 1, wherein the covering portion has a protruding shape protruding toward a central portion of the bump forming portion in a longitudinal direction of the bump forming portion, and an end of the protruding shape closest to the central portion of the bump forming portion in the longitudinal direction is at a midpoint between ends of the bump forming portion in a width direction of the bump forming portion.
Partosa (US 8,766,461 B1) teaches of a board (Fig 8) wherein a covering portion (192; note that the claim has not structurally defined the limits of this claimed “portion”) has a protruding shape (ends of 192 about 196,198) protruding toward a central portion (portion of 194 towards the middle of Fig 8) of the bump forming portion (portion of 194; Column 4, lines 1-38) in a longitudinal direction (longer length direction of 194) of the bump forming portion (194), and an end of the protruding shape (end of 192) closest to the central portion of the bump forming portion in the longitudinal direction is at a midpoint (see Fig 8 showing triangular end point is about the middle of the width of 194) between ends of the bump forming portion in a width direction of the bump forming portion.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the board as disclosed by Ito, wherein the covering portion has a protruding shape protruding toward a central portion of the bump forming portion in a longitudinal direction of the bump forming portion, and an end of the protruding shape closest to the central portion of the bump forming portion in the longitudinal direction is at a midpoint between ends of the bump forming portion in a width direction of the bump forming portion as taught by Partosa, in order to provide better solder isolation, prevent shorting, and form traps (Partosa, Column 4, line 54-Column 5, line 38).
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito (US 2014/0124242 A1) as applied to claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 5, Ito further discloses the board (Fig 1-11) according to claim 1, wherein the covering portion (portion of 5) is made of a material ([0055] “4 is preferably the same as that of the solder resist layer 5”) identical to the insulating member (4; [0055]).
Though Ito discloses both covering portion and insulating member are formed from the same material, Ito does not explicitly state wherein the covering portion is formed integrally with the insulating member.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the board as disclosed by Ito, wherein the covering portion is formed integrally with the insulating member, in order to ensure a better bond between both layers, since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill in the art. Howard v. Detroit Stove Works, 150 U.S. 164 (1993). Please note that in the instant application, page 6, [0023] Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ito (US 2014/0124242 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Rosch (US 2019/0206774 A1).
Regarding Claim 6, Ito discloses the limitations of the preceding claim.
Ito does not disclose the board according to claim 1, wherein the covering portion is formed of a material different from the insulating member.
Rosch (US 2019/0206774 A1) teaches of a board (Fig 1-2), wherein a covering portion (portion at 122 about 126) is formed of a material ([0024-0029]) different from an insulating member (120).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify the board as disclosed by Ito, wherein the covering portion is formed of a material different from the insulating member as taught by Rosch, in order to provide different adhesion strengths, potentially improve adhesion and control contact angles (Rosch, [0016-0018,0024-0029,0038-0040]). Please note that in the instant application, page 6, [0023] Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
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 ROSHN K VARGHESE whose telephone number is (571)270-7975. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 900 am-300 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 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.
/ROSHN K VARGHESE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights