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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: --PRESSURE SENSOR MODULE--.
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.
Claims 1 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Morino et al. (US 6,590,777 B2) (hereinafter Morino).
Regarding claim 1, Morino teaches a sensor module [control unit incorporating a pressure sensor] (see Abstract), comprising:
a box-shaped structure [case body 11] that includes a bottom surface portion [bottom plate 12] and a side surface portion arranged upright with respect to the bottom surface portion [walls 13 to 16] (Col 3, lines 60-65, Col 7, lines 6-20, see Figs. 1 and 5);
a sensor unit that is mounted on the bottom surface portion of the box-shaped structure and that includes a pressure sensor body [pressure sensor 20] (Col 3, lines 60-65, Col 7, lines 6-20, see Figs. 1 and 5); and
a cover member that is placed on the side surface portion in such a manner as to cover the sensor unit [lid 31] (Col 3, lines 60-65, Col 7, lines 6-20, see Figs. 1 and 5), wherein
an opening for allowing communication between a space inside the box-shaped structure housing the sensor unit and outside is formed on the side surface portion in the box-shaped structure [wall 13 has a notch 19; pressure duct 40 fitted into notch 19; pressure duct 40 allows communication between space inside case body 11 and outside environment; thus notch 19 is an opening that allows said communication] (Col 3, line 65 - Col 4 line 21, see Figs. 1 and 5).
Regarding claim 8, Morino as applied to claim 1 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein the opening [19] is formed at a height position from the bottom surface portion where the opening faces the pressure sensor body [20, 21] (see Figs. 1 and 5).
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 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. (US 2016/0061677 A1) (hereinafter Han) in view of Cook, Sr. et. Al. (US 5,616,521) (hereinafter Cook).
Regarding claim 1, Han teaches a sensor module [sensor package] (see Abstract), comprising:
a box-shaped structure that includes a bottom surface portion and a side surface portion arranged upright with respect to the bottom surface portion [substrate 400 including sidewalls 402] (Para [0068], see Figs. 11C-11D);
a sensor unit that is mounted on the bottom surface portion of the box-shaped structure and that includes a pressure sensor body [die stack 250 with pressure sensor 110] (Para [0065], see Figs. 11C-11D); and
a cover member that is placed on the side surface portion in such a manner as to cover the sensor unit [lid 500] (Para [0068], see Figs. 11C-11D), wherein
an opening for allowing communication between a space inside the box-shaped structure housing the sensor unit and outside is formed in the cover member [pressure inlet 510] (Para [0068], see Figs. 11C-11D).
Han fails to teach wherein the opening is formed on the side surface portion in the box-shaped structure. Cook teaches a pressure sensor module comprising an opening for allowing communication between a space inside a box-shaped structure housing a pressure sensor unit and outside, the opening formed on a side surface portion in the box-shaped structure [body 12 having a port 28 on its lateral surface] (Col 3, lines 34-37, see Figs. 1-4). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify Han with Cook such that the opening is formed on the side surface portion in the box-shaped structure, for the predictable result of communicating the outside environment with the pressure sensor inside the sensor module.
Regarding claim 8, Han in view of Cook as applied to claim 1 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein the opening is formed at a height position from the bottom surface portion where the opening faces the pressure sensor body (see Han Figs. 11C-11D, Cook Figs. 1-4).
Regarding claim 9, Han in view of Cook as applied to claim 1 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein the box-shaped structure includes a ceramic layered structure [ceramic substrate] (see Han Para [0068], Figs. 11C-11D).
Claims 2 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han in view of Cook as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Nishiyama et al. (US 2018/0172531 A1) (hereinafter Nishiyama).
Regarding claim 2, Han in view of Cook as applied to claim 1 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein the bottom surface portion includes a first surface on which the sensor unit is mounted and a second surface positioned on an opposite side of the first surface (see Han Figs. 11C-11D). Han in view of Cook fails to teach wherein a plurality of installation terminals electrically connected to the sensor unit are arranged on the second surface. Nishiyama teaches a pressure sensor module comprising a sensor unit mounted on a bottom surface portion, wherein the bottom surface portion includes a first surface on which the sensor unit is mounted and a second surface positioned opposite the first surface, and a plurality of installation terminals electrically connected to the sensor unit arranged on the second surface [electrode pads 12 disposed on installation surface 1b of substrate 1] (Para [0065], see Figs. 3-4). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to further modify Han in view of Cook with Nishiyama such that a plurality of installation terminals electrically connected to the sensor unit are arranged on the second surface, in order to allow for integration of the sensor module onto a system circuit board.
Regarding claim 5, Han in view of Cook and Nishiyama as applied to claim 2 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to further comprising bumps located between the bottom surface portion and the sensor unit and configured to electrically connect the sensor unit and the installation terminals, wherein the bumps are formed as composites of first portions connected to the first surface of the bottom surface portion and second portions connected to the sensor unit [bumps 320] (Han Para [0066, 0075], see Figs. 11C-11D).
Regarding claim 6, Han in view of Cook and Nishiyama as applied to claim 2 above teaches the claimed invention, except for wherein the plurality of installation terminals are formed in such a manner so as to extend, in the second surface of the bottom surface portion, from positions corresponding to ends of the box-shaped structure towards inside of the second surface. Cook additionally teaches bonding terminals formed in such a manner so as to extend from a second surface of a bottom surface portion of a substrate, from positions corresponding to ends of the substrate towards inside of the second surface [terminals 52, 54] (see Cook Fig. 3). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to further modify Han in view of Cook and Nishiyama such that the plurality of installation terminals are formed in such a manner so as to extend, in the second surface of the bottom surface portion, from positions corresponding to ends of the box-shaped structure towards inside of the second surface, in order to allow for integration of the sensor module onto a system circuit board.
Regarding claim 7, Han in view of Cook and Nishiyama as applied to claim 2 above teaches the claimed invention, except for wherein the plurality of installation terminals are formed in such a manner so as to extend, in the second surface of the bottom surface portion, from positions separated by a distance from positioned corresponding to ends of the box-shaped structure towards inside of the second surface. Nishiyama additionally teaches wherein the plurality of installation terminals are formed in such a manner so as to extend, in the second surface of the bottom surface portion, from positions separated by a distance from positioned corresponding to ends of the box-shaped structure towards inside of the second surface (see Figs. 3-4). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to further modify Han in view of Cook and Nishiyama such that the plurality of installation terminals are formed in such a manner so as to extend, in the second surface of the bottom surface portion, from positions separated by a distance from positioned corresponding to ends of the box-shaped structure towards inside of the second surface, in order to allow for integration of the sensor module onto a system circuit board.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-4 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 3, the primary reason for the indication of allowable subject matter is the inclusion of the limitations regarding wherein the plurality of installation terminals include a positioning terminal that specifies an arrangement position with respect to an installation board and the opening is formed at a position corresponding to the positioning terminal, in combination with the rest of the limitations found in the claim.
Regarding claim 4, it is dependent on claim 3.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID Z HUANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5360. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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, Kristina Deherrera can be reached at 303-297-4237. 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.
/DAVID Z HUANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855