DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi et al. US (20020033378 hereinafter Hayashi) in view of Suzuki (US 9167702 hereinafter Suzuki).
In regards to claim 1, Hayashi discloses;” A substrate (abstract) comprising: a core substrate (Fig. 1A (2)) having a first surface (Fig. 1A (3)), a second surface (Fig. 1A (4)) facing away from the first surface, and a cavity portion (Fig. 2A (5), shown) therein; at least two electronic components (Fig. 1A (multiple (10), abstract) provided in the cavity portion; and an encapsulating material provided between the cavity portion and the at least two electronic components and between the at least two electronic components (Fig. 1A (13)), the encapsulating material including a resin and fillers (abstract)”, but does not directly disclose;” wherein an average of distances between the at least two electronic components is less than a shortest distance between a wall surface of the cavity portion and some of the at least two electronic components being adjacent to the wall surface.”
However, Suzuki discloses embedded components within a substrate in an epoxy material, wherein the space from the cavity wall is greater than that between the components as shown in Fig. 14. It would have been obvious to a skilled artisan to select spacings dependent on the application and use. In re Chu, at 298-99 (a finding of “design choice” is appropriate where the applicant fails to set forth any reasons why the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art would result in a different function or give unexpected results (citing In re Rice, 341 F.2d 309, 314 (CCPA 1965)). Therefore using a larger separation from the cavity wall to the component as disclosed by Suzuki with that of the design by Hayashi, the claimed invention is disclosed.
In regards to claim 6, Hayashi discloses;” The substrate according to Claim 1, wherein each of the at least two electronic components is shaped to have a longitudinal direction extending in a direction orthogonal to the second surface (Hayashi Fig. 4A (shown)).”
In regards to claim 7, Hayashi discloses;” The substrate according to Claim 6, wherein electrodes of each of the at least two electronic components are located at one end and another end in the longitudinal direction (Hayashi Fig. 4 A (Shown)).”
In regards to claim 8, Hayashi discloses;” The substrate according to Claim 1, wherein, for at least some of the at least two electronic components, a thickness of the encapsulating material in a direction orthogonal to the second surface from surfaces of the at least two electronic components is greater than the average of the distances between the at least two electronic components (Hayashi Fig. 4A (Shown)).”
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5, and 9-20 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL F MCALLISTER whose telephone number is (571)272-2453. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7 AM-4 PM.
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, Timothy Thompson can be reached at 571-272-2342. 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.
/MICHAEL F MCALLISTER/Examiner, Art Unit 2847
/TIMOTHY J THOMPSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights