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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
Figures 1-3 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Note: Applicant’s specification recites that Figs. 1-4 are “views illustrating the technology served as the background for the present disclosure” in paragraph [9], however, paragraph [48] states that Fig. 4 is “a front view illustrating an electro-conductive contact pin according to a preferred embodiment.” For the purposes of this examination, Examiner is interpreting claim 4 to not be construed as prior art. However, if Fig. 4 is prior art, it should be labeled as such, and the specification should be corrected to reflect this.
Claim Rejections – Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art
Claim(s) 1-13, 17, 19, and 20 is/are rejected as being anticipated by Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art (hereafter AAPA).
Applicant’s specification makes clear that Figs. 1-3 of the specification are drawn to “views illustrating the technology served as the background for the present disclosure” and are therefore prior art to the present invention. Furthermore, MPEP 2129 makes clear that “where the admitted prior art anticipates the claim but does not qualify as prior art under any of the paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102, the claim may be rejected as being anticipated by the admitted prior art without citing to 35 U.S.C. 102.” Therefore, even though the admitted prior art is “non-public internal technology” and therefore does not qualify as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102, the claims can still be rejected as being anticipated in view of Applicant’s disclosure.
Regarding claim 1, AAPA discloses an inspection device, comprising: an insert having a receiving portion configured to receive a semiconductor package (see AAPA Fig. 1, items 5 and 8); an interference member provided at a lower part of the insert, and protruding further downward than a terminal of the semiconductor package while the semiconductor package is received in the receiving portion of the insert (see AAPA Fig. 1, items 2-1, 2-2, and 8-1. Note that 2-1 and 2-2 protrude further than 8-1); a guide housing formed with a uniform overall thickness including a part corresponding to a position of the interference member (see AAPA Fig. 1, item 3); and an electro-conductive contact pin installed in the guide housing, wherein a protrusion length of the electro-conductive contact pin protruding upward from an upper surface of the guide housing is longer than a protrusion length of the interference member protruding downward from a lower end of the terminal (see AAPA FIG. 1, items 10 and 2-1, 2-2. Note that the pin 10 extends all the way from the guide housing 3 to the terminal of the semiconductor, while the interference members do not reach the guide housing.).
Regarding claim 4 AAPA discloses the inspection device of claim 1, wherein the electro-conductive contact pin comprises: a first connection portion connected to the terminal of the semiconductor package (see AAPA Fig. 1, top of item 10 contacting item 8-1); a second connection portion connected to a circuit board (see AAPA Fig. 1, item bottom of item 10 contacting item 6-1); a support portion facing an inner wall of the guide housing and extending in a length direction (see AAPA Fig. 1, outer rib portion of item 10); an elastic portion connected to at least one of the first connection portion and the second connection portion and configured to be elastically deformable along the length direction (see AAPA Fig. 1, spring portion of item 10); and a connecting portion connecting the elastic portion to the support portion (see AAPA Fig. 1, item 10, which shows the spring portion connected to the support portion).
Regarding claim 5, AAPA discloses the inspection device of claim 4, wherein the first connection portion comprises: a first contact portion configured to be brought into contact with the terminal; and a first flange extending downward from the first contact portion and provided between the elastic portion and the support portion (see AAPA Fig. 1, note that the top of the contact pin has substantially the same shape as the pin shown in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 6, AAPA discloses the inspection device of claim 5, wherein the first flange is brought into contact with an inner surface of the support portion as the elastic portion is compressed, thereby forming a current path (see AAPA Fig. 2, which shows that in the compressed state the flanges contact the support portion).
Regarding claim 7, AAPA discloses the inspection device of claim 5, wherein the support portion comprises: a first support portion located at a first side of the electro-conductive contact pin; and a second support portion located at a second side of the electro-conductive contact pin, wherein a dimension of the first contact portion in a width direction is smaller than a dimension between the first support portion and the second support portion, and the first flange is located within a region between the first support portion and the second support portion (see AAPA Fig. 1, note that the contact pin has substantially the same shape as the pin shown in Fig. 4).
Regrading claim 8, AAPA discloses an inspection device, comprising: an insert having a receiving portion configured to receive a semiconductor package (see AAPA Fig. 1, items 5 and 8); an interference member protruding further downward than a terminal of the semiconductor package while the semiconductor package is received in the receiving portion of the insert (see AAPA Fig. 1, items 2-1, 2-2, and 8-1); a guide housing formed with a uniform overall thickness including a part corresponding to a position of the interference member (see AAPA Fig. 1, item 3); and an electro-conductive contact pin installed in the guide housing (see AAPA Fig. 1, item 10), wherein in a pre-pusher pressurization step before pressurizing the semiconductor package toward the electro-conductive contact pin, the terminal of the semiconductor package does not make contact with the electro-conductive contact pin (this is a method step which does not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim. See MPEP 2114(II). Furthermore, any time when the contacts do not touch the pin (e.g. while the package is being loaded or removed) is a step which can be construed as “pre-pusher pressurization.”).
Regarding claims 2, 3, and 9-13, the claims are drawn to the manner of operating the device which does not differentiate the device from the prior art (see MPEP 2114(II)). The relative positions of the components while in use are not structural limitations of the device itself, as the device need not conduct the steps called for in the claims. As noted in MPEP 2114(II) “apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). The claim limitations about the relative spacing of components while the device is in operation therefore do not distinguish the invention over the prior art.
Claim 13 does have a structural limitation, however AAPA discloses that the electro-conductive contact pin comprises an elastic portion formed by alternately connecting a plurality of straight portions and a plurality of curved portions (see AAPA Fig. 1, item 10).
Regarding claim 17 AAPA discloses an inspection device, comprising: a guide housing formed with a uniform overall thickness (see AAPA Fig.1 , item 3); and an electro-conductive contact pin installed in the guide housing (see AAPA Fig. 1, item 10), wherein the electro-conductive contact pin comprises: a first connection portion connected to a terminal of a semiconductor package (see AAPA Fig. 1, items 10 and 8-1); a second connection portion connected to a circuit board (see AAPA Fig. 1, items 10 and 6-1); a support portion facing an inner wall of the guide housing and extending in a length direction; an elastic portion connected to at least one of the first connection portion and the second connection portion and configured to be elastically deformable along the length direction; and a connecting portion connecting the elastic portion to the support portion (see AAPA Fig. 1, item 10 which has substantially the same shape as the pin shown in Fig. 4), wherein a protrusion length of the first connection portion protruding from an upper surface of the guide housing is longer than a protrusion of the second connection portion protruding from a lower surface of the guide housing (see AAPA Fig.1, item 10. While drawings are not to scale, they can be relied on for “for what they would reasonably teach one of ordinary skill in the art” (see MPEP 2125(II)). Fig. 1 clearly shows that the top portion of pin 10 extends far further than the bottom portion of pin 10 from the guide), the first connection portion and the second connection portion are displaceable in a vertical direction, wherein a displacement range of the first connection portion is longer than that of the second connection portion, and at least one of the first connection portion and the second connection portion is brought into contact with the support portion during displacement to form a current path (see AAPA Fig. 2, which shows the displacement of the pin and the connection portion being brought into contact with the support portion).
Regarding claim 19, AAPA discloses the inspection device of claim 17, wherein the first connection portion comprises: a first contact portion configured to be brought into contact with the terminal; and a first flange extending downward from the first contact portion and provided between the elastic portion and the support portion, wherein downward displacement of the first flange causes a lower end of the first flange to be brought into contact with the connecting portion, thereby stopping further downward movement of the first contact portion (see AAPA Fig. 1, item 10 which has substantially the same shape as the pin shown in Fig. 4).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over AAPA in view of Zhou et al. (Pub. No. US 2002/0048973 A1; hereafter Zhou).
Regarding claim 18, AAPA discloses the inspection device of claim 17, but does not disclose that the guide housing is made of a polyimide material.
Zhou discloses that it was well known in the art at the time the invention was filed to make a guide house out of a polyimide material (see Zhou paragraph [0052] “In this example, the contactor carrier 20 is comprised of a system carrier 22 and a top retainer 24. The contactor carrier 20 is made of dielectric material such as silicon, polyimide, ceramic or glass.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to make the guide housing shown in AAPA out of polyimide as taught by Zhou in order to use a well-known material known to be useful for the purpose.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 8-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lopergolo et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,800,184; hereafter Lopergolo) in view of Eldridge (Pub. No. US 2001/0012704 A1; hereafter Eldridge).
Regarding claim 1, Lopergolo discloses an inspection device, comprising: an insert having a receiving portion configured to receive a semiconductor package (see Lopergolo Fig. 3, items 39 and 12); a guide housing formed with a uniform overall thickness including a part corresponding to a position of the interference member (see Lopergolo Fig. 3, item 45); and an electro-conductive contact pin installed in the guide housing, (see Lopergolo FIG. 3, items 43 and 26).
Lopergolo further discloses an interference member provided at a lower part of the guide housing, wherein a protrusion length of the electro-conductive contact pin is longer than a protrusion length of the interference member protruding downward from a lower end of the guide housing (see Lopergolo Fig. 1, item 28). However, Lopergolo does not disclose that an interference member is provided at a lower part of the insert, and protruding further downward than a terminal of the semiconductor package while the semiconductor package is received in the receiving portion of the insert; wherein a protrusion length of the electro-conductive contact pin protruding upward from an upper surface of the guide housing is longer than a protrusion length of the interference member protruding downward from a lower end of the terminal.
Eldridge discloses that the interference member can be relatively freely placed in the device. Fig. 6A shows the interference member 606 on the opposite side as the contacts, Fig. 7 shows the interference member 626 on the same side as the contacts. Fig. 11 shows the interference member 1121 on the opposite side of the pressing portion, Fig. 12B shows the interference member 1258 on the same side as the pressing portion.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to relocate the interference portion from the guide housing of Lopergolo to the insert portion of Lopergolo (similar to the embodiment where the interference member is on the pressing portion in Fig. 12B of Eldridge) as an obvious rearrangement of the components as shown in Eldridge to yield predictable results.
Regarding claim 8, Lopergolo discloses an inspection device, comprising: an insert having a receiving portion configured to receive a semiconductor package (see Lopergolo Fig. 3, items 39 and 12); an interference member protruding further downward than a terminal of the semiconductor package while the semiconductor package is received in the receiving portion of the insert (see Lopergolo Fig. 1, item 28, which extends further down than the terminals 16. While Fig. 3 is a different embodiment than that in Fig. 1, it would have been obvious to supply the interference members of the embodiment of Fig. 1 in the guide member of Fig. 3 in order to prevent undesired contact between the guide and the substrate.); a guide housing formed with a uniform overall thickness including a part corresponding to a position of the interference member (see Lopergolo Fig. 3, item 45); and an electro-conductive contact pin installed in the guide housing (see Lopergolo Fig. 3, item 43), wherein in a pre-pusher pressurization step before pressurizing the semiconductor package toward the electro-conductive contact pin, the terminal of the semiconductor package does not make contact with the electro-conductive contact pin (this is a method step which does not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim. See MPEP 2114(II). Furthermore, any time when the contacts do not touch the pin (e.g. while the package is being loaded or removed) is a step which can be construed as “pre-pusher pressurization.”).
Regarding claims 2, 3, and 9-13, the claims are drawn to the manner of operating the device which does not differentiate the device from the prior art (see MPEP 2114(II)). The relative positions of the components while in use are not structural limitations of the device itself, as the device need not conduct the steps called for in the claims. As noted in MPEP 2114(II) “apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). The claim limitations about the relative spacing of components while the device is in operation therefore do not distinguish the invention over the prior art.
Claim 13 does have a structural limitation, and Lopergolo does not disclose that the electro-conductive contact pin comprises an elastic portion formed by alternately connecting a plurality of straight portions and a plurality of curved portions. However, this feature will be addressed below.
Regarding claim 4 Lopergolo as modified discloses the inspection device of claim 1, wherein the electro-conductive contact pin comprises: a first connection portion connected to the terminal of the semiconductor package (see Lopergolo Figs. 3 and 4C, items 46 and 16); a second connection portion connected to a circuit board (see Lopergolo Figs. 3 and 4C, items 36 and 26); a support portion facing an inner wall of the guide housing and extending in a length direction (see Lopergolo Figs. 3 and 4C, items 45 and 48); an elastic portion connected to at least one of the first connection portion and the second connection portion and configured to be elastically deformable along the length direction (see Lopergolo Figs. 3 and 4C, items 36 and 52); and a connecting portion connecting the elastic portion to the support portion (see Lopergolo Fig. 4C, item 51).
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lopergolo in view of Eldridge as applied to claim 12, above, and further in view of Zhou.
As noted above, regarding claim 13, Lopergolo does not disclose that the electro-conductive contact pin comprises an elastic portion formed by alternately connecting a plurality of straight portions and a plurality of curved portions.
Zhou discloses that the electro-conductive contact pin comprises an elastic portion formed by alternately connecting a plurality of straight portions and a plurality of curved portions (see Zhou Fig. 5, items 32 and 36).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to form the pins of Lopergolo as spring pins like those in Zhou in order to give the pins the desired resilience.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAM S REISNER whose telephone number is (571)270-7542. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:30PM.
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.
/NOAM REISNER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852 9/10/2026
Prosecution Insights