NON-FINAL OFFICE ACTION
This non-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 20-39 are rejected.
I. STATUS OF CLAIMS
Applicant filed a preliminary amendment on September 13, 2024 (hereinafter the “2024 Preliminary Amendment”) along with the filing of the present application. In the 2024 Preliminary Amendment, patent claims 1-19 were cancelled and new claims 20-39 were added. Furthermore, the specification was amended.
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. OBJECTION TO CLAIM AMENDMENTS
37 C.F.R. 1.173 Reissue specification, drawings, and amendments.
(c) Status of claims and support for claim changes. Whenever there is an amendment to the claims pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section, there must also be supplied, on pages separate from the pages containing the changes, the status (i.e., pending or canceled), as of the date of the amendment, of all patent claims and of all added claims, and an explanation of the support in the disclosure of the patent for the changes made to the claims.
(d) Changes shown by markings. Any changes relative to the patent being reissued that are made to the specification, including the claims but excluding "Large Tables" (§ 1.58(c) ), a "Computer Program Listing Appendix" (§ 1.96(c) ), a "Sequence Listing" (§ 1.821(c) ), and a "Sequence Listing XML" (§ 1.831(a) ) upon filing or by an amendment paper in the reissue application, must include the following markings:
(1) The matter to be omitted by reissue must be enclosed in brackets; and
(2) The matter to be added by reissue must be underlined.
(g) Amendments made relative to the patent. All amendments must be made relative to the patent specification, including the claims, and drawings, which are in effect as of the date of filing of the reissue application.
The amendments to the claims in the 2024 Preliminary Amendment are objected to because they are improper because they are not made with respect to the original patent, i.e., the 610 Patent. Since all claims 20-39 are new with respect to the 610 Patent, they should be fully underlined, including all of claim numbers, identifiers and text. See MPEP §1453(V)(C). Appropriate correction is required.
Furthermore, Examiners find that Applicant has not provided any explanation of support for the claim changes as explicitly required in the rules above. For example, Applicant is required to provide an explanation of support that allows Applicant to delete the PCB contact features of the patent claims when presenting new claims 20-39. Such an explanation goes to the merits of the original patent requirement of 35 U.S.C. §251. Appropriate correction is required in response to this Office action is required and will not be held in abeyance.
IV. OBJECTIONS TO THE SPECIFICATION
The specification is first objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 C.F.R. §1.75(d)(1) and MPEP §608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the specification is required to provide proper antecedent basis for “a 1-1 hole,” “a 1-2 hole,” “a 2-1 hole,” and “a 2-2 hole” as recited in claims 20-31. While Examiners recognize an attempt to add these features to the 2024 Preliminary Amendment, Examiners nevertheless find they raise an issue of new matter as provided in the next paragraph.
The amendments to the specification in the 2024 Preliminary Amendment are further objected to under 35 U.S.C. §132(a) because they introduce new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. §132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: for “a 1-1 hole,” “a 1-2 hole,” “a 2-1 hole,” and “a 2-2 hole” as recited. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
V. CLAIM REJECTIONS – 35 U.S.C. §112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. §112(b):
(b) 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.
V.A. Indefiniteness Rejections
Claims 20-31 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §112(2nd ¶) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claims 20-31 recite that “the first hole includes a 1-1 hole and a 1-2 hole” and further that “the second hole includes a 2-1 hole and a 2-2 hole.” Thus, Examiners find the claims recite holes that each include two holes which Examiners do not find makes sense. How can a hole itself include two other holes? What does this limitation mean? Examiners and one having ordinary skill would not understand how one hole would include two holes and thus conclude the claims are indefinite.
VI. CLAIM REJECTIONS – 35 U.S.C. §251
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. §251:
Whenever any patent is, through error without any deceptive intention, deemed wholly or partly inoperative or invalid, by reason of a defective specification or drawing, or by reason of the patentee claiming more or less than he had a right to claim in the patent, the Director shall, on the surrender of such patent and the payment of the fee required by law, reissue the patent for the invention disclosed in the original patent, and in accordance with a new and amended application, for the unexpired part of the term of the original patent. No new matter shall be introduced into the application for reissue.
VI.A. Rejection Based on New Matter
Claims 20-31 and 33 and this application as a whole are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §251 as being based upon the inclusion of new matter as set forth above.
First, claims 20-31 have been amended to recite the first and second hole each include two holes. Furthermore, Examiners find the specification and the claims have been amended to recite “a 1-1 hole,” “a 1-2 hole,” “a 2-1 hole,” and “a 2-2 hole” which lack a written description in the specification of the 610 Patent. Furthermore, claims 20-31 recite that “the first hole includes a 1-1 hole and a 1-2 hole” and further that “the second hole includes a 2-1 hole and a 2-2 hole” which also lacks a written description. Examiners are unable to find support for these limitations in the specification of the 610 Patent and thus conclude these new limitations are new matter in this reissue application.
Second, claims 20-31 additionally recite “wherein the first PCB includes a first electrical connection portion spaced apart from the first hole on one side surface, 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.” Examiners find both these limitations imply that the connection portions are on or protrude from the side surfaces of the PCBs. However, the specification and drawings only support for the connection portions to be placed on the upper surfaces of the PCBs. See e.g., FIG. 2B which shows connection portions 123 and 113 on upper surfaces of PCBs 110 and 120. Accordingly, to now cite these connections are on or protrude from the side surfaces lacks written description and is new matter in this reissue application.
Third, claim 33 recites “wherein the protrusion is configured such that a portion or entirety of the protrusion is accommodated in an insertion portion formed in at least one of the first PCB or the second PCB.” Examiners are unable to find support for this feature in the 610 Patent. Rather, with respect to FIG. 3B, Examiners find that the protrusions 158 are placed on the lower surface of the holder 150 and the PCBs are accommodated in the middle slot of the holder 150. Accordingly, to now recite these protrusions are accommodated in any portion of the PCBs lacks written description and thus is new matter in this reissue application.
VI.B. Rejection Based on Recapture
Claim 20-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §251 as being an impermissible recapture of broadened claimed subject matter surrendered in the application for the patent upon which the present reissue is based. In re McDonald, 43 F.4th 1340, 1345, 2022 USPQ2d 745 (Fed. Cir. 2022); Greenliant Systems, Inc. et al v. Xicor LLC, 692 F.3d 1261, 103 USPQ2d 1951 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In re Youman, 679 F.3d 1335, 102 USPQ2d 1862 (Fed. Cir. 2012); In re Shahram Mostafazadeh and Joseph O. Smith, 643 F.3d 1353, 98 USPQ2d 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2011); North American Container, Inc. v. Plastipak Packaging, Inc., 415 F.3d 1335, 75 USPQ2d 1545 (Fed. Cir. 2005); Pannu v. Storz Instruments Inc., 258 F.3d 1366, 59 USPQ2d 1597 (Fed. Cir. 2001); Hester Industries, Inc. v. Stein, Inc., 142 F.3d 1472, 46 USPQ2d 1641 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Clement, 131 F.3d 1464, 45 USPQ2d 1161 (Fed. Cir. 1997); Ball Corp. v. United States, 729 F.2d 1429, 1436, 221 USPQ 289, 295 (Fed. Cir. 1984). The reissue application contains claim(s) that are broader than the issued patent claims. The record of the application for the patent family shows that the broadening aspect (in the reissue) relates to claimed subject matter that applicant previously surrendered during the prosecution of the application. Accordingly, the narrow scope of the claims in the patent was not an error within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. §251, and the broader scope of claim subject matter surrendered in the application for the patent cannot be recaptured by the filing of the present reissue application.
A reissue will not be granted to "recapture" claimed subject matter which was surrendered in an application to obtain the original patent. See MPEP §1412.20. A three-step process is used to apply the recapture rule:
“(1) first, we determine whether, and in what respect, the reissue claims are broader in scope than the original patent claims;
(2) next, we determine whether the broader aspects of the reissue claims relate to subject matter surrendered in the original prosecution; and
(3) finally, we determine whether the reissue claims were materially narrowed in other respects, so that the claims may not have been enlarged, and hence avoid the recapture rule.” See MPEP §1412.02(I).
Recapture Step 1 Analysis
Regarding step 1, upon review of claims 20-39 as presented in this reissue application in comparison to claims 1-20 of the 610 Patent, Examiners find that Applicant has through the 2024 Preliminary Amendment broadened the scope of the patented claims by specifically deleting the feature “wherein a one side surface of the first PCB and a one side surface of the second PCB facing each other are configured to contact each other” in the presentation of claims 20-39. This broadening with respect to the patent claims occurs in all pending claims 20-39.
Recapture Step 2 Analysis
During prosecution of the 406 Application, an examiner’s amendment was authorized by the Applicant’s representative Brian Cash as noted in the Notice of Allowance mailed May 13, 2022, wherein the feature “wherein a one side surface of the first PCB and a one side surface of the second PCB facing each other are configured to contact each other” was specifically added to all claims. Thus, Examiners further determine that Applicant specifically added/authorized the addition of this language to achieve allowance of the claims and thus surrendered claims without this feature.
Examiners further find now that Applicant has deleted this surrendered subject matter deleted from the patented claims in the presentation of pending claims 20-39. Thus, Examiners determine that the broadening aspects of the claims are directly related to the surrendered subject matter.
Recapture Step 3 Analysis
Regarding step 3, Examiners determine that the claims 20-39 have not been materially narrowed in other respects to overcome the broadening aspect to avoid recapture. If a surrender generating limitation has been entirely eliminated from a claim present in the reissue application, then a recapture rejection under 35 U.S.C. §251 may be proper. See MPEP 1412.02(II)(C). Applicant in this reissue application has entirely eliminated the subject matter surrendered during prosecution of the 406 Patent. Specifically, Applicant has entirely deleted the requirement that the side surfaces of the printed circuit boards contact each other. Thus, Examiners find no material narrowing of the surrendered subject matter.
In view of the forgoing, since Applicant specifically added the subject matter requiring contact between the side surfaces of the printed circuit boards to achieve the allowance and issuance of patent claims 1-19 of the 610 Patent, Examiners conclude that deletion/removal of such subject matter from the claims in this reissue application is improper recapture of surrendered subject matter.
VII. OBJECTION TO THE DRAWINGS
The drawings are objected to under 37 C.F.R. §1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the features (1) “wherein the first PCB includes a first electrical connection portion spaced apart from the first hole on one side surface, 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” as recited in claims 20-39, (2) “wherein the protrusion is configured such that a portion or entirety of the protrusion is accommodated in an insertion portion formed in at least one of the first PCB or the second PCB” as recited in claim 33 and (3) “wherein each of the fifth hole and the sixth hole has a shape in which a diameter thereof decreases in a direction of a lower end” as recited in claim 35 must be shown or the features canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CF.R. §1.173 are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
VIII. OBJECTIONS TO THE REISSUE DECLARATION
37 C.F.R. §1.175 Reissue oath or declaration (in part).
(a) The inventor’s oath or declaration for a reissue application, in addition to complying with the requirements of § 1.63, § 1.64, or § 1.67, must also specifically identify at least one error pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 251 being relied upon as the basis for reissue and state that the applicant believes the original patent to be wholly or partly inoperative or invalid by reason of a defective specification or drawing, or by reason of the patentee claiming more or less than the patentee had the right to claim in the patent.
(b) If the reissue application seeks to enlarge the scope of the claims of the patent (a basis for the reissue is the patentee claiming less than the patentee had the right to claim in the patent), the inventor's oath or declaration for a reissue application must identify a claim that the application seeks to broaden. A claim is a broadened claim if the claim is broadened in any respect.
(d) If errors previously identified in the inventor’s oath or declaration for a reissue application pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section are no longer being relied upon as the basis for reissue, the applicant must identify an error being relied upon as the basis for reissue.
Examiners acknowledge the reissue declaration filed September 13, 2024 along with the filing of this reissue application (hereinafter the “2024 Reissue Declaration”). However, Examiners object to the 2024 Reissue Declaration on the basis that the error raises the issue of recapture. For example, the error statement states that the surrendered limitation, i.e., the contact between the side surfaces of the printed circuit boards, as noted above in the recapture rejections above “is a feature not believed necessary to establish patentability of the claims.” Examiners disagree because this feature was specifically added to achieve allowance and thus was necessary to establish patentability of the claims. Furthermore, its removal is an attempt by Applicant to recapture the contact feature and the re-prosecute the claims without this limitation. Recapture bars such an amendment to the claims and is not a proper basis for reissue.
Thus, Applicant is required to provide a new declaration with a statement of error in accordance with the rule above with respect to 610 Patent identifying “a single word, phrase, or expression” from the 610 Patent that rendered the 610 Patent invalid or inoperative. See MPEP §1414.
IX. ADDITIONAL CLAIM REJECTIONS – 35 U.S.C. §251
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. §251:
Whenever any patent is, through error without any deceptive intention, deemed wholly or partly inoperative or invalid, by reason of a defective specification or drawing, or by reason of the patentee claiming more or less than he had a right to claim in the patent, the Director shall, on the surrender of such patent and the payment of the fee required by law, reissue the patent for the invention disclosed in the original patent, and in accordance with a new and amended application, for the unexpired part of the term of the original patent. No new matter shall be introduced into the application for reissue.
IX.A. Rejection Based on Defective Declaration
Claims 20-39 and this application as a whole are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §251 as being based on a defective declaration. The nature of the defects of the 2024 Reissue Declaration are discussed above.
X. 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).
XI. 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.
XI.A. Anticipation Rejections Applying Brunker
Claims 20-26 and 29-31 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 including a first 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, disposed adjacently to the first PCB, and having a second hole disposed opposite to the first hole;
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 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, 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 third hole, the first hole and the fifth hole, and fixing the upper plate and the lower plate to the first PCB; and a second fixing screw penetrating the fourth hole, the second hole and the sixth 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 upper surface of the PCB 30.
wherein the first hole includes a 1-1 hole and a 1-2 hole spaced apart from the 1-1 hole, wherein the second hole includes a 2-1 hole disposed opposite to the 1-1 hole and a 2-2 hole disposed opposite to the 1-2 hole, wherein the 1-1 hole, the first electrical connection portion and the 1-2 hole are spaced apart from each other in order on one side surface of the first PCB, and wherein the 2-1 hole, the second electrical connection portion and the 2-2 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’.
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_image3.png
198
486
media_image3.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) The PCB assembly of claim 20, wherein the first hole is disposed adjacently to one side surface of the first PCB, and wherein the second hole is 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) The PCB assembly of claim 20, wherein diameters of the third hole and the fourth hole are greater than diameters of the first hole and the second 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) The PCB assembly of claim 24, wherein the fifth hole has a shape corresponding to a shape of the first fixing screw, and wherein the sixth 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) The PCB assembly of claim 20, wherein the upper plate includes: a first support portion protruding from a sidewall of the third hole into the third hole; and a second support portion protruding from a sidewall of the fourth hole into the fourth 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.
XII. 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.
XII.A. Obviousness Rejections Applying Brunker and Fuchs
Claims 27, 32, 34 and 36-39 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_image4.png
236
448
media_image4.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) 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 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.
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.
Regarding claim 39, the combination of Brunker and Fuchs as discussed for claim 32 teaches:
39. (New) A device, comprising:
Note combination of Brunker and Fuchs proposed for claim 32.
a first printed circuit board (PCB) including a first 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 disposed adjacently to the first PCB and having a second hole disposed opposite to the first hole; and
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,
See Brunker FIGS. 1c and 2 above, holder comprising plates 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 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 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 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, note chamfers on holes 140 for supporting head of screws.
wherein the lower plate includes a first extension portion and a second extension portion formed by extending the fifth hole and the sixth hole and protruding from a lower surface of the lower plate.
Note combination of Brunker and Fuchs wherein the threaded holes of Brunker have extensions as taught by Fuchs.
XIII. 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.
XIV. 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.
XV. CONCLUSION
Claims 20-39 are pending.
Claims 20-39 are rejected.
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.
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.
/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