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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-15 in the reply filed on 06/04/2026 is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “wherein a thickness L3 of the socket block 2B is greater than a length L4 from an end of the upper pin to an end of the bottom pin when the end of the upper pin and the end of the bottom pin are not in contact [Fig. 2] with each other” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). 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.
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) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adachi et al. (US 2005/0156166 A1) hereafter Adachi in view of Kim et al. (US 2017/0010324 A1), hereafter Kim.
Regarding claim 1, Adachi at fig. 1-4, particularly at fig. 4 discloses a semiconductor package inspection device comprising: a socket block 2B; a plurality of pin holes extending through the socket block; a plurality of pogo pins, wherein each of the plurality of pogo pins 15 is located within a respective one of the plurality of pin holes; a sealing portion 5 extending peripherally around a first pin area [inside annular area of 5] of the socket block 2B, wherein the plurality of pin holes and the plurality of pogo pins are arranged in the first pin area [as shown], and wherein the sealing portion protrudes [ 5 protrudes 2B as shown] from an upper surface of the socket block [as shown]; an upper test board 4 on an upper surface of the support socket 2B, wherein the upper test board comprises a plurality of first contact pads on a bottom surface thereof [implicit to “ Upper end of the first contact pin 12 contacts a printed circuit board 4 “, see 0053], and a vacuum aperture 4A formed therethrough; and a handler 50 above the upper test board [as shown] and comprising an internal vacuum passageway 9 in fluid communication with the vacuum aperture [using 60], wherein each of the plurality of pogo pins comprises a pin body 11, an upper pin 12 protruding upward from the pin body, and a bottom pin 13 protruding downward from the pin body.
Adachi discloses all the elments except for a support socket that supports the socket block. Kim at fig. 3 discloses a support socket 150 that supports the socket block 100. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to add socket support to the device of Adachi to cover the support block.
Regarding claim 2, Adachi at fig. 1-4, particularly at fig. 4 discloses the semiconductor package inspection device of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of pin holes comprises an upper pin hole [hole for 12], a bottom pin hole [hole for 13], and a central pin hole [hole for 11] in fluid communication with the upper pin hole and the bottom pin hole, and wherein a width of the central pin hole is greater than a width of the pin body [implicit to width of a pin body 11], and wherein a width of an upper pin hole and a bottom pin hole in which the upper pin and the bottom pin are located, respectively, is less [holes for 12 and 13 are smaller than 44 in width direction i.e. horizontal direction, as shown] than the width of the pin body.
Regarding claim 3, Adachi at fig. 1-4, particularly at fig. 4 discloses the semiconductor package inspection device of claim 2, wherein a length of the pin body [length/height in vertical direction of 11, as shown] is less than a length of the central pin hole [length of hole in vertical direction for 11, as shown], and wherein a thickness of the socket block [vertical height of 2B as shown] is greater than a length from an end of the upper pin to an end of the bottom pin when the end of the upper pin and the end of the bottom pin are not in contact with each other [because of 20 and recess 31/32/33 in 2B, although non-contact is not shown, it is implicit from the drawing that height of pin 15 is smaller than height of Socket 2B].
Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adachi as applied to claim 3 above.
Regarding claims 4-5. Adachi discloses all the elements including seal 5 that can be compressed and decompressed. Adachi is silent about wherein a maximum value of a height of the end of the upper pin protruding from the upper surface of the socket block is less than a height of the sealing portion in an undeformed state. Use of thicker seal for an arrangement to obtain a maximum value of a height of the end of the upper pin protruding from the upper surface of the socket block is less than a height of the sealing portion in an undeformed state, to keep the test board away from the socket before applying pressure for testing is old and well known for many reasons (protection, interference) including the reason as stated by Adachi. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date use thicker sealing in order to obtain the claim invention. Again, thicker seal as described above can also obtains the invention of claim 5 i.e. wherein, when a distance between the bottom surface of the upper test board and the upper surface of the socket block is equal to a height of the sealing portion in an undeformed state, the upper pin does not contact the upper test board.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-15 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: No prior art has been found that meets the limitations of claim 6 calling for a semiconductor package inspection device comprising: wherein a height of the sealing portion in a deformed state is less than the height of the sealing portion in the undeformed state, and wherein the height of the end of the upper pin protruding from the upper surface of the socket block when the sealing portion in the deformed state is equal to the height of the sealing portion in the deformed state. Dependent claims 7-15 are also allowed.
Please note: Examiner has cited particular columns, line numbers, and figures in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teaching of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. Applicants are reminded that MPEP 2141.02 states: A prior art reference must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the claimed invention. W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. V. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 220 USPQ 303 (Fed. Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 851 (1984).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PARESH PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-1968. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 am to 4:00pm.
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, Eman Alkafawi can be reached at 571-272-4448. 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.
/PARESH PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
July 18, 2026
Prosecution Insights