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.
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.
(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, 2, 11, 12, 14, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2018/0235113 A1 (Bruss).
Bruss discloses, referring primarily to figures 1A-2B, a multilayer printed circuit board, comprising: at least one metallization layer (120); an insulating layer (110); and wherein the at least one metallization layer comprises a plurality of filling segment structures such that the at least one metallization layer has a metal density of at least about 35% ([0050]) [claim 1], wherein each filling segment structure has a surface area of less than about 5% of a surface area of multilayer printed circuit board ([0050]) [claim 2], wherein the metallization layer does not include any degassing holes [claim 11], wherein the metallization layer comprises a radio frequency circuit pattern ([0002]) [claim 12], wherein the plurality of filling segment structures are additive process defined structures [claim 14], wherein the plurality of filling segment structures are copper ([0050]) [claim 15].
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) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bruss.
Regarding claim 13, Bruss discloses the claimed invention as described above with respect to claim 1 except Bruss does not specifically state that the metallization layer is an inner metallization layer of a plurality of metallization layers in a printed circuit board stack. However, such an arrangement would amount to a mere duplication of the working parts of Bruss which has been held to be within the skill of the ordinary artisan (MPEP 2144). Therefore, it would have been obvious, to one having ordinary skill in the art, to incorporate the claimed features into the invention of Bruss. The motivation for doing so would have been to allow for simultaneous signal transmission.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-20 are allowed.
Claims 3-10 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: Claim 3 states the limitation “wherein the plurality of filling segment structures form a repeating pattern of identical shapes for at least a portion of the metallization layer.” This limitation, in conjunction with the other claimed features, was neither found to be disclosed in, nor suggested by the prior art. Claim 4 states the limitation “wherein the plurality of filling segment structures are spaced apart at regular intervals.” This limitation, in conjunction with the other claimed features, was neither found to be disclosed in, nor suggested by the prior art. Claim 5 states the limitation “wherein the plurality of filling segment structures each have a width dimension and a length dimension, wherein a spacing between adjacent filling segment structures is less than about 25% of the width dimension and the length dimension.” This limitation, in conjunction with the other claimed features, was neither found to be disclosed in, nor suggested by the prior art. Claim 6 states the limitation “wherein a spacing between adjacent filling segment structures is in a range of about 25 microns to about 125 microns.” This limitation, in conjunction with the other claimed features, was neither found to be disclosed in, nor suggested by the prior art. Claim 7 states the limitation “wherein a width dimension of the filling segment structures is in a range of about 100 microns to about 750 microns.” This limitation, in conjunction with the other claimed features, was neither found to be disclosed in, nor suggested by the prior art. Claim 8 states the limitation “wherein each filling segment structure has a polygonal shape.” This limitation, in conjunction with the other claimed features, was neither found to be disclosed in, nor suggested by the prior art. Claim 9 states the limitation “wherein each filling segment structure has a square shape.” This limitation, in conjunction with the other claimed features, was neither found to be disclosed in, nor suggested by the prior art. Claim 10 states the limitation “wherein the plurality of filling segment structures are at least partially arranged in a grid pattern.” This limitation, in conjunction with the other claimed features, was neither found to be disclosed in, nor suggested by the prior art. Claims 16-19 state the limitation “wherein the one or more inner metallization layers comprise a plurality of filling segment structures arranged at least partially in a repeating pattern.” This limitation, in conjunction with the other claimed features, was neither found to be disclosed in, nor suggested by the prior art. Claim 20 states the limitation “the second metallization layer comprising a ground plane.” This limitation, in conjunction with the other claimed features, was neither found to be disclosed in, nor suggested by the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMY C NORRIS whose telephone number is (571)272-1932. The examiner can normally be reached 7:15-15:15 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, 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.
JEREMY C. NORRIS
Examiner
Art Unit 2847
/JEREMY C NORRIS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights