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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
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.
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) 1-9, 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHISHIDO (US 20230324611 hereinafter Shishido).
In regards to claim 1, Shishido discloses;” A wiring substrate (Fig, 1A (31) ), comprising: an electrical wiring part comprising a plurality of insulating layers and a plurality of conductor layers (Fig, 1A (31) paragraph 0035); and an optical wiring part formed on a surface of the electrical wiring part (Fig. 2 (4)) applicant own admission that electrical part is attached by any means pages 9-10) and comprising a support plate (Fig. 2 (41)) and an optical waveguide formed on the support plate (Fig. 2 (42)), wherein the optical wiring part is formed such that the optical waveguide includes at least one core part configured to transmit light (Fig. 2 (42b)) and a cladding part surrounding the at least one core part (Fig. 2 (42a and c))”, but does not directly disclose;” and that the support plate has a thermal expansion coefficient that is
lower than a thermal expansion coefficient of the optical waveguide”
However, Shishido does disclose;” that the support plate (Fig. 2 (41), formed using a resin or glass paragraph 0019 the same as applicants disclosed materials) has a thermal expansion coefficient that is lower than a thermal expansion coefficient of the optical waveguide (waveguide materials paragraph 0023 include an epoxy resin and a polyimide resin. and applicants organic materials include acrylic resins such as polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA), polyimide resins, polyamide resins, polyether resins, epoxy resins, and the like), therefore when similar materials are used the thermal coefficient differences will be the same. Therefore, the claimed invention is disclosed.
In regards to claim 2, a modified Shishido discloses;” The wiring substrate according to claim 1, wherein the electrical wiring part is formed such that the plurality of insulating layers includes an interlayer insulating layer interposed between two of the conductor layers, and the optical wiring part is formed on a portion of the interlayer insulating layer such that the portion is exposed on the surface of the electrical wiring part (Fig. 2 (shown)).”
In regards to claim 3, a modified Shishido discloses;” The wiring substrate according to claim 1, wherein the optical wiring part is formed such that the optical waveguide and the support plate have substantially a same shape and size in a plan view (Fig. 1B (shows (42) on (41) from the top), paragraph 0019).”
In regards to claim 4, a modified Shishido discloses;” The wiring substrate according to claim 1, wherein the optical wiring part is formed such that the support plate has a higher bending rigidity than the optical waveguide (a support plate made of glass has a higher rigidity than an optical waveguide made of resin).”
In regards to claim 5, a modified Shishido discloses;” The wiring substrate according to claim 1, wherein the optical wiring part is formed such that the at least one core part has a first end part (Fig. 4 (shown)) and a second end part on an opposite side with respect to the first end part and that the second end part (Fig. 4 (8)) and a portion of the cladding part surrounding the second end part are protruding to an outer side of the electrical wiring part (Fig. 2 (shown)).”
In regards to claim 6, a modified Shishido discloses;” The wiring substrate according to claim 5, wherein the optical wiring part is formed such that a portion of the support plate is protruding to the outer side of the electrical wiring part together with the second end part of the at least one core part (Fig. 2 (shown)).”
In regards to claim 7, a modified Shishido discloses;” The wiring substrate according to claim 5, wherein the optical wiring part is formed such that a portion of the support plate is protruding to the outer side of the electrical wiring part together with the second end part of the at least one core part (Fig. 2 (shown)).”
In regards to claim 8, a modified Shishido discloses;” The wiring substrate according to claim 1, wherein the support plate includes one of glass, ceramics, and metal (paragraph 0019).”
In regards to claim 9, a modified Shishido discloses;” The wiring substrate according to claim 1, wherein the optical wiring part is formed such that the at least one core part of the optical waveguide comprises a plurality of core parts and that the cladding part is divided into a plurality of cladding parts surrounding the plurality of core parts, respectively (Fig. 2 (42a-c)).”
In regards to claim 17, a modified Shishido discloses;” The wiring substrate according to claim 2, wherein the optical wiring part is formed such that the optical waveguide and the support plate have substantially a same shape and size in a plan view (Fig. 1B, paragraph 0019).”
In regards to claim 18, a modified Shishido discloses;” The wiring substrate according to claim 2, wherein the optical wiring part is formed such that the support plate has a higher bending rigidity than the optical waveguide (a support plate made of glass has a higher rigidity than an optical waveguide made of resin).”
In regards to claim 19, a modified Shishido discloses;” The wiring substrate according to claim 2, wherein the optical wiring part is formed such that the at least one core part has a first end part (Fig. 4 (shown)) and a second end part (Fig. 4 (8)) on an opposite side with respect to the first end part and that the second end part and a portion of the cladding part surrounding the second end part are protruding to an outer side of the electrical wiring part (Fig. 2 (51)).”
In regards to claim 20, a modified Shishido discloses;” The wiring substrate according to claim 19, wherein the optical wiring part is formed such that a portion of the support plate is protruding to the outer side of the electrical wiring part together with the second end part of the at least one core part (Fig. 2 (shown)).”
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL F MCALLISTER whose telephone number is (571)272-2453. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7 AM-4 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.
/MICHAEL F MCALLISTER/Examiner, Art Unit 2847
/TIMOTHY J THOMPSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2847