FINAL OFFICE ACTION
This final Office action addresses U.S. Application No. 18/885,193, which is a broadening reissue application of U.S. Application No. 17/210,406 (hereinafter the “406 Application"), entitled PRINTED CIRCUIT BOARD ASSEMBLY, which issued as U.S. Patent No. 11,445,610 (hereinafter the “610 Patent").
The status of the claims is as follows:
Claims 20-39 are pending and examined herein.
Claims 28, 33 and 35 are objected to.
Claims 20-27, 29-32, 34 and 36-39 are rejected.
I. STATUS OF CLAIMS
Applicant filed an amendment on June 11, 2026 (hereinafter the “June 2026 Amendment”) in response to a non-final Office action mailed March 11, 2026 (hereinafter the “2026 NF Action”). In the June 2026 Amendment, claims 20, 23-27, 32 and 39 were amended and claims 21, 22, 28-31 and 33-38 were unchanged with respect to the prior versions of these claims.
Therefore, claims 20-39 are pending and will be examined.
II. PRIORITY
Examiners acknowledge the Applicant’s claim that present application is a reissue application of the 406 Application, now the 610 Patent. Examiners further acknowledge the claim of foreign priority to Korean Application No. KR10-2020-0088155, filed July 16, 2020 and Korean Application No. KR10-2021-0001416, filed June 6, 2021.
III. CLAIM INTERPRETATION
After careful review of the original specification, the prosecution history, and unless expressly noted otherwise by the Examiners, the Examiners find that they are unable to locate any lexicographic definitions (either express or implied) with the required clarity, deliberateness, and precision with regard to pending and examined claims. Because the Examiners are unable to locate any lexicographic definitions with the required clarity, deliberateness, and precision, the Examiners conclude that Applicant is not his own lexicographer for the pending and examined claims. See MPEP §2111.01(IV).
The Examiners further find that because the pending and examined claims herein recite neither “step for” nor “means for” nor any substitute therefore, the examined claims fail Prong (A) as set forth in MPEP §2181(I). Because all examined claims fail Prong (A) as set forth in MPEP §2181(I), the Examiners conclude that all examined claims do not invoke 35 U.S.C. §112(f). See also Ex parte Miyazaki, 89 USPQ2d 1207, 1215-16 (B.P.A.I. 2008)(precedential)(where the Board did not invoke 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) because “means for” was not recited and because applicant still possessed an opportunity to amend the claims).
Because of the Examiners’ findings above that Applicant is not his own lexicographer and the pending and examined claims do not invoke 35 U.S.C. §112(f) the pending and examined claims will be given the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification since patentee has an opportunity to amend claims. See MPEP §2111, MPEP §2111.01 and In re Yamamoto et al., 222 USPQ 934 (Fed. Cir. 1984). Under a broadest reasonable interpretation, words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. See MPEP §2111.01(I). It is further noted it is improper to import claim limitations from the specification, i.e., a particular embodiment appearing in the written description may not be read into a claim when the claim language is broader than the embodiment. See MPEP §2111.01(II).
IV. CLAIM REJECTIONS – 35 U.S.C. §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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
IV.A. Anticipation Rejections Applying Brunker
Claims 20-26, 29-31 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0298304 to David Brunker et al. (hereinafter “Brunker”).
Regarding claim 20, Brunker discloses:
20. (New) A printed circuit board (PCB) assembly, comprising:
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2d, reprinted below:
PNG
media_image1.png
730
448
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
566
476
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Brunker FIG. 1c Brunker FIG. 2
a first PCB configured to have a first hole and a second hole;
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, first PCB 20, which has two holes 37 therein for association with holes 140 in holder 150/150’.
a second PCB, configured to be disposed adjacently to the first PCB, and having a third hole and a fourth hole respectively;
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, first PCB 30, which has two holes 37 therein for association with holes 140 in holder 150/150’.
a holder for coupling the first PCB to the second PCB; and
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, holder 150/150’.
a fixing screw for fixing the holder to the first PCB and the second PCB,
See Brunker ¶0063 wherein screws are inserted through holes 140/37 to secure the PCBs 20 and 30 together using holder 150/150’.
wherein the holder includes:
an upper plate disposed on the first PCB and the second PCB, supporting upper surfaces of the first PCB and the second PCB, and including a fifth hole disposed on the first hole and a sixth hole disposed on the third hole;
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, holder upper plate 150 having holes 140.
a lower plate disposed below the first PCB and the second PCB, supporting lower surfaces of the first PCB and the second PCB, and including a seventh hole disposed below the first hole and an eighth hole disposed below the third hole; and
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, lower holder plate 150’ having holes 140.
a protrusion disposed between the first PCB and the second PCB, and connecting the upper plate to the lower plate,
See Brunker FIG. 7 and ¶0069 wherein protrusion is used to couple the holder plates 150/150’ together as shown in FIGS. 1c and 2.
wherein the fixing screw includes:
a first fixing screw penetrating the fifth hole, the first hole and the seventh hole, and fixing the upper plate and the lower plate to the first PCB; and a second fixing screw penetrating the sixth hole, the third hole and the eighth hole, and fixing the upper plate and the lower plate to the second PCB,
See Brunker ¶0063 wherein screws are inserted through holes 140/37 to secure the PCBs 20 and 30 together using holder 150/150’.
wherein the first PCB includes a first electrical connection portion spaced apart from the first hole on one side surface,
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, note connectors which would be provided on the upper side surface of the PCB 20 to contact the electrical contacts in the upper holder plate 150’.
wherein the second PCB includes a second electrical connection portion having at least one region protruding outwardly from one side surface of the second PCB,
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, note connector/traces 35/36 protruding from the one side surface 32/32’/32’’ of the PCB 30.
wherein the first hole and the second hole are spaced apart, wherein the first hole, the first electrical connection portion and the second hole are spaced apart from each other in order on one side surface of the first PCB, and wherein the third hole, the second electrical connection portion and the fourth hole are spaced apart from each other in order on one side surface of the second PCB,
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, note arrangement of holes 140/37 and connector/traces 35/36 on PCBs 20 and 30 with respect to holes 140 in holder 150/150’.
wherein one side of the first PCB and one side of the second PCB facing each other are electrically contact each other.
See Brunker FIGS. 1 and 2c wherein the side of the first PCB 20 and second PCB 30 electrically contact each other through the holder 105/150’, i.e., the holder provides and electrical connection between electrical contacts as shown for example in FIG. 15a, reprinted below.
PNG
media_image3.png
146
478
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Brunker FIG. 15a
Regarding claim 21, Brunker discloses the assembly of claim 20 as evidenced above and further wherein
21. (New) The PCB assembly of claim 20, wherein the holder has an H-beam shape when viewed from the side surface.
See Brunker FIG. 1d, reprinted below showing the holder has a generally sideways H-beam shape when viewed from this side surface.
PNG
media_image4.png
198
486
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Brunker FIG. 1d
Regarding claim 22, Brunker discloses the assembly of claim 20 as evidenced above and further wherein:
22. (New) The PCB assembly of claim 20, wherein the upper plate, the lower plate and the protrusion are formed as an integrated body.
See Brunker FIG. 7 and ¶0069 wherein protrusion is used to integrate the holder plates 150/150’ together as shown in FIGS. 1c and 2.
Regarding claim 23, Brunker discloses the assembly of claim 20 as evidenced above and further wherein:
23. (New - amended) The PCB assembly of claim 20, wherein the first hole and the second hole are disposed adjacently to one side surface of the first PCB, and wherein the third hole and the fourth hole are disposed adjacently to one side surface of the second PCB facing one side surface of the first PCB.
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, note arrangement of holes 140/37 and connector/traces 35/36 on PCBs 20 and 30 with respect to holes 140 in holder 150/150’.
Regarding claim 24, Brunker discloses the assembly of claim 20 as evidenced above and further wherein:
24. (New - amended) The PCB assembly of claim 20, wherein diameters of the fifth hole and the sixth hole are greater than diameters of the first hole and the second hole, the third hole and the fourth hole.
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above and further ¶0063 wherein “the aperture 140 may be adapted to accept a screw and in such a case the aperture 140 may be configured with one side that provides clearance for threads on the screw while the other side of the aperture 140 is configured to securely receive the threads.”
Regarding claim 25, Brunker discloses the assembly of claim 24 as evidenced above and further wherein:
25. (New - amended) The PCB assembly of - amended) The PCB assembly of claim 24, wherein the seventh hole has a shape corresponding to a shape of the first fixing screw, and wherein the eighth hole has a shape corresponding to a shape of the second fixing screw.
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above and further ¶0063 wherein “the aperture 140 may be adapted to accept a screw and in such a case the aperture 140 may be configured with one side that provides clearance for threads on the screw while the other side of the aperture 140 is configured to securely receive the threads.”
Regarding claim 26, Brunker discloses the assembly of claim 20 as evidenced above and further wherein:
26. (New - amended) The PCB assembly of claim 20, wherein the upper plate includes: a first support portion protruding from a sidewall of the fifth hole into the fifth hole; and a second support portion protruding from a sidewall of the sixth hole into the sixth hole, wherein the first support portion supports a screw head of the first fixing screw, and wherein the second support portion supports a screw head of the second fixing screw.
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, note chamfers on holes 140 for supporting head of screws, which provide a protrusion into the holes and further supports the head of the screws.
Regarding claim 29, Brunker discloses the assembly of claim 20 as evidenced above and further wherein:
29. (New) The PCB assembly of claim 20 wherein a weight of the first PCB is different from a weight of the second PCB, and wherein, in the holder, a shape of a region accommodating the first PCB and a shape of a region accommodating the second PCB are different to correspond to weights of the first PCB and the second PCB, respectively.
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, note different widths of the PCBs 20 and 30 which implies different weights and shapes thereof.
Regarding claim 30, Brunker discloses the assembly of claim 20 as evidenced above and further wherein:
30. (New) The PCB assembly of claim 20, wherein a thickness of a layer included in the first PCB is different from a thickness of a layer included in the second PCB, and wherein, in the holder, distances between the upper plate and the lower plate are different in a region accommodating the first PCB and a region accommodating the second PCB to correspond to a thickness of a layer included in the first PCB and a thickness of a layer included in the second PCB.
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, note different widths of the PCBs 20 and 30.
Regarding claim 31, Brunker discloses the assembly of claim 20 as evidenced above and further wherein:
31. (New) The PCB assembly of claim 20, wherein the protrusion passes through at least one region of the first PCB and the second PCB, and connecting the upper plate to the lower plate.
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above and FIG. 7, note protrusion that integrates the plates 150/150’ passes through notches 32, 32’, 32’’ in the PCBs 20 and 30.
Regarding claim 39, Brunker discloses:
39. (New - amended) A device, comprising the PCB assembly of claim 20.
See discussion above for claim 20.
V. CLAIM REJECTIONS – 35 U.S.C. §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.
V.A. Obviousness Rejections Applying Brunker and Fuchs
Claims 27, 32, 34 and 36-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brunker in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0184281 to Viktor Fuchs et al. (hereinafter “Fuchs”).
Regarding claim 27, Brunker teaches the features of claims 20 and 26 as evidenced above, but not lower plate extensions. Nevertheless, Fuchs at FIG. 2, reprinted below, teaches a manner of fixing PCB plates with screws wherein the threaded portion comprises extension portions 14 formed by extending the fifth hole via inserts and protruding from a lower surface of the lower plate. It would have been
PNG
media_image5.png
236
448
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Fuchs FIG. 2
obvious at the time the invention was filed to provide extensions for the threaded fifth and sixth holes in the lower holder plate 150’ of Brunker as taught by Fuchs. One having ordinary skill in the art would do so to provide extended threaded holes for more increased and robust fastening of the screws.
Regarding claim 32, Brunker teaches:
32. (New – amended) A holder for coupling a first printed circuit board (PCB) including a first hole to a second PCB disposed adjacently to the first PCB and having a second hole disposed opposite to the first hole, the holder comprising:
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, holder 150/150’ for holding together PCBs 20 and 30 having holes 37 therein.
an upper plate disposed on the first PCB and the second PCB, supporting upper surfaces of the first PCB and the second PCB, and including a third hole disposed on the first hole and a fourth hole disposed on the second hole;
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, holder upper plate 150 having holes 140.
a lower plate disposed below the first PCB and the second PCB, supporting lower surfaces of the first PCB and the second PCB, and including a fifth hole disposed below the first hole and a sixth hole disposed below the second hole; and
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, holder lower plate 150’ having holes 140.
a protrusion disposed between the first PCB and the second PCB, and connecting the upper plate to the lower plate,
See Brunker FIG. 7 and ¶0069 wherein protrusion located between upper and lower plates 150/150’ and is used to couple the holder plates 150/150’ together as shown in FIGS. 1c and 2.
wherein the upper plate includes: a first support portion supporting a lower surface of a screw head of a first fixing screw for fixing the first PCB to the holder through the first hole; and
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, holder upper plate 150 having holes 140 with chamfers for supporting the screw heads.
a second support portion supporting a lower surface of a screw head of a second fixing screw for fixing the second PCB to the holder through the second hole,
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, holder upper plate 150 having holes 140 with chamfers for supporting the screw heads.
However, while Brunker suggest threads in the lower plate for accepting the screws, Brunker does not discloses extensions for the threaded areas protruding from the lower surface of the holder plate 150’. Nevertheless, Fuchs at FIG. 2, reprinted above, teaches a manner of fixing PCB plates with screws wherein the threaded portion comprises extension portions 14 formed by extending the fifth hole via inserts and protruding from a lower surface of the lower plate. It would have been obvious at the time the invention was filed to provide extensions for the threaded fifth and sixth holes in the lower holder plate 150’ of Brunker as taught by Fuchs. One having ordinary skill in the art would do so to provide extended threaded holes for more increased and robust fastening of the screws.
wherein one side of the first PCB and one side of the second PCB facing each other are electrically contact each other.
See Brunker FIGS. 1 and 2c wherein the side of the first PCB 20 and second PCB 30 electrically contact each other through the holder 105/150’, i.e., the holder provides and electrical connection between electrical contacts as shown for example in FIG. 15a, reprinted above.
Regarding claim 34, Brunker and Fuchs teach the holder of claim 32 and further wherein:
34. (New) The holder of claim 32, wherein the third hole has a diameter greater than a diameter of the fifth hole, and wherein the fourth hole has a diameter greater than a diameter of the sixth hole.
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above and further ¶0063 wherein “the aperture 140 may be adapted to accept a screw and in such a case the aperture 140 may be configured with one side that provides clearance for threads on the screw while the other side of the aperture 140 is configured to securely receive the threads.”
Regarding claim 36, Brunker and Fuchs teach the holder of claim 32 and further wherein:
36. (New) The holder of claim 32, wherein each of the fifth hole and the sixth hole has a female screw shape on an internal surface thereof.
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above and further ¶0063 wherein “the aperture 140 may be adapted to accept a screw and in such a case the aperture 140 may be configured with one side that provides clearance for threads on the screw while the other side of the aperture 140 is configured to securely receive the threads.”
Regarding claim 37, Brunker and Fuchs teach the holder of claim 32 and further wherein:
37. (New) The holder of claim 32, wherein an upper diameter of the third hole is greater than an internal diameter formed in the first extension portion.
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above and further ¶0063 wherein “the aperture 140 may be adapted to accept a screw and in such a case the aperture 140 may be configured with one side that provides clearance for threads on the screw while the other side of the aperture 140 is configured to securely receive the threads.” The threads on the lower plate and in the extension would imply a smaller diameter of hole.
Regarding claim 38, Brunker and Fuchs teach the holder of claim 32 and further wherein:
38. (New) The holder of claim 32, wherein an upper diameter of the fourth hole is greater than an internal diameter formed in the second extension portion.
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above and further ¶0063 wherein “the aperture 140 may be adapted to accept a screw and in such a case the aperture 140 may be configured with one side that provides clearance for threads on the screw while the other side of the aperture 140 is configured to securely receive the threads.” The threads on the lower plate and in the extension would imply a smaller diameter of hole.
VI. ALLOWABLE SUBJECT MATTER
Claims 28, 33 and 35 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.
Regarding claim 28, the prior art of record in this application does not show or teach the arrangement of the first and second holders and the electrical connections as recited in the claim and in combination with the other features of the claim.
Regarding claim 33, the prior art of record in this application does not disclose or teach the protraction accommodated in an insertion portion forming in the at least one of the first or second PCB as recited in the claim and in combination with the other features of the claim.
Regarding claim 35, the prior art of record in this application does not disclose or teach the diameters of the holes in the lower plate of the holder decreasing in a direction of the lower end as recited in the claim and in combination with the other features of the claim.
VII. EXAMINERS’ RESPONSES TO APPLICANT’S ARGUMENTS
Examiners have fully considered the Applicant’s arguments provided in the June 2026 Amendment. In view thereof, all objections and rejections provided in the 2026 NF Action are withdrawn. However, in view of the amendments to the claims, new/amended rejections applying Brunker and Fuchs are provided in this action.
Applicant’s only argument relevant to the rejections provided in this Office action in the June 2026 Amendment is that the applied prior art does not read on the feature wherein “one side of the first PCB and one side of the second PCB facing each other are electrically contact each other.” See June 2026 Amendment pages 18-20. Examiners disagree. As noted above in the rejections Brunker discloses precisely electrically connecting (contact) the first and second PCBs 20 and 30 via conductors 200 within the holder 150/150’ (See Bunker FIG. 15a above).
VIII. PRIOR OR CONCURRENT PROCEEDINGS
Applicant is reminded of the obligation apprise the Office of any prior or concurrent proceedings in which the 610 Patent is or was involved, such as interferences or trials before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, reissues, reexaminations, or litigations and the results of such proceedings.
IX. INFORMATION MATERIAL TO PATENTABILITY
Applicant is further reminded of the continuing obligation under 37 C.F.R. §1.56 to timely apprise the Office of any information which is material to patentability of the claims under consideration in this reissue application.
X. CONCLUSION
Claims 28, 33 and 35 are objected to.
Claims 20-27, 29-32, 34 and 36-39 are rejected.
Applicant's substantial amendments provided in the June 2026 Amendment necessitated the new/amended grounds of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP §706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 C.F.R. §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 C.F.R. §1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §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.
The prior art made of record which is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure is listed on the document titled ‘Notice of Reference Cited’ (“PTO-892”). Unless expressly noted otherwise by the Examiners, all documents listed on the PTO-892 are cited in their entirety.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to KENNETH WHITTINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-2264. The Examiner can normally be reached on 8:30am - 5:00pm, Monday - Friday.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Andrew J. Fischer, SPE Art Unit 3992, can be reached at (571) 272-6779. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-9900.
/KENNETH WHITTINGTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Conferees:
/MY TRANG TON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3992
/ANDREW J. FISCHER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3992
Prosecution Insights