Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-21 of U.S. Application 18/630,732 filed on December 09, 2025 are presented for examination.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-21 in the reply filed on 12/09/2025 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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 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.
Claims 1-3, 8-11, 14-17, and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being unpatentable over Mroczkowski et al (USPGPub 20200116759).
PNG
media_image1.png
429
691
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Prior Art: Mroczkowski
Regarding claim 1, Mroczkowski discloses a lead frame (120) comprising a substrate (122 including 124) having a first substrate side (such as top of 124); a first ground sheet (such as left ground not fully shown) secured on the first substrate side (par 61 discloses having a signal trace surrounding by ground); a second ground sheet (such as right ground not fully shown) secured on the first substrate side, the second ground sheet physically separated from the first ground sheet (claim 3 discloses metal layer having a signal lead surrounded by two sides of ground); and a signal conductor trace (signal lead) secured on the first substrate side between the first ground sheet and the second ground sheet (par 61 discloses signal lead surrounded by two sides of ground), the signal conductor trace terminating in a device contact (126).
Regarding claim 2, Mroczkowski discloses comprising a ground sheet gap (using 128) separating the first ground sheet from the second ground sheet, the ground sheet gap contiguous with a conductor slot (137) formed between the first ground sheet and the second ground sheet and the conductor slot contiguous with the signal conductor trace (shown in figs 9-13 shows a slot 137 between the ground sheets).
Regarding claim 3, Mroczkowski discloses wherein the ground sheet gap has a ground sheet gap center line, the signal conductor trace has a signal conductor trace center line (160), and the signal conductor trace center line and the ground sheet gap center line form an angle having an angle size greater than zero degrees and less than one-hundred eighty degrees (par 66 discloses the angle being 45 degrees).
Regarding claim 8, Mroczkowski discloses a lead frame comprising: wherein the first ground sheet (left side) has a first ground sheet mounting (left side) and alignment first hole (130) and a first ground sheet mounting and alignment second hole (132) and the second ground sheet has a second ground sheet mounting (right side) and alignment first hole (134) and a second ground sheet mounting and alignment second hole (136).
Regarding claim 9, Mroczkowski discloses wherein the signal conductor trace has a signal conductor trace width, a first signal conductor trace gap located between the signal conductor trace (shown in fig 11 as having gap between the ground sheet and a trace) and the first ground sheet has a first signal conductor trace gap width and a second signal conductor trace gap located between the signal conductor trace and the second ground sheet has a second signal conductor trace gap width, and the conductor slot has a width substantially equal to the signal conductor trace width plus the first signal conductor trace gap width and the second signal conductor trace gap width (figs 9-22 shows gaps between the signal trace and ground which show substantially gap width).
Regarding claim 10, Mroczkowski discloses wherein the first ground sheet and the second ground sheet form a conductor slot that exposes a section of the first substrate side (shown in figs 9-12), the conductor slot located between the ground sheet gap and the signal conductor trace (shown in fig 11 and 12 as between the ground and trace).
Regarding claim 11, Mroczkowski discloses wherein the signal conductor trace has a signal conductor trace width, a first signal trace gap has a first signal trace gap width and a second signal trace gap has a second signal trace gap width (par 61 discloses gap and signal width), and the conductor slot has a conductor slot width substantially equal to the signal conductor trace width plus the first signal trace gap width and the second signal trace gap width (shown in figs 9-14 as substantially equal).
Regarding claim 14, Mroczkowski discloses wherein the conductor slot (137) exposes a section of the first substrate side (shown in figs 1-14 as exposed between the layers).
Regarding claim 15, Mroczkowski discloses a test probe assembly (100) comprising: a mounting fixture (110); a lead frame (120) mounted to the mounting fixture (par 60 discloses 120 on 110); and at least one radio frequency connector assembly (180) electrically coupled with the lead frame (abstract discloses being electrically coupled).
Regarding claim 16, Mroczkowski discloses a lead frame (120) comprising a substrate (122 including 124) having a first substrate side (such as top of 124); a first ground sheet (such as left ground not fully shown) secured on the first substrate side (par 61 discloses having a signal trace surrounding by ground); a second ground sheet (such as right ground not fully shown) secured on the first substrate side, the second ground sheet physically separated from the first ground sheet (claim 3 discloses metal layer having a signal lead surrounded by two sides of ground); and a signal conductor trace (signal lead) secured on the first substrate side between the first ground sheet and the second ground sheet (par 61 discloses signal lead surrounded by two sides of ground), the signal conductor trace terminating in a device contact (126).
Regarding claim 17, Mroczkowski discloses comprising a ground sheet gap (using 128) separating the first ground sheet from the second ground sheet, the ground sheet gap contiguous with a conductor slot (137) formed between the first ground sheet and the second ground sheet and the conductor slot contiguous with the signal conductor trace (shown in figs 9-13 shows a slot 137 between the ground sheets).
Regarding claim 19, Mroczkowski discloses a test probe assembly (100) comprising: a mounting fixture (110); a lead frame (120) mounted to the mounting fixture; and at least one radio frequency connector assembly (180) electrically coupled with the lead frame (abstract discloses being electrically coupled), the at least one radio frequency connector assembly includes a connector body (186) and a center conductor assembly (150), the center conductor assembly including a center conductor (154)extending from a first end (156) to a second end(158).
Regarding claim 20, Mroczkowski discloses a lead frame (120) comprising a substrate (122 including 124) having a first substrate side (such as top of 124); a first ground sheet (such as left ground not fully shown) secured on the first substrate side (par 61 discloses having a signal trace surrounding by ground); a second ground sheet (such as right ground not fully shown) secured on the first substrate side, the second ground sheet physically separated from the first ground sheet (claim 3 discloses metal layer having a signal lead surrounded by two sides of ground); and a signal conductor trace (signal lead) secured on the first substrate side between the first ground sheet and the second ground sheet (par 61 discloses signal lead surrounded by two sides of ground), the signal conductor trace terminating in a device contact (126).
Regarding claim 21, Mroczkowski discloses comprising a ground sheet gap (using 128) separating the first ground sheet from the second ground sheet, the ground sheet gap contiguous with a conductor slot (137) formed between the first ground sheet and the second ground sheet and the conductor slot contiguous with the signal conductor trace (shown in figs 9-13 shows a slot 137 between the ground sheets).
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 of this title, 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.
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 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.
Claims 4 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mroczkowski et al (USPGPub 20200116759) in view of Hayden et al (USPGPub 20080042673).
Regarding claim 4, Mroczkowski does not fully disclose an adhesive to secure the first ground sheet to the substrate and to secure the second ground sheet to the substrate.
However, Hayden discloses an adhesive to secure the first ground sheet to the substrate and to secure the second ground sheet to the substrate (par 38 discloses using 276 to adhere components together). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Mroczkowski in view of Hayden in order to properly bond materials together with electrical interference.
Regarding claim 18, Mroczkowski does not fully disclose a test signal generator to provide a test signal to the test probe assembly and the test probe assembly electrically coupled to a device under test.
However, Hayden discloses a test signal generator (26) to provide a test signal (Vna or Bit error rate) to the test probe assembly and the test probe (40) assembly electrically coupled to a device under test (par 21 discloses 26 provided a test signal to a probe to a DUT). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Mroczkowski in view of Hayden in order to test the DUT.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mroczkowski et al (USPGPub 20200116759) in view of Hayden et al (USPGPub 20080042673).
Regarding claim 5, Mroczkowski does not fully disclose wherein the adhesive has an adhesive thickness of between about zero and one-hundred microns.
However, It has been held where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention taught by Mroczkowski in view of Hayden in order to be strong enough to hold the materials together while not interfering the mechanics of the device.
Regarding claim 6, Mroczkowski does not fully disclose wherein the substrate has a substrate thickness of between about zero and two-hundred microns.
However, It has been held where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention taught by Mroczkowski in view of Hayden in order to be strong enough to support the weight of the probe.
Regarding claim 7, Mroczkowski does not fully disclose wherein the first ground sheet has a first ground sheet thickness between about thirteen and two-hundred and fifty microns.
However, it has been held where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention taught by Mroczkowski in view of Hayden in order to be protect the signal lead for testing.
Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mroczkowski et al (USPGPub 20200116759).
Regarding claim 12, Mroczkowski does not fully disclose wherein the signal conductor trace width is between about fifty and about six-hundred microns.
However, it has been held where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention taught by Mroczkowski in order to be able to process the signal from the DUT.
Regarding claim 13, Mroczkowski discloses wherein the lead frame includes an outside edge and the ground sheet gap extends from the conductor slot to the outside edge (shown in annotated fig 1 as 135).
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chien et al (USPGPub 20230262900): discloses substrate with multiple traces.
Lau et al (USPGPub 10520535): discloses RF probe with test equipment.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOMINIC E HAWKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-2647. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:00pm 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, Judy Nguyen can be reached at (571) 272-2258. 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.
/DOMINIC E HAWKINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858