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 § 103
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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tustaniwskyi (US 5724229 A) in view of Matsunami (US 20080006937 A1).
As to Claim 1, Tustaniwskyi discloses:
A heat-sink fixing structure (assembly if Figs. 3A-3B) comprising:
a heat sink (heat spreader 12) fixed to a main unit of an electronic component (chips 20; 12 thermally and indirectly connected to 20) to which a leg portion (combination of bonding wire 11d, 13e, 13f) is connected to a substrate 50 (11d connected to 50 via plurality of connectors, 13e, 13a and 50b);
a mounting portion 60b provided in a device main unit 60 to which the substrate 50 is fixed (col. 5, Lines 8-10 “Section 60a is a central section which rests against surface 50f of the printed circuit board 50”), the mounting portion 60b having flexibility (col. 5, Lines 20-22 “Each screw 60e is tightened until section 60b of the pressure plate is bent against surface 50f of the printed circuit board”); and
a joining member 40/60e joining the heat sink 12 and the mounting portion 60b (col. 5, Lines 18-22 “Section 60b of the pressure plate is connected to the threaded ends 40e of the alignment pins 40 by screws 60e. Each screw 60e is tightened until section 60b of the pressure plate is bent against surface 50f of the printed circuit board”; Lines 27-31 “To hold the heat sink 70 in place, it is provided with holes 71 through which the wide end 40b of the alignment pins pass; and a nut 40f screws on the wide end of the alignment pins and presses the heat sink 70 against the heat spreader 12”; pins 40 join 60b and 12).
Tustaniwskyi does not disclose:
a main unit of an electronic component to which a leg portion is connected to a substrate by soldering.
However, Matsunami discloses:
a main unit of an electronic component 100 to which a leg portion (leads 404) is connected to a substrate 400 by soldering (Par. 0040 “The microelectronic device package 100 and process 200 provide a reliable solder joint between the leads 404 and the substrate 402, and therefore provide a reliable product able to withstand significant thermal stress”);
in order to provide a reliable connected between leads and the substrate (Par. 0040).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the related art(s) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Tustaniwskyi as further suggested by Matsunami e.g., providing:
a main unit of an electronic component to which a leg portion is connected to a substrate by soldering;
in order to provide a reliable connected between leads/legs and the substrate.
Additionally, the method of forming the device is not germane to the issue of patentability of the device itself. Even though the claims are limited by and defined by the recited process, the determination of patentability of the product is based on the product itself, and does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. In re Thorpe, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985). Therefore, this limitation has not been given patentable weight. See MPEP 2113.
As to Claim 2, the obvious modification of Tustaniwskyi in view of Matsunami discloses:
wherein
the mounting portion (60b of Tustaniwskyi) has flexibility along a direction in which the leg portion (combination defined in rejection of claim 1 above) of the electronic component 20 extends toward the substrate 50 (connection between 20 and 50 is vertical; 60b is flexible in vertical direction, e.g., between unstressed position 60c and secured position of Fig. 3b; Tustaniwskyi).
As to Claim 3, the obvious modification of Tustaniwskyi in view of Matsunami does not disclose (in the present embodiment):
comprising
a supporting member supporting the main unit of the electronic component, wherein
the supporting member includes a connecting portion joined to the mounting portion together with the heat sink with the joining member, the connecting portion having flexibility.
However, Tustaniwskyi discloses (in another embodiment):
comprising
a supporting member (retainer clip 73, see Fig. 7) supporting the main unit of the electronic component (at least in part supports 20 when device is assembled), wherein
the supporting member 73 includes a connecting portion 73a joined to the mounting portion 60b together with the heat sink 12 with the joining member 40’/60e (73a is joined with 60b and 12 via pin 40’), the connecting portion 73a having flexibility (73 is a springy retainer clip, therefore has flexible qualities);
in order to provide a simplified attachment without the use of nuts (col. 7, Lines 26-28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the related art(s) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Tustaniwskyi in view of Matsunami as further suggested by Tustaniwskyi e.g., providing:
comprising
a supporting member supporting the main unit of the electronic component, wherein
the supporting member includes a connecting portion joined to the mounting portion together with the heat sink with the joining member, the connecting portion having flexibility;
in order to provide a simplified attachment without the use of nuts.
As to Claim 4, the obvious modification of Tustaniwskyi in view of Matsunami discloses:
wherein
the heat sink 12 is sandwiched between the mounting portion 60b and the connecting portion 73a (heat spreader 12 of Tustaniwskyi is sandwiched between 60b and 73a), and
the joining member 40/60e is inserted from the mounting portion 60b through the heat sink 12, to be joined with the connecting portion 73a (at least 60e is inserted through 60b and 40/40’ passes through 12 and is joined with 73a; Tustaniwskyi).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is 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:
As to claim 5, the allowability resides in the overall structure and functionality of the device as recited in the dependent claim 5, including all of the limitations of its base claims and intervening claims, and at least in part, because claim 5 recite the following limitations:
“wherein the main unit of the electronic component is fixed by being sandwiched between the heat sink and the supporting member, and a space portion that penetrates in a predetermined direction is provided between the heat sink and the supporting member.” – claim 5.
The aforementioned limitations in combination with all remaining limitations of claim 5, are believed to render said claim 5 and all claims dependent therefrom allowable over the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination.
Further, Examiner has not identified any double patenting issues.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chang (US 20160057891 A1) discloses a heat sink assembly with a plurality of clips.
Taka (US 8797743 B2) discloses a fixing structure for a heat source element.
Stolze (US 20090021916 A1) discloses a semiconductor assembly with a heat sink and pressing plate.
Solberg (US 5343362 A) discloses a heat sink assembly with a clip for an electronic component.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW S MUIR whose telephone number is (571)270-1329. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 am - 5 pm.
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, Jayprakash Gandhi can be reached at 571-272-3740. 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.
/MATTHEW SINCLAIR MUIR/ Examiner, Art Unit 2841
/Jayprakash N Gandhi/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2841
Prosecution Insights