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 Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In regards to claim 3, there is no antecedence for claimed subject matter “step g) is performed”.
In regards to claim 9, there is no antecedence for claimed subject matter “the further adhesive material”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “interconnecting element” “wavelength-selective element configured for separating” in claim 14, 15, & 16.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Applicant teaches the at least one interconnecting element, may further be comprised by the spectrometer device. In particular, the interconnecting element may be or may comprise a wire and/or a solder bump (col 8, lines 10-15).
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 15 & 16 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. In regards to claims 15 & 16, the claimed subject matter “wavelength-selective element” is rendered indefinite. Examiner notes the specification does not provide the structure for the “wavelength-selective element” to perform the claimed functions. Applicant teaches at least one wavelength-selective element configured for separating the electromagnetic radiation into a spectrum. Based upon the specification, there is no way to determine the metes and bounds of this limitation, since there are no limits imposed by structure, material or acts, and can therefore be performed by any means capable of performing the function, both known and unknown. Clarification is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 9-11, & 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zandian US 9570428 in view of KIM US 20210256898 in further view of Robert McKeown, “Electronics Adhesives & Sealants”, Dec 22, 2017 hereafter McKeown.
With respect to claim 1, Zandian teaches a method of manufacturing at least one spectrometer device for evaluating electromagnetic radiation, the method comprising:
a) providing at least one electro-optical system “pixels on detector 14” (fig 4a, 14) configured for generating at least one electronic signal according to the electromagnetic radiation (col 2, lines 65-67);
b) providing at least one readout integrated circuit (ROIC) “first die 12 is an ROIC” (fig 4a, 12) (col 2, lines 65-67) for processing the at least one electronic signal;
c) providing at least one circuit carrier (fig 4a, 24)
f) arranging the ROIC on the circuit carrier (fig 4a) such that the ROIC is located between the electro-optical system and the circuit carrier.
Zandian does not teach bonding the electro-optical system and the ROIC as to establish at least one electrical connection between the electro-optical system with an adhesive material selected from the group consisting of: a thermosetting material; a thermoplastic material; a plastic material; a polymer material; and a silicone-based glue.
Kim, in the field of endeavor of LED, teaches an adhesive silicone may be between a pixel i.e. electro-optical system and an integrated circuit (0050).
Kim does not teach silicone-based glue.
McKeown, in the field of endeavor of electronic adhesives, implicitly teaches a silicone glue (fig 1 & 2) used as an electronic adhesive. Examiner submits the silicone adhesive would indirectly establish an electrical connection between electrical components since the components are adhere to one another preventing the direct electrical connection to be broken. At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to try to bond Zandian’s pixels and ROIC via a silicone glue since it is an excellent epoxy for bonding electrical components with high heat resistance.
PNG
media_image1.png
763
1322
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
894
1408
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 3 according to claim 1, the combination teaches the method wherein a step is performed after performing a further step (col 2, lines 65-67 Zandian).
With respect to claim 9 according to claim 1, the combination teaches the method wherein the further adhesive material is selected from the group consisting of: a silicone-based glue (fig 1 & 2 McKeown).
With respect to claim 10, Zandian teaches a spectrometer device for evaluating electromagnetic radiation, the spectrometer device comprising:
at least one circuit carrier (fig 4a, 24);
at least one electro-optical system “pixels on detector 14” (fig 4a, 14) configured for generating at least one electronic signal according to the electromagnetic radiation (col 2, lines 65-67); and
at least one readout integrated circuit (ROIC) “first die 12 is an ROIC” (fig 4a, 12) (col 2, lines 65-67) for processing the at least one electronic signal, wherein the ROIC is arranged between the circuit carrier and the electro-optical system.
Zandian does not teach bonding the electro-optical system and the ROIC as to establish at least one electrical connection between the electro-optical system with an adhesive material selected from the group consisting of: a thermosetting material; a thermoplastic material; a plastic material; a polymer material; and a silicone-based glue.
Kim, in the field of endeavor of LED, teaches an adhesive silicone may be between a pixel i.e. electro-optical system and an integrated circuit (0050).
Kim does not teach silicone-based glue.
McKeown, in the field of endeavor of electronic adhesives, implicitly teaches a silicone glue (fig 1 & 2) used as an electronic adhesive. Examiner submits the silicone adhesive would indirectly establish an electrical connection between electrical components since the components are adhere to one another preventing the direct electrical connection to be broken. At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to try to bond Zandian’s pixels and ROIC via a silicone glue since it is an excellent epoxy for bonding electrical components with high heat resistance.
PNG
media_image1.png
763
1322
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
894
1408
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 11, Zandian teaches a spectrometer device (fig 4a) wherein the spectrometer device j is manufactured at least partially by performing the method of manufacturing a spectrometer device.
Zandian does not teach bonding the electro-optical system and the ROIC as to establish at least one electrical connection between the electro-optical system with an adhesive material selected from the group consisting of: a thermosetting material; a thermoplastic material; a plastic material; a polymer material; and a silicone-based glue.
Kim, in the field of endeavor of LED, teaches an adhesive silicone may be between a pixel i.e. electro-optical system and an integrated circuit (0050).
Kim does not teach silicone-based glue.
McKeown, in the field of endeavor of electronic adhesives, implicitly teaches a silicone glue (fig 1 & 2) used as an electronic adhesive. Examiner submits the silicone adhesive would indirectly establish an electrical connection between electrical components since the components are adhere to one another preventing the direct electrical connection to be broken. At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to try to bond Zandian’s pixels and ROIC via a silicone glue since it is an excellent epoxy for bonding electrical components with high heat resistance.
PNG
media_image1.png
763
1322
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
894
1408
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 14 according to claim 10, the combination teaches the spectrometer device, wherein the electrooptical system is bonded to the ROIC by at least one interconnecting element “silicone glue” (fig 1 & 2 McKeown).
Claim(s) 2 & 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zandian US 9570428 in view of KIM US 20210256898 in further view of Robert McKeown, “Electronics Adhesives & Sealants”, Dec 22, 2017 hereafter McKeown in further view of Bartolome US 20210376179.
With respect to claim 2 according to claim 1, the combination does not teach the at least one ROIC is provided as a ROIC wafer, wherein the method further comprises singulating the ROIC from the ROIC wafer.
Bartolome, in the same field of endeavor as Zandian of ROIC, teaches ROIC dies are singulated from a wafer and subsequently mounted onto a reconstituted wafer (0025, lines 0025). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to singulate the combination’s ROIC from a wafer as a known technique to efficiently manufacture several photodetectors from a wafer.
With respect to claim 4 according to claim 1, the combination does not teach the method wherein the at least one ROIC is provided as singulated ROIC
Bartolome, in the same field of endeavor as Zandian of ROIC, teaches ROIC dies are singulated from a wafer and subsequently mounted onto a reconstituted wafer (0025, lines 0025). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to singulate the combination’s ROIC from a wafer as a known technique to efficiently manufacture several photodetectors from a wafer.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zandian US 9570428 in view of KIM US 20210256898 in further view of Robert McKeown, “Electronics Adhesives & Sealants”, Dec 22, 2017 hereafter McKeown in further view of Delyon US 10424608.
With respect to claim 5 according to claim 1, the combination does not teach the method wherein the bonding comprises performing one or more of the processes selected from the group consisting of: a wire bonding process.
Delyon, in the same field of endeavor as Zandian of photodetectors, teaches wire bonding individual detector dies to a ROIC (col 4, lines 38-41). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to wire bond the combination’s pixels to the combination’s ROIC as a known technique to transmit electrical signals between electrical components.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zandian US 9570428 in view of KIM US 20210256898 in further view of Robert McKeown, “Electronics Adhesives & Sealants”, Dec 22, 2017 hereafter McKeown in further view of Dixon US 20160336370.
With respect to claim 6 according to claim 1, the combination does not teach bonding the ROIC to the circuit carrier such as to establish at least one electrical connection between the ROIC and the circuit carrier.
Dixon, in the same field of endeavor as Zandian of photodetectors, teaches wire bonding between ROIC pads and printed circuit board assembly (PCBA) i.e. circuit carrier wherein the ROIC pads are used for electrical connections to enable interfacing between the ROIC and photodetector’s electronics (0015, lines 5-10). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine a PCBA board with the combination’s ROIC to enable electrical connections for powering the ROIC.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zandian US 9570428 in view of KIM US 20210256898 in further view of Robert McKeown, “Electronics Adhesives & Sealants”, Dec 22, 2017 hereafter McKeown in further view of LIDDIARD CA 2599133 in further view of Dixon US 20160336370.
With respect to claim 7 according to claim 1, the combination does not teach the method comprises packaging the ROIC with the electro-optical system thereby generating a packaged chip and then placing and bonding the packaged chip on the circuit carrier such as to establish at least one electrical connection between the packaged chip and the circuit carrier.
Liddiard, in the same field of endeavor as Zandian of photodetectors, teaches packaging pixels i.e. electro-optical system integrated with ROIC (fig 1, 4) (col 5, lines ¶ 7).
Liddiard does not teach placing and bonding on the circuit carrier.
Dixon, in the same field of endeavor as Zandian of photodetectors, teaches wire bonding between ROIC pads and printed circuit board assembly (PCBA) i.e. circuit carrier wherein the ROIC pads are used for electrical connections to enable interfacing between the ROIC and photodetector’s electronics (0015, lines 5-10). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine a PCBA board with the combination’s ROIC to enable electrical connections for powering the ROIC.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zandian US 9570428 in view of KIM US 20210256898 in further view of Robert McKeown, “Electronics Adhesives & Sealants”, Dec 22, 2017 hereafter McKeown in further view of Motegi CN 102855895.
With respect to claim 8 according to claim 1, the combination does not teach providing at least one housing and gluing the ROIC to the housing by applying at least one further adhesive material.
Motegi, in the same field of endeavor as Zandian of ROIC, teaches mounting a ROIC to housing via an adhesive material (0051). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to combine a housing and further adhesive material with the combination’s ROIC to protect the electronics from external forces.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zandian US 9570428 in view of KIM US 20210256898 in further view of Robert McKeown, “Electronics Adhesives & Sealants”, Dec 22, 2017 hereafter McKeown in further view of Creative Live, “How Camera Sensors Pick up Light with John Greengo” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BsXIQkhsxEM, Jan 21, 2014 hereafter Creative Live.
With respect to claim 12 according to claim 10, the combination teaches the spectrometer wherein the electrooptical system comprises an array of individual pixel sensors “array of detector pixels” (col 3, lines 19-20 Zandian),
The combination does not specifically teach each of the individual pixel sensors has at least one photosensitive area adapted for generating the at least one electronic signal depending on an illumination of the photosensitive area by at least a portion of the electromagnetic radiation.
Creative Live, in the same field of endeavor as Zandian of photodetectors, teaches individual pixels are photosensitive areas which generate an electronic signal (fig 3) when illuminated by at least a portion of electromagnetic radiation (fig 1 & 2). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art the combination’s individual pixel sensor would have yield predictable results of generating an electronic signal based upon the illumination to characterize light.
PNG
media_image3.png
844
1350
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
840
1342
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
812
1406
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zandian US 9570428 in view of KIM US 20210256898 in further view of Robert McKeown, “Electronics Adhesives & Sealants”, Dec 22, 2017 hereafter McKeown in further view of Bartolome US 20210376179 in further Farnworth US 6432752.
With respect to claim 13 according to claim 10, the combination does not teach the ROIC comprises at least one bare semiconductor chip element previously separated from a wafer
Bartolome, in the same field of endeavor as Zandian of ROIC, teaches ROIC dies are singulated from a wafer and subsequently mounted onto a reconstituted wafer (0025, lines 0025). Examiner notes singulated ROIC are separated through process of dicing a semiconductor therefore the result is a semiconductor chip.
Bartolome does not specifically teach a bare semiconductor chip.
Farnworth, in the field of endeavor of fabricating semiconductors, teaches providing bare semiconductor chips are based on wafers having a plurality of dice locations (claim 5). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to singulate the combination’s ROIC from a wafer as a known technique to efficiently manufacture several photodetectors from a wafer.
Claim(s) 15 & 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zandian US 9570428 in view of KIM US 20210256898 in further view of Robert McKeown, “Electronics Adhesives & Sealants”, Dec 22, 2017 hereafter McKeown in further view of Wein US 20150136954.
With respect to claim 15 according to claim 10, the combination does not teach at least one wavelength-selective element configured for separating the electromagnetic radiation into a spectrum of constituent wavelength signals, wherein the wavelength-selective element is arranged in an optical path between a source of the electromagnetic radiation and the electro optical system.
Wein, in the field of endeavor of hyper spectral imaging, teaches a wavelength-selective element such as a filter (fig 2, 210) is placed between a light source (fig 1, wavelengths from a scene) and electro optical system comprising pixels on top of a ROIC (fig 2, 100) (0052, line 20). Wein further teaches each filter selects a narrow band wavelength separating light into constituent wavelength signals (0043, lines 15-20). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Wein’s wavelength-selective element with the combination’s electro optical system to observe desired spectrums from a scene.
With respect to claim 16 according to claim 10, the combination does not teach at least one wavelength-selective element configured for separating the electromagnetic radiation into a spectrum of constituent wavelength signals, wherein the wavelength-selective element is arranged in an optical path between an external source of the electromagnetic radiation and the electro optical system.
Wein, in the field of endeavor of hyper spectral imaging, teaches a wavelength-selective element such as a filter (fig 2, 210) is placed between a light source (fig 1, wavelengths from a scene) and electro optical system comprising pixels on top of a ROIC (fig 2, 100) (0052, line 20). Wein further teaches each filter selects a narrow band wavelength separating light into constituent wavelength signals (0043, lines 15-20). At the time prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Wein’s wavelength-selective element with the combination’s electro optical system to observe desired spectrums from a scene.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAURICE C SMITH whose telephone number is (571) 272-2526. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm EST.
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, Kara Geisel can be reached at (571) 272-2416. 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.
/MAURICE C SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights