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 .
Response to Amendment
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yamagishi USPG Pub. No.: US 7,449,900.
Regarding Claim 1, Yamagishi teaches an electrical connecting apparatus that electrically connects a testing device and a test subject (see figures 3-4 showing an electrical interposer between a DUT and a tester, not shown but described in col.8, lns.8-20), comprising:
a multilayer wiring substrate having a plurality of contactors that electrically contact electrode terminals of the test subject and are electrically (see figures 3-4, in which 10 is comprised of multiple layers including 12, 14, and a substrate as shown, and connects substrate electrodes 16-18 to the test subject through electrode terminals 32),
wherein the multilayer wiring substrate has a metal core member (figures 3-4 and col.14, lns.47-59, in which core member 12 is partially metal), and
the metal core member is aligned with a position where one or both of a power supply terminal and a ground terminal of the electrode terminals of the test subject in a thickness direction of a multilayer wiring substrate (see col.8, lns.27-38 and figures 3-4, in which the core member, including the metal film of the core member, is arranged where both the ground and power terminals 17 and 18 are present; see figures 3-4 in which element 12 is aligned with elements 17 and 18 in a vertical direction, i.e. the thickness direction of the wiring substrate).
Regarding Claim 2, Yamagishi teaches the electrical connecting apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the multilayer wiring substrate includes:
a first multilayer wiring layer having a first signal circuit between a plurality of substrate layers and a through-hole in which the metal core member is provided (see figure 4, but for a clearer reference, also see figure 10, 120, and portions of 118 comprise the first multilayer wiring between the substrate layers and a through-hole in which the metal core is provided); and
a second multilayer wiring layer having a second signal circuit between a plurality of substrate layers on one side of the first multilayer wiring layer (see figure 10, 120 or figure 4, 14), and
the second multilayer wiring layer has a through-connection path that electrically connects the metal core member and each of a power supply contactor that contacts the power supply terminal and a ground contactor that contacts the ground terminal (seen in figure 4, in which contactors contact terminals 17 and 18), for each of the power supply terminal and the ground terminal within an area corresponding to the metal core member in the thickness direction (see figure 4 in which the presence of said elements relative to one another are shown).
Regarding Claim 3, Yamagishi teaches the electrical connecting apparatus according to claim 2, wherein is electrically connected to a signal contractor among the electrical terminal of the test subject via the second signal circuit for each of the power supply terminal and the ground terminal outside the area where the metal core member is present (see figures 4, in which the second multilayer wiring 14 is shown as being connected to the power supply terminal and the ground terminals 17 and 18 through the first signal circuit and the second signal circuit seen as the via interconnects; also this location can be considered outside the area where the metal core member is present as no direction regarding the presence is specified).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the rejection of Claim 1: “According to the Official Action, the claimed "metal core member" corresponds to element 12 of Yamagishi. However, element 12 of Yamagishi is merely a wiring board with plated metal through holes. It cannot reasonably be construed as a metal core member included in a multilayer wiring substrate, as claimed. To the contrary, element 12 of Yamagishi is a multilayer wiring substrate, described in col. 7, lines 59-62 of Yamagishi as an "interconnection layer 12" that "includes a plurality of interconnection patterns." The "interconnection layer 12" of Yamagishi does not include a "metal core member" as claimed, much less one that is aligned in a thickness direction of the substrate with ground or power contactors and terminals of the test subject…All of the metal in Yamagishi's "interconnection layer" is in the form of metal plating, including the through hole plating that conducts current between the layers of the connector. Such plating is not capable of withstanding high currents. As a result, if a high current is applied the connector will fail. There is no suggestion in Yamagishi of including any sort of "metal core member" within the wiring substrate, or aligning the core member with contactors and ground/power supply terminals of the test subject to achieve a high current handling capacity.” (Remarks p.7-8).
Contrary to Applicant’s arguments, the claim language does not specify that the metal core must be made of a metal structure that is capable of withstanding high currents. Furthermore, the specification does not refer explicitly to the metal core necessarily having the capability of handling high currents. It is maintained that Yamagishi element 12 teaches a metal core under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the term as the element is a core, and is referred to in the reference as such, that is at least partially constructed of metal.
Further regarding the rejection of Claim 1: “Furthermore, as explained in col. 8, lines 32-38 of the Yamagishi patent, instead of being coupled to a metal core member, Yamaguchi's ground and power supply lines 17 and 18 are connected to a thin film decoupling capacitor 20. Ground line 17 and power supply line 18 of Yamagishi are clearly not aligned, in a thickness direction of the wiring substrate, with any sort of "metal core member" or with any of the contactors or ground/power supply terminals of the test subject 30. There is no attempt to provide a high current capacity path to ground or power supply terminals of the test subject, which are not specifically identified in the Yamagishi patent.”
Contrary to Applicant’s arguments, components 17 or 18 of Yamagishi are aligned in the thickness direction of wiring substrate 10 with metal core 12, as these components overlap in the thickness direction of wiring substrate 10, thus being broadly aligned with one another. The claim language does not specify an orientation of the components’ alignment, and therefore they are met by the reference.
Regarding the rejection of Claims 2-3: “Turning to claims 2 and 3, the Yamagishi patent clearly does not disclose or suggest (i) the connection path of claim 2, which "electrically connects the metal core member and each of a power supply contactor, and a ground contactor, within an area corresponding to the metal core member in the thickness direction," or (ii) the first and second signal circuits of claim 3, in which "the first signal circuit is electrically connected to a signal contactor among the electrical terminals of the test subject via the second signal circuit. According to the arrangement described in paragraphs [0047], [0048], and [0054], the invention provides a testing path for signal transmission that extends from the first signal circuit 13 through the second signal circuit 14 and the signal contactor 61 to a signal terminal 841 of the test subject, and also a testing path for power supply or ground terminals 842 that are, unlike the ground/power supply terminals recited in claim 1, outside the area. R directly below the core member 15," the testing path for the outside ground/power supply terminals extending from the first signal circuit 13 through the second signal circuit 14 and the power supply or ground contactor 62. Thus, in addition to failing to disclose the metal core member and electrode terminal alignment of claim 1, Yamagishi clearly fails to disclose or suggest the feature of claim 3 in which "the first signal circuit is electrically connected to a signal contact among the electrical terminals of the subject under test via the second signal circuit."”
Contrary to Applicant’s arguments, figure 4 of Yamagishi clearly teaches that the metal core 12 is electrically connected with power supply and ground elements 17 and 18 at least partially within an area corresponding the metal core in the thickness direction, which runs vertically along the figure.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL A HARRISON whose telephone number is (571)272-3573. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM - 5:00 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, STEPHANIE BLOSS can be reached at (571) 272-3555. 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.
/MICHAEL A HARRISON/Examiner, Art Unit 2852
/CARLA J THERRIEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights