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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS/IDSs) submitted on 6/18/2024 & 7/14/2025 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS/IDSs is/are being considered by the examiner.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1, 7, 9, 10, 12-16, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by United States Patent App. Pub. No. 20220349937 to Reid et al.
Regarding claim 1, Reid teaches a method comprising:
inserting a calibration probe assembly (28) into a test socket (48);
programming a test equipment communicatively coupled to the test socket to:
control operation of a first switch to selectively couple a first pin of the test socket to a first equipment port of the test equipment (the assembly necessarily must be able to selectively couple the DUT to the test socket via the multiple pins in order to receive the power value--return loss--associated with the injected signal, see, e.g., ¶¶ [0054], [0055], & [0078]); and
control operation of a second switch to selectively couple a second pin of the test socket to a second equipment port of the test equipment (the assembly necessarily must be able to selectively couple the DUT to the test socket via the multiple pins in order to receive the power value--return loss--associated with the injected signal, see, e.g., ¶¶ [0054], [0055], & [0078]);
electrically stimulating the first pin with an RF signal via the first equipment port (¶¶ [0068]-[0069]);
measuring the RF signal propagated from the first pin and received at the second pin via the second equipment port (¶¶ [0054] & [0055]); and
determining a power value associated with the RF signal (¶¶ [0054] & [0055]).
Regarding claim 7, Reid teaches a method comprising:
inserting a plurality of calibration probe assemblies (28) into a respective plurality of test sockets (48) of a multi-site calibration probe assembly (figure 1A shows the multi-site nature of the assembly);
for a first test socket of the plurality of test sockets:
programming a test equipment communicatively coupled to the first test socket to selectively couple a first pin of the first test socket to a second pin of the first test socket via a plurality of switches (the assembly necessarily must be able to selectively couple the DUT to the test socket via the multiple pins in order to receive the power value--return loss--associated with the injected signal, see, e.g., ¶¶ [0054], [0055], & [0078]);
electrically stimulating the first pin with an RF signal (¶¶ [0068]-[0069]);
measuring the RF signal propagated from the first pin to the second pin (¶¶ [0054] & [0055]); and
determining a power value associated with the RF signal measured by the measuring (¶¶ [0054] & [0055]).
Regarding claim 9, Reid teaches the method of claim 7, further comprising programming the test equipment to:
selectively couple the first pin of the first test socket to a first equipment port of the test equipment (the assembly necessarily must be able to selectively couple the DUT to the test socket via the multiple pins in order to receive the power value--return loss--associated with the injected signal, see, e.g., ¶¶ [0054], [0055], & [0078]); and
selectively couple the second pin of the first test socket to a second equipment port of the test equipment (the assembly necessarily must be able to selectively couple the DUT to the test socket via the multiple pins in order to receive the power value--return loss--associated with the injected signal, see, e.g., ¶¶ [0054], [0055], & [0078]).
Regarding claim 10, Reid teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the electrically stimulating the first pin with the RF signal is performed via the first equipment port, and wherein the measuring the RF signal propagated from the first pin to the second pin is performed via the second equipment port (¶ [0077]).
Regarding claim 12, Reid teaches the method of claim 7, wherein the plurality of test sockets are disposed on a loadboard assembly (figure 1A element 40), wherein the plurality of test sockets are operable to receive devices under test (DUTs) (38), and wherein the loadboard assembly comprises a plurality of switches that selectively couple any of the plurality of test sockets to either: components of DUTs disposed in the plurality of sockets (figure 1B); or loopback components of the DUTs, and wherein the DUTs are operable to both generate the RF signal and receive the RF signal via the loopback components (¶¶ [0054] & [0055]).
Regarding claim 13, Reid teaches the method of claim 7, further comprising testing a DUT disposed in the test socket according to the power value (¶¶ [0054], [0055], & [0078]).
Regarding claim 14, Reid teaches the method of claim 13, wherein the DUT comprises:
a first component operable to transmit the RF signal at the first pin (¶ [0081]); and
a second component operable to receive the RF signal at the second pin via a loopback path provided by the plurality of switches (¶ [0081]).
Regarding claim 15, Reid teaches a device comprising:
a test socket (48) comprising a plurality of pins (50) operable to be coupled to pins of a device under test (DUT);
a probe assembly comprising:
a first equipment port (the assembly necessarily must be able to selectively couple the DUT to the test socket via the multiple pins in order to receive the power value--return loss--associated with the injected signal, see, e.g., ¶¶ [0054], [0055], & [0078]); and
a second equipment port (the assembly necessarily must be able to selectively couple the DUT to the test socket via the multiple pins in order to receive the power value--return loss--associated with the injected signal, see, e.g., ¶¶ [0054], [0055], & [0078]);
a plurality of switches operable to selectively couple the plurality of pins of the test socket to one of the first equipment port and the second equipment port (the assembly necessarily must be able to selectively couple the DUT to the test socket via the multiple pins in order to receive the power value--return loss--associated with the injected signal, see, e.g., ¶¶ [0054], [0055], & [0078]);
a first bench equipment coupled to the first equipment port and operable to electrically stimulate a first pin of the plurality of pins of the test socket with an RF signal (¶¶ [0068]-[0069]);
a second bench equipment coupled to the second equipment port and operable to measure the RF signal propagated from the first pin and received at a second pin of the plurality of pins of the test socket via the second equipment port (¶¶ [0054] & [0055]); and
test equipment operable to determine a power value associated with the RF signal (¶¶ [0054] & [0055]).
Regarding claim 16, Reid teaches the device of claim 15, wherein the test equipment is further operable to test the DUT according to the power value when the DUT is disposed in the test socket (¶¶ [0054], [0055], & [0078]).
Regarding claim 18, Reid teaches the device of claim 15, wherein the plurality of switches are further operable to provide a loopback path between a first pin of the plurality of pins of the test socket and a second pin of the plurality of pins of the test socket (the assembly necessarily must be able to selectively couple the DUT to the test socket via the multiple pins in order to receive the power value--return loss--associated with the injected signal, see, e.g., ¶¶ [0054], [0055], & [0078]).
Regarding claim 19, Reid teaches the device of claim 18, wherein the DUT is disposed in the test socket, and wherein the DUT is operable to generate an RF signal on the loopback path (¶ [0057]).
Regarding claim 20, Reid teaches the device of claim 19, wherein the DUT is further operable to receive the RF signal from the loopback path, wherein the loopback path is operable to route the RF signal from the DUT back to the DUT via the plurality of switches (¶¶ [0054] & [0074]).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2-4, 6, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reid in view of United States Patent App. Pub. No. 20170192079 to Huang.
Regarding claim 2, Reid teaches the method of claim 1, but does not teach explicitly wherein determining the power value comprises applying de-embedding factors to the RF signal measured by the measuring.
However, Huang teaches determining the power value comprises applying de-embedding factors to the RF signal measured by the measuring (figure 4 element 404).
It 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 to combine the de-embedding of Huang with the power value determination of Reid in order to provide a simpler and more accurate method to create the S parameters (see Huang Abstract).
Regarding claim 3, Reid in view of Huang teaches the method of claim 2, and Huang further teaches comprising measuring the de-embedding factors by:
mounting a calibration probe assembly shorting structure to a bottom of the calibration probe assembly (¶ [0015]); and
measuring the de-embedding factors using a vector network analyzer connected to the calibration probe assembly (¶ [0028]).
Regarding claim 4, Reid in view of Huang teaches the method of claim 1, and Huang further teaches wherein the calibration probe assembly comprises one or more coaxial cables (¶ [0045]), wherein the RF signal is propagated through the calibration probe assembly using at least one cable of the one or more coaxial cables (¶ [0045]), and wherein the measuring the RF signal comprises using external equipment to measure the RF signal that is propagated through the calibration probe assembly (¶ [0045]).
Regarding claim 6, Reid in view of Huang teaches the method of claim 1, and Reid further teaches comprising testing a device under test (DUT) disposed in the test socket according to the power value associated with the RF signal (¶¶ [0054], [0055], & [0078]).
Regarding claim 8, Reid teaches the method of claim 7, but does not teach explicitly wherein the determining the power value comprises applying de-embedding factors to the RF signal measured by the measuring.
However, Huang teaches wherein the determining the power value comprises applying de-embedding factors to the RF signal measured by the measuring (figure 4 element 404).
It 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 to combine the de-embedding of Huang with the power value determination of Reid in order to provide a simpler and more accurate method to create the S parameters (see Huang Abstract).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reid in view of Huang, and further in view of United States Patent App. Pub. No. 20110238360 to Tanaka.
Regarding claim 5, Reid in view of Huang teaches the method of claim 1, but does not teach explicitly wherein the first equipment port comprises a coaxial connector coupled to a power meter.
However, Tanaka teaches wherein the first equipment port comprises a coaxial connector coupled to a power meter (¶ [0006]).
It 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 to combine the coaxial connector of Tanaka with the method of Reid in view of Huang in order to provide efficient transfer of the RF signals, thereby enhancing the accuracy of the power measurement.
Claim(s) 11 & 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reid in view of Tanaka.
Regarding claim 11, Reid teaches the method of claim 10, but does not teach explicitly wherein the first equipment port is coupled to an RF signal generator, and wherein the second equipment port is coupled to a power meter.
However, Tanaka teaches wherein the first equipment port is coupled to an RF signal generator, and wherein the second equipment port is coupled to a power meter (¶ [0006]).
It 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 to combine the power meter of Tanaka with the method of Reid in order to provide accuracy of power measurement.
Regarding claim 17, Reid teaches the device of claim 15, but does not teach explicitly wherein the first equipment port is coupled to an RF signal generator and the second equipment port is coupled to a power meter.
However, Tanaka teaches wherein the first equipment port is coupled to an RF signal generator and the second equipment port is coupled to a power meter (¶ [0006]).
It 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 to combine the power meter of Tanaka with the device of Reid in order to provide accuracy of power measurement.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
United States Patent App. Pub. No. 20120081138 to Sul et al. discloses testing of high-speed input devices having a transmitter and a receiver and a loop-back connection from an output of the transmitter to an input of the receiver.
United States Patent No. 6492797 to Maassen discloses a socket calibration method and apparatus having multiple reference blocks and a signal trace.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert P Alejnikov whose telephone number is (571)270-5164. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00a-6:00p M-F.
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, Arleen Vazquez, can be reached at 571.272.2619. 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.
/ROBERT P ALEJNIKOV JR/Examiner, Art Unit 2857
/ARLEEN M VAZQUEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2857