Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/618,734

SOLDER SOLDERING METHOD USING LASER

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 27, 2024
Priority
Jun 09, 2023 — RE 10-2023-0074352
Examiner
CHEN, SIMPSON ABRAHAM
Art Unit
3761
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
S S P Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
10m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allowance Rate
121 granted / 195 resolved
-7.9% vs TC avg
Strong +42% interview lift
Without
With
+42.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
46 currently pending
Career history
243
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
52.2%
+12.2% vs TC avg
§102
15.7%
-24.3% vs TC avg
§112
23.7%
-16.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 195 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . 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) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US 2022/0410298 A1) in view of Maijala (US 2013/0255079 A1). Claim 1. Choi discloses a solder soldering method using a laser (laser reflow method, abstract), the solder soldering method comprising: a supplying process (vertical transport system with holder unit 500 transports the bonding object and presses it onto the electrostatic chuck 940, par. 198-199) in which a substrate having solder (bonding object 11a has solder on top of it, Fig. 30a, par. 304) positioned on an upper portion of the substrate is supplied to an upper portion of a substrate fixing member (vacuum chuck 940 holds the bonding object 11, Fig. 26a and 30a) that constitutes a soldering apparatus (soldering device, Fig. 30a); a preheating process in which the substrate and the solder are preheated while the substrate is moved together with the substrate fixing member (solder is continuously preheated by the heating blook 942 provided inside the vacuum chuck 940, par. 300; preheating while being transported into the laser reflow treatment area, par. 273); an attachment process in which the upper portion of the substrate is irradiated with the laser so that the solder is melted and attached to the upper portion of the substrate (laser beam irradiates the solder in the laser reflow process, par. 272); and a discharging process in which the substrate having the solder attached to the substrate is moved to a Choi does not explicitly disclose that the bonding object is discharged and moved to a tray. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Choi and discharge the substrates to tray. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been able to select any number of surface structures to place the bonded object onto. For example, Maijala discloses a process for attaching chips to conductive surfaces wherein the completed workpieces are placed on a tray (708, par. 59). Claim 2. Choi in view of Maijala discloses the solder soldering method of claim 1, wherein, in the preheating process, a lower portion of the substrate is heated to a set temperature by a lower heater provided in the soldering apparatus (solder is continuously preheated by the heating blook 942 provided inside the vacuum chuck 940, par. 300), and the upper portion of the substrate and the solder are heated to a set temperature by an upper heater provided in an upper portion of the soldering apparatus (laser can be used to preheat the area, par. 164). Claim 3. Choi in view of Maijala discloses the solder soldering method of claim 1, wherein an adsorption portion for adsorbing a lower surface of the substrate is formed in the substrate fixing member (vacuum chuck 940, par. 273), an inner portion of the adsorption portion maintains a set vacuum level (porous absorption plates are set above the vacuum chuck, wherein the vacuum chuck sets a vacuum through the adsorption portion, par. 61 and 281), and gas contained inside the adsorption portion is heated to a temperature equal to or more than a set temperature (heating block 942 heats the bonding object to a predetermined temperature, wherein the heating block is below the central absorption plate 943, par. 284; it is understood by the examiner that the gas in the central absorption plate is heated to at least the predetermined temperature in order for the bonding object above it to also reach the predetermined temperature). Claim 4. Choi in view of Maijala discloses the solder soldering method of claim 1, wherein, in the attachment process, a first mask configured to prevent the laser irradiating an edge of the substrate is used, the first mask includes a blocking portion configured to block the laser irradiation (blocking layer 103 only allows laser transmission through the pressurization area 102, preventing the edge of the bonding object from being irradiated and having blocking portions, par. 240, Fig. 18 and 19), and the first mask includes a heat dissipation portion which is in contact with the upper surface of the substrate and which is configured to discharge excessive heat (pressurization area 102 contacts the electronic components of the bonding object 11, par. 243, due to physical contact, thermal conduction will occur and inherently allow for heat transfer from the heated solder portion to the blocking layer 103). Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Maijala as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Rahimi (US 2021/0185831 A1) Claim 5. Choi in view of Maijala discloses the solder soldering method of claim 4, wherein, in the attachment process, a the includes a masking portion which is formed on a first side of the transparent plate so as to correspond to a Choi in view of Maijala does not explicitly disclose a second mask for protecting a chip and that the masking portion corresponds to a position of the chip mounted on the substrate. However, Choi discloses blocking the laser from transmitting to undesired locations (par. 237). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Choi in view of Maijala and prevent the laser from irradiating a component or chip on the substrate surface. For example, Rahimi discloses photonic soldering with high power and short pulses of light wherein a light mask is used to prevent the surrounding substrate and components from being exposed to the light (par. 80, Rahimi). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SIMPSON A CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6422. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5. 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, Steven Crabb can be reached at (571) 270-5095. 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. /SIMPSON A CHEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /ELIZABETH M KERR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 27, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 30, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12765712
INLINE CAVITATION REDUCTION FOR A BEVERAGE APPLIANCE
3y 7m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12759080
CROSS STITCHING CONTROL BY QMM3D
2y 4m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12722204
SPOT PREHEATING
5y 1m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12722225
METHOD FOR SEPARATING A WORKPIECE
3y 5m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12703040
ELECTRON BEAM WELDING APPLIANCE
4y 8m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+42.4%)
3y 5m (~10m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 195 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month