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 § 112
Claim 1 recites the limitation "second electrically-conductive structures..." in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation should recite: “a second electrically-conductive structures…”
Claim 1 recites the limitation "a second electrically-conductive structures..." in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation should recite: “the second electrically-conductive structures…”
Claim 1 recites the limitation "...mounting components..." in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "..." in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "second electrically-conductive structures..." in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation should recite: “a second electrically-conductive structures…”
Claim 21 recites the limitation "a second electrically-conductive structures..." in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation should recite: “the second electrically-conductive structures…”
Claim 21 recites the limitation "...mounting components..." in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "..." in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 8, 16-22 and 26-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Nickel et al. (US PUB 2013/0015870), hereinafter Nickel.
With respect to claim 1, Nickel discloses a system for testing an electrical connection (See [10] in figure 1 of Nickel) in a circuit board (See [32] in figure 2 in view of paragraph [0039] and further in view of the abstract of Nickel), the circuit board comprising a first electrically-conductive structure (See [38] in figure 2 of Nickel) for receiving test signals (See paragraph [0030] of Nickel), second electrically-conductive structures (See [56] and the trace [48] connected between [54] and [34] in figure 2 of Nickel) for mounting components (See [62] in figure 2 of Nickel), and electrically-conductive traces between the first electrically-conductive structure and the second electrically-conductive structures (See traces [48] disposed between [56] and [38] in figure 2 of Nickel), the system comprising: a pin assembly (See the portion of [18] in figure 2 of Nickel which holds pins [17] and [19]) comprising an electrically-conductive pin (See pin [17] in figure 2 of Nickel) that is configured to physically contact the first electrically-conductive structure to apply an electrical signal to the first electrically-conductive structure (See pin [17] in figure 2 of Nickel); and a sensor configured to wirelessly couple to a second electrically-conductive structure (See paragraphs [0029] and [0040] of Nickel in view of [34] in figure 2 of Nickel), the sensor being configured to receive, through the wireless coupling, an electrical response that is based on the electrical signal through an electrically-conductive trace on the circuit board (See paragraphs [0040] and [0042] in view of paragraph [0045] of Nickel).
With respect to claim 4, Nickel discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the sensor is electromagnetically shielded (See paragraph [0063] in view of paragraph [0065] of Nickel).
With respect to claim 5, Nickel discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the pin assembly comprises electromagnetic shielding to electromagnetically shield the electrically-conductive pin (See paragraph [0063] in view of paragraph [0065] and further in view of claim 9 of Nickel).
With respect to claim 8, Nickel discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the electrical response is received from the second electrically-conductive structure (See paragraph [0041] in view of [56] in figure 2 of Nickel); and wherein the electrically-conductive trace is internal to the circuit board or on a surface of the circuit board (See traces [48] in figure 2 of Nickel).
With respect to claim 16, Nickel discloses the system of claim 1, further comprising: a fixture containing the electrically-conductive pin and the sensor (See [10] in figure 1, in view of paragraph [0060] and further in view of paragraph [0032] of Nickel), the fixture being configured for placement relative to the circuit board so that the electrically-conductive pin aligns to the first electrically-conductive structure (See [16] in figure 1 in view of paragraph [0032] of Nickel) and the sensor aligns to multiple instances of the second electrically-conductive structures (See paragraph [0032] of Nickel).
With respect to claim 17, Nickel discloses the system of claim 16, wherein alignment of the electrically-conductive pin to the first electrically-conductive structure (See paragraph [0032] of Nickel) and of the sensor to the multiple ones of the second electrically-conductive structures is based on coordinate locations of the first electrically-conductive structure (See [10] in figure 1, in view of paragraph [0060] and further in view of paragraph [0032] of Nickel) and the multiple instances of the second electrically-conductive structure (See paragraph [0032] of Nickel).
With respect to claim 18, Nickel discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the second electrically-conductive structure is internal to the circuit board (See the trace [48] connected between [54] and [34] in figure 2 of Nickel).
With respect to claim 19, Nickel discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the second electrically-conductive structure is on a surface of the circuit board (See [56] in figure 2 of Nickel).
With respect to claim 20, Nickel discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the second electrically-conductive structure comprises a component structure, a via structure, a test structure, an electrical routing trace, an inner layer trace, or a metal surface area internal or external to the circuit board (See [56] and the trace [48] connected between [54] and [34] in figure 2 of Nickel).
With respect to claim 21, Nickel discloses a method of testing electrical connections (See [10] in figure 1 of Nickel) in a circuit board (See [32] in figure 2 in view of paragraph [0039] and further in view of the abstract of Nickel), the circuit board comprising a first electrically-conductive structure (See [38] in figure 2 of Nickel) for receiving test signals (See paragraph [0030] of Nickel), second electrically-conductive structures (See [56] and the trace [48] connected between [54] and [34] in figure 2 of Nickel) for mounting components (See [62] in figure 2 of Nickel), and electrically-conductive traces between the first electrically-conductive structure and the second electrically-conductive structures (See traces [48] disposed between [56] and [38] in figure 2 of Nickel), the method comprising: causing an electrically-conductive pin to physically contact the first electrically-conductive structure (See the portion of [18] in figure 2 of Nickel which holds pins [17] and [19]); wirelessly coupling a sensor to a second electrically-conductive structure (See paragraphs [0029] and [0040] of Nickel in view of [34] in figure 2 of Nickel); applying an electrical signal to the first electrically-conductive structure (See pin [17] in figure 2 of Nickel); and receiving, at the sensor through the wireless coupling, an electrical response that is based on the electrical signal through an electrically-conductive trace on the circuit board between the first electrically-conductive structure and the second electrically-conductive structure (See paragraphs [0040] and [0042] in view of paragraph [0045] of Nickel).
With respect to claim 22, Nickel discloses the method of claim 21, further comprising: selecting an output of the sensor that is based on the electrical response (See paragraph [0029] in view of paragraphs [0040] and [0042] of Nickel in view of [34] in figure 2 of Nickel); processing the output to produce a signal that is based on the electrical response; and comparing the signal that is based on the electrical response to a first threshold (See paragraph [0071] of Nickel).
With respect to claim 26, Nickel discloses the method of claim 21, wherein causing the electrically-conductive pin to physically contact the first electrically-conductive structure results in at least partly electromagnetically shielding the electrically-conductive pin (See paragraph [0063] in view of paragraph [0065] and further in view of claim 9 of Nickel).
With respect to claim 27, Nickel discloses the method of claim 21, wherein causing and wirelessly coupling comprise bringing a fixture comprising the electrically-conductive pin (See [18] in figure 2 of Nickel) and the sensor into at least partial contact with the circuit board (See the arrangement shown in figure 2 of Nickel which shows the engagement of [18] to the board [32]).
With respect to claim 28, Nickel discloses the method of claim 21, wherein bringing the fixture into at least partial contact (See the arrangement shown in figure 2 of Nickel which shows the engagement of [18] to the board [32]) is based on coordinates associated with at least one of the fixture or the circuit board (See [10] in figure 1, in view of paragraph [0060] and further in view of paragraph [0032] of Nickel).
With respect to claim 29, Nickel discloses the method of claim 21, wherein at least one of the electrically-conductive pin or the sensor is electromagnetically shielded (See paragraph [0063] in view of paragraph [0065] and further in view of claim 9 of Nickel).
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) 2, 3, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nickel, and further in view of Underwood et al. (US PUB 2006/0028459), hereinafter Underwood.
With respect to claim 2, Nickel discloses the system of claim 1, but fails to disclose further comprising a sensor package, the sensor package comprising the sensor and an amplifier, the amplifier being configured to amplify a signal that is based on the electrical response. However, Underwood does disclose a sensor package (See the abstract of Underwood in view of paragraph [0376] of Underwood), the sensor package comprising the sensor and an amplifier (See paragraph [0376] of Underwood), the amplifier being configured to amplify a signal that is based on the electrical response (See paragraph [0366] of Underwood). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device disclosed by Nickel to include the features disclosed by Underwood because doing so enables a higher Signal-to-Noise ratio and a greater detection accuracy.
With respect to claim 3, the combination of Nickel and Underwood discloses the system of claim 2, wherein the sensor package is electromagnetically shielded (See paragraph [0376] of Underwood).
With respect to claim 9, Nickel discloses the system of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the sensor comprises an electrical insulator that surrounds at least part of the sensor. However, Underwood does disclose wherein the sensor comprises an electrical insulator that surrounds at least part of the sensor (See paragraph [0276] of Underwood). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device disclosed by Nickel to include the features disclosed by Underwood because doing so prevents damaging electrostatic discharging.
With respect to claim 10, Nickel discloses the system of claim 1, but fails to disclose further comprising: circuitry configured to receive a signal based on the electrical response from the sensor and to amplify the signal based on the electrical response to produce an amplified electrical signal. However, Underwood does disclose circuitry configured to receive a signal based on the electrical response from the sensor and to amplify the signal based on the electrical response to produce an amplified electrical signal (See paragraph [0366] of Underwood). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device disclosed by Nickel to include the features disclosed by Underwood because doing so enables a higher Signal-to-Noise ratio and a greater detection accuracy.
With respect to claim 11, the combination of Nickel and Underwood discloses the system of claim 10, further comprising: a detector configured to compare a signal based on the amplified electrical signal to a first threshold to test the electrically-conductive trace (See paragraph [0071] of Nickel).
With respect to claim 12, the combination of Nickel and Underwood discloses the system of claim 11, wherein, if the signal based on the amplified electrical signal exceeds the first threshold, then the one or more processing devices determine that an electrical path including the electrically-conductive trace has passed testing (See paragraph [0071] of Nickel).
With respect to claim 25, Nickel discloses the method of claim 22, but fails to disclose wherein processing the output comprises amplifying a precursor signal to the signal that is based on the electrical response. However, Underwood does disclose wherein processing the output comprises amplifying a precursor signal to the signal that is based on the electrical response (See paragraph [0376] of Underwood). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method disclosed by Nickel to include the method steps disclosed by Underwood because doing so enables a higher Signal-to-Noise ratio and a greater detection accuracy.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Nickel and Underwood, and further in view of Srinivasan et al. (US PUB 2017/0143311), hereinafter Srinivasan.
With respect to claim 13, the combination of Nickel and Underwood discloses the system of claim 11, but fails to disclose wherein the detector is configured also to compare the signal based on the amplified electrical signal to a second threshold, the second threshold being greater than the first threshold. However, Srinivasan does disclose a detector is configured also to compare the signal based on the amplified electrical signal to a second threshold, the second threshold being greater than the first threshold (See paragraph [0086] of Srinivasan). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device disclosed by the combination of Nickel and Underwood to include the features disclosed by Srinivasan because doing so enables a greater detection accuracy.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nickel, and further in view of Srinivasan.
With respect to claim 23, Nickel discloses the method of claim 21, but fails to disclose further comprising: comparing the signal that is based on the electrical response to a second threshold. However, Srinivasan does disclose comparing the signal that is based on the electrical response to a second threshold (See paragraph [0086] of Srinivasan). Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method disclosed by Nickel to include the method steps disclosed by Srinivasan because doing so enables a greater detection accuracy.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 7, 14, 15 and 24 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:
With respect to claim 6, the prior art of record neither shows nor suggests the combination of structural elements wherein the pin assembly comprises an outer enclosure, the outer enclosure comprising an electrically-insulating ring, the outer enclosure being configured to move relative to the electrically-conductive pin so that the outer enclosure encloses the electrically-conductive pin when the electrically-conductive pin is in physical contact with the first electrically-conductive structure, the outer enclosure comprising metal.
Claim 7 depends from objected to claim 6 and is therefore also objected to.
With respect to claim 14, the prior art of record neither shows nor suggests the combination of structural elements wherein, if the signal based on the amplified electrical signal exceeds the first threshold but not the second threshold, then the system determines that an electrical path including the electrically-conductive trace has passed testing; and wherein if the signal based on the amplified electrical signal exceeds the second threshold, then the system determines that there is a short circuit to a second electrically-conductive structure.
With respect to claim 15, the prior art of record neither shows nor suggests the combination of structural elements wherein the circuit board comprises multiple instances of the first electrically-conductive structure, and wherein the circuit board comprises multiple sets of second electrically-conductive structures, each set of second electrically-conductive structures being electrically connected to a respective instance of the first electrically-conductive structure through electrically-conductive traces; wherein the system comprises: multiple instances of the sensor, each instance of the sensor being configured to wirelessly couple to a second electrically-conductive structure in a different set of the second electrically-conductive structures; a multiplexer to select an output of one of the instances of the sensor; and a detector to receive a signal that is based on the output of the one of the instances of the sensor and to an electrical path based on the signal.
With respect to claim 24, the prior art of record neither shows nor suggests the combination of method steps wherein, if the signal exceeds the first threshold but not the second threshold, then an electrical path including the electrically-conductive trace has passed testing; and wherein if the signal exceeds the second threshold, then it is determined that there is a short circuit to a second electrically-conductive structure.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TEMILADE S RHODES-VIVOUR whose telephone number is (571)270-5814. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (flex schedule).
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, Huy Phan can be reached at 571-272-7924. 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.
/TEMILADE S RHODES-VIVOUR/ Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/HUY Q PHAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858