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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species A, fig. 1, a semiconductor test device of claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 03/16/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liao et al. (US 2019/0064258 A1), hereafter Liao in view of Clark et al. (US 2004/0211942 A1), hereafter Clark.
Regarding claim 1, Liao at least at fig. 7 discloses a semiconductor test device comprising: a test chamber 200 having at least one device under test 800 disposed therein; a test module 100 testing the at least one device under test; and a signal connection device 320/310 electrically connecting the at least one device under test 800 and the test module 100 to each other, wherein the signal connection device includes an electrically conductive thermal insulator (ECTI) [see “conductive thermal-isolation portions 320”]. Liao is silent about wherein the ECTI has electrical conductivity greater than or equal to about 1700 S/cm and thermal conductivity less than or equal to about 2.2 W/mK. Clark at ¶0022 discloses an electrically conductive thermal insulator (ECTI) [SWNTs] to improve the electrical properties and achieve ESD and EM shielding. Clark discloses “It is generally desirable for the SWNTs to have an inherent thermal conductivity of at least 2000 W/m-K and an inherent electrical conductivity of 104 Siemens/centimeter (S/cm). It is also generally desirable for the SWNTs to have a tensile strength of at least 80 Gigapascals (GPa) and a stiffness of about 0.5 Tarapascals (TPa).” Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the an electrically conductive thermal insulator of Liao with SWNT as taught by Clark to obtain to obtain advantages that Clark have to offer such as adequate ESD and EM shielding.
Regarding claim 2, Liao at fig. 1, 7 discloses the semiconductor test device of claim 1, wherein the test chamber, the test module, and the signal connection device are a chamber-type one-test device [implicit to place of testing and test device 10].
Regarding claim 3, Liao at ¶0018-0021, particularly at ¶0018 discloses the semiconductor test device of claim 1, wherein the ECTI includes at least one of Al2O3-graphene nanocomposite material, Bi—Si nanocomposite material, carbon-ceramic electrospun nonwoven material, carbon nanotube sponge, multi-nanolayer graphene/ceramic metamaterial, and poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) polystyrene sulfonate.
Regarding claim 7, Liao at fig. 1, 5, 7 discloses the semiconductor test device of claim 1, wherein the signal connection device includes at least one of a cable, a socket, a probe card 303/301, a printed circuit board 303/301, and a low temperature co-fired ceramic.
Regarding claim 8, modified Liao discloses the semiconductor test device of claim 7, wherein at least one of the socket and the probe card includes a pin having a bending structure [ECTI as modified can bend because of resin(s) use] having the ECTI [[ also, “The court held that the configuration of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container (“a bending structure” here) was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant. In reDailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)].
Regarding claim 9, modified Liao discloses the semiconductor test device of claim 8, wherein the pin has a buckled column structure [ECTI as modified can have buckled, because “The court held that the configuration of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container (“a buckled column structure” here) was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant. In reDailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)].
Regarding claim 10, Liao discloses the semiconductor test device of claim 1, wherein the semiconductor test device performs burn-in testing, high-speed signal testing and low-speed signal testing [implicit to predetermined temperature testing and electrical testing of DUT and testing data].
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liao and Clark as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sano (US 5550482).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Liao and Clark discloses the semiconductor test device of claim 1. They are silent about said modified semiconductor test device further comprises: an air supply device supplying air to control a temperature of the test chamber. Sano in similar environment of testing disclose a semiconductor test device [fig. 1] further comprises: an air supply device 23/24 supplying air [gas] to control a temperature of the test chamber [3/22, a fluid supply pipe 23 and a fluid exhaust pipe 24, provided with valves V3 and V4 (not shown), respectively, penetrate through a wall portion of the base portion 22 and open into a space below the probe card 40, so that a gas or an inert gas for temperature adjustment flows therethrough into the space.]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add an air supply device as taught by Sano to the test device of Liao, in order to obtain advantages that Sano has to offer such as a gas that has been adjusted to a predetermined temperature is also made to flow by the fluid supply pipe 23 and the fluid exhaust pipe 24 through the space in which the wafer mounting stand 3 is provided, and thus the temperature of the wafer W is kept even more stable.
Regarding claim 5, Sano discloses the test chamber further includes a temperature sensor detecting the temperature [implicit to 32/35 because of temperature adjustment as described].
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liao and Clark as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yamashita (US 5325052).
Regarding claim 6, The combination of Liao and Clark discloses all the semiconductor test device of claim 1. They are silent about wherein the test module includes a cooling pipe through which a refrigerant flows to control a test temperature of the test module. Yamashita at fig. 1 discloses the semiconductor test device comprises wherein the test module 34 includes a cooling pipe [pipe for 39, see “A heater/cooler or air jacket 39 is formed in the probe support portion 34. The inlet and outlet ports of the heater/cooler 39 are connected to the outlet and inlet ports, respectively, of a gas supply device 40 through pipes.”] through which a refrigerant flows to control a test temperature of the test module [using 41, “The gas supply device 40 causes the heater/cooler 39 to perform cooling or heating to a desired temperature on the basis of an output signal from a controller 41. The controller 41 outputs a signal in response to a temperature detection signal supplied from a temperature sensor 43 for detecting the temperature of the probe support portion 34.”]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add a cooling pipe through which a refrigerant flows as taught by Yamashita to the test device of Liao, in order to obtain advantages that Yamashita has to offer such as to detect temperature of test module and control the temperature as further disclosed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PARESH PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-1968. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am to 4:00pm.
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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at 571-272-4448. 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.
/PARESH PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
April 16, 2026
Prosecution Insights