DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/7/2025 was considered by the examiner.
Drawings
Figures 1-4 are identified in the disclosure as “conventional” and/or “standard” and 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.
Paragraph [0067] of the specification filed 9/26/2024 recites “moveable wedge 1304” but the number 1304 is missing from Fig. 13.
Claim Objections
Claims 10 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 10, the claim ends with the number “504”. Please review.
Regarding claim 14, please amend to recite, “wherein a height of at least one of the retractable needles, …”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Written Description:
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 5, the claim recites, “wherein the actuator comprises a movable wedge.” The limitation corresponds to the embodiment of Fig. 13 (see below) and outlined in [0066] of corresponding Pg. Pub. US 2026/0086121 which teaches:
FIG. 13 illustrates a fourth example embodiment of the reconfigurable probe card 500 incorporating a movable wedge 1304 actuated retractable needle 274, in accordance with example embodiments. An actuator (not shown), such as the actuators depicted in FIGS. 10-12, can be incorporated to horizontally move the wedge 1304, thereby adjusting the location of the tip of the retractable needle 274. The embodiment of FIG. 13 can be configured to save space as the actuator can be located remotely from the wedge 1304. Since the wedge 1304 is relatively small compared to the actuator, the retractable needles 274 can therefore be located closer together than with other embodiments.
PNG
media_image1.png
209
442
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The written description states, “An actuator (not shown), such as the actuators depicted in FIGS. 10-12, can be incorporated to horizontally move the wedge 1304, thereby adjusting the location of the tip of the retractable needle 274.” It is not obvious to the examiner how the actuators of Figs. 10-12 would be configured to “horizontally move the wedge” while also satisfying the alleged benefit of being “configured to save space as the actuator can be located remotely from the wedge 1304.” As recited in the description.
For example, the stacked actuator of Fig. 10 moves up and down and it is unclear how such an actuator would move a moveable wedge horizontally and/or how such an actuator would be configured remotely to move the wedge.
The bimorph actuator of Fig. 11 is characterized in [0064] wherein “In example embodiments, a bias voltage is applied to each layer of the actuator 1108 via a power contact 1104 and the bias voltage is varied to change the length and, more importantly, height of the thin film piezo bimorph 1108 (or bi-metal) actuator, thereby adjusting the location of the tip of the retractable needle 574.” It is unclear to the examiner how a bimorph actuator of Fig. 11 would be implemented to move a wedge to retract the needle without the bimorph itself interfering with retracting the needle and/or how such an actuator would be configured remotely to move the wedge.
It is unclear to the examiner how a bellow of Figs. 12a,b would be implemented to move a wedge to retract the needle without the bellow itself interfering with retracting the needle and/or how such an actuator would be configured remotely to move the wedge.
For the purpose of examination, a stacked piezoelectric is interpreted as a wedge which moves in a vertical direction to actuate the probe needle.
Enablement:
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
As outlined in the written description requirement, it is unclear how the movable wedge is actuated horizontally as illustrated in Fig. 13, and how the movable wedge would be actuated horizontally by means of the actuators of Figs. 10-12 as recited in [0066] of the specification, or how the embodiment of Fig. 13 would be “configured to save space as the actuator can be located remotely from the wedge 1304.” The applicant provides no prior art examples, provides no guidance or working examples in the pending disclosure, or makes any attempt to illustrate how the actuators of Figs. 10-12 to actuate a moveable wedge horizontally or remotely without interfering with the needle. Further, if the actuators of Figs. 10-12 are each adequate to retract a needle at cryogenic temperatures themselves, it is unclear how adding an additional component in the form of a moveable wedge would “save space” as alleged in the disclosure.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-8, 10, and 13-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 4,811,246 (Fitzgerald) in view of US 2024/0118315 (Nielson).
Regarding claim 1, Fitzgerald teaches a probe card (test system of Fig. 3) comprising:
a base configured to transfer electrical signals to test and measurement circuitry (the probe card comprises a base 41 and probes 61-76 which make electrical contact with a DUT 150 and a user test system 297 and main control computer 290; see Fig. 8; see col. 16, lines 1-57);
a plurality of retractable needles mounted on the printed circuit board and configured to transfer the electrical signals from a chip via the printed circuit board (probes 61-67 are moveable needles which connect to a DUT via the probe card wherein the probes are moved via piezoelectric motors (see Figs. 1-4) or a bimorph motors 221, 237 (see Fig. 6)); and
a plurality of actuators mounted on the printed circuit board, each actuator configured to engage a corresponding retractable needle of the plurality of retractable needles and to adjust a position of the engaged retractable needle to contact a pad on the chip (in/out motors 42-57 are respectively connected to probes 61-76 to move the probes in an in/out direction and vertical motors 77-92 are respectively connected to probes 61-76 to move the probes in an up/down direction to engage the needle in contact with contacts 125-140 spaced about the DUT 150; see Fig. 3; see col. 11, lines 9-42).
Fitzgerald fails to explicitly teach a printed circuit board configured to transfer electrical signals to test and measurement circuitry; each actuator configured to operate at cryogenic temperatures.
Nielsen teaches a printed circuit board configured to transfer electrical signals to test and measurement circuitry (a probe card 100 is operable to withstand cryogenic temperatures and includes a printed circuit board 108 to transfer electrical signals from a test instrument to a DUT; see Fig. 1A, B; see [0005], [0024], [0047]-[0048]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the features of Nielsen into Fitzgerald as probe card conventionally include printed circuit boards to provide wiring traces to provide a signal path connecting the DUT to test instruments, wherein the probe card is able to withstand cryogenic temperatures for testing DUTs which operate at cryogenic temperatures.
While Fitzgerald fails to explicitly teach wherein each actuator configured to operate at cryogenic temperatures, Fitzgerald teaches wherein the actuators comprise piezoelectric or bimorph materials in an equivalent manner as the pending application. Since Fitzgerald teaches substantially identical structure the claimed structure would presumably be inherent. See MPEP 2112.01 I. Further, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide traces on the PCB to communicate electrical signals between the actuators and the test equipment in an equivalent manner as signals provided to the test probe without requiring undue experimentation or providing any new or unexpected results.
Regarding claim 15, Fitzgerald teaches a method comprising:
configuring a set of retractable needles of a probe card according to a test plan for a given device during testing (in/out motors 42-57 are respectively connected to probes 61-76 to move the probes in an in/out direction and vertical motors 77-92 are respectively connected to probes 61-76 to move the probes in an up/down direction to engage the needle in contact with contacts 125-140 spaced about the DUT 150; see Fig. 3; see col. 11, lines 9-42); and
testing the given device using the set of retractable needles (“a micro positionable contactor for use in establishing testing connections to selected terminals of a device under test which comprises a probe supporting an electrical contact and means for making electrical connections to the contact, a piezoelectric motor responsive to an applied voltage and mechanically coupled to and acting upon the probe to move the electrical contact of the probe to selected positions in response to a predetermined applied voltage” see Fig. 3, lines 34-58; also see cols. 4-8 and Figs. 1-4).
Fitzgerald fails to teach cooling a cryostat to cryogenic temperatures; configuring a set of retractable needles of a probe card during testing in the cryostat at the cryogenic temperatures.
Nielsen teaches cooling a cryostat to cryogenic temperatures; configuring a probe card during testing in the cryostat at the cryogenic temperatures (the probe card is able to withstand cryogenic temperatures which would inherently require cooling to cryogenic temperatures; see [0005], [0024], [0047]-[0048]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the features of Nielsen into Fitzgerald as probe card conventionally include printed circuit boards to provide wiring traces to provide a signal path connecting the DUT to test instruments, wherein the probe card is able to withstand cryogenic temperatures for testing DUTs which operate at cryogenic temperatures.
Regarding claim 2, Fitzgerald teaches wherein the actuator includes a stacked piezo device (in/out motor 16 is a piezoelectric stacked motor configuration; see col. 1, lines 31-65; see Figs. 1-4).
Regarding claim 3, Fitzgerald teaches wherein the actuator is a thin film piezo bimorph device or a bi-metal actuated device and wherein the actuator is configured to change a length and a height of the actuator via a bias voltage applied to each layer of the actuator, thereby adjusting a location of a tip of a corresponding retractable needle based on the bias voltage (the actuator is a bimorph piezoelectric motor; see Fig. 6; see col. 15, lines 1-61).
Regarding claim 5, Fitzgerald teaches wherein the actuator comprises a movable wedge (piezoelectric motors 16-18 are illustrated as rectangular prisms in order to move the probe 40, and may reasonably be interpreted as a wedge; see Figs. 1; see col. 4-8).
Regarding claim 6, Fitzgerald teaches wherein each retractable needle is adjustable on a vertical axis (the needles are adjustable on three axes including a vertical, horizontal, and in/out; see Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 7, Fitzgerald further teaches electronic lines configured to carry signals to control the actuators and to carry signals from and to the retractable needles (electrical signals are applied to all motors and to the probe for testing the device under test; see Figs. 1-3; see cols. 4-8), but fails to explicitly teach wherein the electronic lines are arranged in a printed circuit board.
Nielsen teaches wherein the printed circuit board has electronic lines configured to carry signals from and to the retractable needles (a probe card 100 facilitates electrical connections between probe tips 128 and a DUT by means of electrical traces 136 formed on the circuit board 108 of the probe card 100, and it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to from electrical traces to control the actuators as disclosed in Fitzgerald on the printed circuit board in an equivalent manner; see [0042]; see Figs. 1-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the features of Nielsen into Fitzgerald to provide the advantage of electrical lines to provide a signals to the actuators and probe needles using a printed circuit board of a probe card to provide signals between a test instrument and components of the probe card as is conventional in the art without requiring any undue experimentation of providing any new or unexpected results.
Regarding claim 8, Fitzgerald teaches wherein the retractable needles are configured as a micro-cantilever (the probe card is a “micropositionable contactor” and the probe 22 is attached to probe attachment 41 to form a cantilever structure; see Figs. 1-4; see cols. 4-8).
Regarding claim 10, Fitzgerald teaches further comprising a controller configured to map a specified location of the actuator to a specified control signal for a corresponding actuator (a voltage source including a computer is coupled to a piezoelectric motor such that digital coded position signals produced by the computing means and applied to the digital to analog converter produce corresponding precision voltages applied to the piezoelectric motor. See col. 3, lines 35-58; col. 16, lines 36-57).
Regarding claim 13, Fitzgerald teaches further comprising electronic circuitry configured to enable system-level testing (the probe card is implemented with automated testing equipment; see col. 3, lines 21-34).
Regarding claim 14, Fitzgerald teaches wherein a height of at least one of retractable needles, in relation to a surface of the chip, is adjustable to adapt to chips with different thicknesses (“In accordance with the invention there is provided a micro positionable contactor for use in establishing testing connections to selected terminals of a device under test which comprises a probe supporting an electrical contact and means for making electrical connections to the contact” see col. 3, lines 34-58. “In operation electrical signals are applied to either or all of motors 16, 17 and 18 to move probe 22 and thereby probe contact 24 to the desired position to establish the micropositioned contact.” See col. 6, lines 49-52. “The arrangement and orientation of probes 61 through 76 and the respective pin apertures 152 through 167 would be altered to suit a different configuration of contacts 125 through 140 of device under test 150 in the event a different configuration of the device is encountered.” See col. 11, lines 9-42. Since each probe is controlled independently, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the motors of a select number of probes to contact select terminals at desired positions even if a device has a different configuration.).
Regarding claim 16, Fitzgerald teaches further comprising reconfiguring one or more of the retractable needles in accordance with the test plan (“In accordance with the invention there is provided a micro positionable contactor for use in establishing testing connections to selected terminals of a device under test which comprises a probe supporting an electrical contact and means for making electrical connections to the contact, a piezoelectric motor responsive to an applied voltage and mechanically coupled to and acting upon the probe to move the electrical contact of the probe to selected positions in response to a predetermined applied voltage. A voltage source including a computer is coupled to a piezoelectric motor such that digital coded position signals produced by the computing means and applied to the digital to analog converter produce corresponding precision voltages applied to the piezoelectric motor.” See col. 3, lines 35-58; col. 16, lines 36-57).
Regarding claims 17-18, Fitzgerald fails to explicitly teach wherein the given device is a classical device; and wherein the given device is a quantum device, however, the limitations as claimed are properties of the material or article to be worked upon which do not limit the apparatus as claimed. See MPEP 2115. Fitzgerald teaches a probe card with an equivalent structure as a probe card as claimed, and it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that test probes and probe cards would be operable on a test circuit device regardless of whether the device is a classical or quantum device without requiring any undue experimentation or providing any new or unexpected results.
Regarding claim 19, Fitzgerald teaches wherein the configuring of the set of retractable needles according to the test plan further comprises configuring a subset of the retractable needles according to the test plan for a second given device and wherein the testing of the given device using the set of retractable needles further comprises testing the given device in conjunction with testing the second given device (“In accordance with the invention there is provided a micro positionable contactor for use in establishing testing connections to selected terminals of a device under test which comprises a probe supporting an electrical contact and means for making electrical connections to the contact” see col. 3, lines 34-58. “In operation electrical signals are applied to either or all of motors 16, 17 and 18 to move probe 22 and thereby probe contact 24 to the desired position to establish the micropositioned contact.” See col. 6, lines 49-52. “The arrangement and orientation of probes 61 through 76 and the respective pin apertures 152 through 167 would be altered to suit a different configuration of contacts 125 through 140 of device under test 150 in the event a different configuration of the device is encountered.” See col. 11, lines 9-42. Since each probe is controlled independently, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to adjust the motors of a select number of probes to contact select terminals at desired positions even if a device has a different configuration.).
Regarding claim 20, Fitzgerald teaches a system (system of Fig. 3) comprising:
a chip under test (DUT 150; see Fig. 3);
a controller configured to control test activities for the chip under test (main control computer 290; see col. 16, lines 12-57); and
a probe card (the probe card comprising a base 41 and probes 61-76 which make electrical contact with a DUT 150 and a user test system 297 and main control computer 290; see Fig. 8; see col. 16, lines 1-57) comprising:
a plurality of retractable needles configured to transfer the electrical signals from the chip via the printed circuit board under a control of the controller (probes 61-67 are moveable needles which connect to a DUT via the probe card wherein the probes are moved via piezoelectric motors (see Figs. 1-4) or a bimorph motors 221, 237 (see Fig. 6)); and
a plurality of actuators mounted on the printed circuit board engage a corresponding retractable needle of the plurality of retractable needles and to adjust a position of the engaged retractable needle to contact a pad on the chip (in/out motors 42-57 are respectively connected to probes 61-76 to move the probes in an in/out direction and vertical motors 77-92 are respectively connected to probes 61-76 to move the probes in an up/down direction to engage the needle in contact with contacts 125-140 spaced about the DUT 150; see Fig. 3; see col. 11, lines 9-42).
Fitzgerald fails to explicitly teach a printed circuit board configured to transfer electrical signals to test and measurement circuitry; each actuator configured to operate at cryogenic temperatures.
Nielsen teaches a printed circuit board configured to transfer electrical signals to test and measurement circuitry (a probe card 100 is operable to withstand cryogenic temperatures and includes a printed circuit board 108 to transfer electrical signals from a test instrument to a DUT; see Fig. 1A, B; see [0005], [0024], [0047]-[0048]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the features of Nielsen into Fitzgerald as probe card conventionally include printed circuit boards to provide wiring traces to provide a signal path connecting the DUT to test instruments, wherein the probe card is able to withstand cryogenic temperatures for testing DUTs which operate at cryogenic temperatures.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 4,811,246 (Fitzgerald) in view of US 2024/0118315 (Nielson), and in further view of US 2011/0022820 (Bunyk).
Regarding claim 9, Fitzgerald fails to teach wherein the retractable needles are implemented with a superconducting material.
Bunyk teaches wherein the retractable needles are implemented with a superconducting material (a superconducting probe card 700 comprises superconducting probes 720; see [0095]; see whole document).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the features of Bunyk into Fitzgerald to provide the advantage of superconducting probe to make a superconducting connection with a superconducting integrated circuit.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 11-12 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 4, the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest wherein the actuator is a bellows configured to operate based on volumetric expansion, wherein the bellows comprises an integrated heater configured to be controlled via a heater control voltage and wherein the integrated heater is configured to control a volume of a gas filling of the bellows, in combination with all other limitations of claim 1.
Regarding claim 11, the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest wherein the actuator is a superconducting coil configured to adjust a height of a corresponding retractable needle in relation to a surface of the chip, in combination with all other limitations of claim 1.
Regarding claim 12, the claim is objected to through a dependence on objected claim 11.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN LEE YENINAS whose telephone number is (571)270-0372. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 10 - 6.
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, Judy Nguyen can be reached at (571) 272-2258. 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.
/STEVEN L YENINAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights