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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
1. The references disclosed within the information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on August 26, 2024, have been considered and initialed by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 102(a)(1)
2. 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.
3. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakanishi (U.S. 20085/0239058).
Nakanishi discloses a ceramic insulating substrate and a glaze layer (paragraph 26) where the article has ribs spaced from each other in a secondary scanning direction (paragraph 31). Figure 2b of Nakanishi shows a plurality of first ribs formed on the substrate; a glaze layer disposed on the substrate to cover the plurality of first ribs, where the plurality of first ribs extend in a first direction and spaced in a second direction orthogonal to the first direction, as shown below:
PNG
media_image1.png
398
485
media_image1.png
Greyscale
, as in claim 1.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103
4. 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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
5. Claims 2-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakanishi (U.S. 20085/0239058).
Nakanishi is taken as above. Nakanishi discloses a ceramic insulating substrate and a glaze layer (paragraph 26) where the article has ribs spaced from each other in a secondary scanning direction (paragraph 31). Nakanishi does not explicitly disclose the thickness of the glaze layer; however thickness modifications involve a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art and therefore obvious. Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert, denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 USPQ 232 (1984) See MPEP 2144.04, as in claims 2-3.
Concerning claim 4, Nakanishi discloses a ceramic insulating substrate and a glaze layer (paragraph 26) where the article has ribs spaced from each other in a secondary scanning direction (paragraph 31). Figure 2a shows a plurality of second ribs on the substrate.
Concerning claims 5-6, Nakanishi discloses a ceramic insulating substrate and a glaze layer (paragraph 26) where the article has ribs spaced from each other in a secondary scanning direction (paragraph 31). In claim 5, the phrase, “ribs are each composed of material that is a sintered compact including a plurality of grains” introduces a process limitation to the product claim. The patentability of a product 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, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966.
Conclusion
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lawrence Ferguson whose telephone number is 571-272-1522. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday 9:00 AM – 5:30PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Frank Vineis, can be reached on 571-270-1547. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/LAWRENCE D FERGUSON/Examiner, Art Unit 1781
Prosecution Insights