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 papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/06/2024 and 10/03/2024 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.
Claims 1-8,10-11 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.
The claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors.
For example, claim1 recite in line 1 the term “inculding” it is unclear what the term means.
Regarding claim4, line 1 recites "leaste" which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what the term means.
Regarding claim7, line 3 recites "inculding" which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what the term means.
Regarding claim10, line 3 recites "popusliated" which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what the term means.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9,12 allowed.
The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance: The closest prior art of record of Rowden (US 20170294373 A1) or Yoshihara et al, ( US 20150371937 A1) teaches the limitation of A method for producing at least one power module, the method comprising, for producing each of the at least one power module, but it does not teach or suggest, singularly or in combination, at least the limitations of the independent claim 9 including “the following steps: providing a first circuit carrier which is mirror-symmetrical to a central longitudinal axis, and a second circuit carrier which is a flexible printed circuit board which has at least one internal contact region and at least one external contact region; providing at least one first semiconductor switch and at least one second semiconductor switch; electrically connecting the at least one first semiconductor switch between at least one first conductor structure of the first circuit carrier and at least one third conductor structure of the first circuit carrier; electrically connecting at least one second semiconductor switch between the at least one third conductor structure and at least one second conductor structure of the first circuit carrier spatially arranging the second circuit carrier in parallel with and symmetrically to the central longitudinal axis above the first circuit carrier; wherein the at least one first semiconductor switch is connected to the first conductor structure via at least one first bonding wire, the at least one second semiconductor switch is connected to the third conductor structure via at least one first bonding wire, and contact regions of the flexible printed circuit board are connected to the at least one first and second semiconductor switches via second bonding wires.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAMADOU L DIALLO whose telephone number is (571)270-5449. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00AM-5PM.
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, FERNANDO TOLEDO can be reached at (571)272-1867. 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.
/MAMADOU L DIALLO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights