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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/27/2024 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 3, claim 3 recites “a concentration of aluminum chloride is not detected in the side surface”. It is not clear what is being claimed by the above limitation. It is not clear if the above limitation is claiming that the side surface of the bonding pad is not made of aluminum chloride. Even if that is what is being claimed, it is not clear how you detect concentration of aluminum chloride especially when the side surface is not made of aluminum chloride.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamade et al. (US 2007/0040868).
Regarding claim 1, Yamade et al teaches a thermal print head (A1, A2 figs.1,2,4) comprising:
a substrate (ceramic substrate 1A figs.2,1,4);
an insulating layer (2 fig. 2,1,4);
a wiring layer (31,32b fig. 2,1,4);
a resistor layer (4 fig. 2,1,4); and
a protective layer (51 fig. 2,1,4), wherein
the substrate (1A fig.2) has a first surface (surface of 1A adjacent to layer 2) and a second surface (surface of 1A adjacent to heatsink 10) opposite to the first surface,
a raised portion (2a fig.2) protruding toward a side opposite to the second surface and extending along a first direction (X figs.1,4,2) in a plan view is formed on the first surface (surface of 1A adjacent to layer 2),
the insulating layer (2 fig.2) is disposed on the first surface (surface of 1A adjacent to layer 2),
the wiring layer (31,32 fig. 2,1,4) is disposed on the insulating layer (2) with the resistor layer (4) interposed therebetween,
the wiring layer (31,32) has a bonding pad (32a figs.1,2,4),
a constituent material of the wiring layer (31,32 fig. 2,1,4) is aluminum or an aluminum alloy (paragraph 0031),
the protective layer (51 fig. 2,1,4) is disposed on the insulating layer to cover the wiring layer,
an opening (in fig.4, openings between 51b-51c and 51d-51c containing bonding pads 32; in fig.1) that exposes the bonding pad (32a) is formed in the protective layer (51), and
a width of the opening (openings between 51b-51c and 51d-51c fig.4) in the first direction (X fig.4) is greater than a width of the bonding pad (32a fig.4) in the first direction (X fig.4) (note also opening 51a in fig.1 can be considered the claimed opening and the width of the opening 51a is inherently greater than the width of the bonding pad 32a in order to accommodate 32a. see also paragraphs 0010,0033 teaches there is a gap of 1μm to 10μm between the 32a and 51 with in the hole 51a).
Regarding claim 3, Yamade et al as best understood, further teaches wherein
in a cross-sectional view orthogonal to a second direction (Y fig.2), the bonding pad (32a figs.2,1,4) has an upper surface, a bottom surface opposite to the upper surface, and a side surface continuous to the upper surface and the bottom surface (fig.2),
a concentration of aluminum chloride is not detected in the side surface (paragraph 0031, teaches 32a is made of aluminum or gold), and
the second direction (Y) is orthogonal to the first direction (X) in a plan view (figs.1,2,4).
Regarding claim 5, Yamade et al teaches a method for manufacturing a thermal print head (figs.1,2,4; paragraphs 0011,0025,0037,0039,0044,0046), the method comprising:
preparing a substrate (ceramic substrate 1A figs.2,1,4) having a first surface (surface of 1A adjacent to layer 2) and a second surface (surface of 1A adjacent to heatsink 10) opposite to the first surface;
forming, on the first surface, a raised portion (2a fig.2) protruding toward a side opposite to the second surface and extending along a first direction (X figs.1,4,2) in a plan view;
forming an insulating layer (2 fig.2) on the first surface (surface of 1A adjacent to layer 2);
forming a wiring layer (31,32 fig. 2,1,4) on the insulating layer (2) with a resistor layer (4) interposed therebetween; and
forming a protective layer (51 fig. 2,1,4) on the insulating layer to cover the wiring layer, wherein
a constituent material of the wiring layer (31,32 fig. 2,1,4) is aluminum or an aluminum alloy (paragraph 0031),
the wiring layer (31,32 fig. 2,1,4) has a bonding pad (32a figs.1,2,4),
an opening (in fig.4, openings between 51b-51c and 51d-51c containing bonding pads 32) that exposes the bonding pad (32a) is formed in the protective layer (51), and
a width of the opening (openings between 51b-51c and 51d-51c fig.4) in the first direction (X fig.4) is greater than a width of the bonding pad (32a fig.4) in the first direction (X fig.4) (note also opening 51a in fig.1 can be considered the claimed opening and the width of the opening 51a is inherently greater than the width of the bonding pad 32a in order to accommodate 32a. see also paragraphs 0010,0033 teaches there is a gap of 1μm to 10μm between the 32a and 51 with in the hole 51a).
Regarding claim 7, Yamade et al further teaches further comprising performing wire (71 figs.1,2,4) bonding on the bonding pad (32a) by using a capillary, wherein the width of the opening in the first direction is greater than a diameter of the capillary (paragraphs 0015,0040,0041).
Claims 1, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakakubo (WO 2021/106479).
Regarding claim 1, Nakakubo teaches a thermal print head (figs.1-4,18-22,27) comprising:
a substrate (11 figs.2,4,20-22);
an insulating layer (102 in figs.4,20-22; 21 in fig.2; paragraph 0067);
a wiring layer (107 figs.4,20-22; 3 in figs.2,3);
a resistor layer (109 figs.4,20-22; 4 in fig.2); and
a protective layer (110 figs.4,20-22; 6 fig.2), wherein
the substrate (11) has a first surface (15 figs.2,4,20-22) and a second surface (surface of 11 opposite to surface 15 of 11) opposite to the first surface,
a raised portion (P1 figs.2,20-22) protruding toward a side opposite to the second surface (surface of 11 opposite to surface 15 of 11) and extending along a first direction (Y figs.1-4,20-22) in a plan view is formed on the first surface,
the insulating layer (102;21) is disposed on the first surface (15 figs.4,20-22),
the wiring layer (107;3) is disposed on the insulating layer (102;21) with the resistor layer (109;104) interposed therebetween,
the wiring layer (107;3) has a bonding pad (111 functions as bonding pad paragraph 0090 figs.4,20-22; bonding pad 313 fig.3),
a constituent material of the wiring layer (107 figs.4,20-22; 3 in figs.2,3) is aluminum or an aluminum alloy (paragraph 0052),
the protective layer (110 figs.4,20-22; 6 fig.2) is disposed on the insulating layer (102;21) to cover the wiring layer (107;3),
an opening (opening in 110 around 111 in figs.4,18,20-22) that exposes the bonding pad (111, paragraph 0090) is formed in the protective layer (110), and
a width of the opening (opening in 110 around 111) in the first direction is greater than a width of the bonding pad (111, paragraph 0090) in the first direction (figs.4,18,20-22. The width of the opening in 110 around 111 is inherently greater than the width of the bonding pad 111 in order to accommodate 111).
Regarding claim 5, Nakakubo teaches a method for manufacturing a thermal print head (figs.1-4,18-22,27), the method comprising:
preparing a substrate (11 figs.2,4,20-22) having a first surface (15 figs.2,4,20-22) and a second surface (surface of 11 opposite to surface 15 of 11) opposite to the first surface;
forming, on the first surface, a raised portion (P1 figs.2,20-22) protruding toward a side opposite to the second surface and extending along a first direction (Y figs.1-4,20-22) in a plan view;
forming an insulating layer (102 in figs.4,20-22; 21 in fig.2; paragraph 0067) on the first surface (15);
forming a wiring layer (107 figs.4,20-22; 3 in figs.2,3) on the insulating layer (102;21) with a resistor layer (109 figs.4,20-22; 4 in fig.2) interposed therebetween; and
forming a protective layer (110 figs.4,20-22; 6 fig.2) on the insulating layer to cover the wiring layer, wherein
a constituent material of the wiring layer (107 figs.4,20-22; 3 in figs.2,3) is aluminum or an aluminum alloy (paragraph 0052),
the wiring layer (107 figs.4,20-22; 3 in figs.2,3) has a bonding pad (111 functions as bonding pad paragraph 0090 figs.4,20-22; bonding pad 313 fig.3),
an opening (opening in 110 around 111 in figs.4,18,20-22) that exposes the bonding pad (111, paragraph 0090) is formed in the protective layer (110), and
a width of the opening (opening in 110 around 111) in the first direction is greater than a width of the bonding pad (111, paragraph 0090) in the first direction (figs.4,18,20-22. The width of the opening in 110 around 111 is inherently greater than the width of the bonding pad 111 in order to accommodate 111).
Regarding claim 6, Nakakubo further teaches wherein the forming a wiring layer (107 figs.4,20-22; 3 in figs.2,3) has depositing the constituent material of the wiring layer, and patterning the deposited constituent material of the wiring layer by wet etching using a resist pattern as a mask (paragraph 0078).
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.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamade et al. (US 2007/0040868) in view of Yokoyama et al.(US 2006/0176359).
Regarding claim 2, Yamade et al substantially teaches the claimed invention including wherein the bonding pad (32a figs.1,2,4) has an upper surface and a bottom surface opposite to the upper surface, a width of the bottom surface in a second direction (Y) is a little more than 1 as great as a width of the upper surface in the second direction (Y) (see bonding pad 32a in fig.2 at least the left side of 32a is tapered shape which shows its bottom surface is a little larger than its top surface in Y direction), and the second direction (Y) is orthogonal to the first direction (X) in a plan view.
Yamade et al does not explicitly shows wherein the width of the bottom surface in the second direction is specifically 1.1 times or more as great as a width of the upper surface in the second direction.
However, Yokoyama et al teaches similar thermal print head (fig.1) including bonding pad/s (17 figs.3-6) wherein the bonding pad (17) has an upper surface and a bottom surface opposite to the upper surface, and the bonding pad (17) is tapered shape (figs.4-6) on both side of the bonding pad, which means the width of the bottom surface is more than 1 times as great as a width of the upper surface of the bonding pad (figs.4-6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to such optimum taper shape of 1.1 times or more for instance strengthen the bonding pad and suppress peeling off, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamade et al. (US 2007/0040868).
Regarding claim 4, Yamade et al substantially teaches the claimed invention including the opening (in fig.4, openings between 51b-51c and 51d-51c containing bonding pads 32; in fig.1, opening 51a) that exposes the bonding pad (32a). Yamade et al also teaches a gap of 1μm to 10μm between the 32a and 51 with in the hole 51a (paragraphs 0010,0033). That is without including the width of the bonding pad 32a in opening 51 there is as much as 20μm width opening in the first direction.
Yamade et al does not explicitly shows wherein the width of the opening in the first direction is equal to or greater than 100 μm.
However, given the above discussed teachings. It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have width of the opening equal to or greater than 100 μm for instance to accommodate about 100 μm or more wide landing pads, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or working ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamade et al. (US 2007/0040868) in view of Nakakubo (WO 2021/106479).
Regarding claim 6, Yamade et al substantially teaches the claimed invention including wherein the forming a wiring layer (31,32 fig. 2,1,4) has depositing the constituent material of the wiring layer, and patterning the deposited constituent material of the wiring layer by etching using a resist pattern as a mask (paragraph 0037).
Yamade et al does not explicitly teaches if the etching is wet etching.
However, Nakakubo teaches forming a wiring layer (104,107 figs.4,14-16; 3 figs.2,3) by depositing the constituent material of the wiring layer (104,107,3), and patterning the deposited constituent material of the wiring layer by wet etching using a resist pattern as a mask (paragraph 0078).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use such method steps including use of wet etching steps in Yamade et al based on the teachings of Nakakubo for instance to use a safer and less aggressive material removing manufacturing step.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENOK D LEGESSE whose telephone number is (571)270-1615. The examiner can normally be reached General Schedule 9:00 am- 5:00 pm, IFP.
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, Douglas Rodriguez can be reached at (571)431-0716. 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.
/HENOK D LEGESSE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2853