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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of group I, claims 1-8 in the reply filed on 9/16/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
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 concave-convex pattern must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The pattern that is labeled concave-convex in the drawings is not concave or convex. 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.
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 zigzag form must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The form shown in the drawings is not a zigzag form. 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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
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.
Claims 2 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, 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.
Claim 2 is indefinite because it is not clear what is meant by “concave-convex pattern”. Does this mean that it alternates between concave and convex? The drawings do not show a concave or convex pattern. It is unclear what is meant by this limitation. Concave is defined as curving in. Convex is defined as curved out (Cambridge dictionary). Since the drawings are not showing concave or convex, it is not clear what the Applicant is attempting to claim with this pattern and requests that the Applicant please clarify.
Claim 8 is indefinite because it is unclear what is meant by “zigzag form”. What is meant by form? Does it just have to look like a zigzag? What is meant by form? The drawings do not show a zigzag, so it is unclear what is meant by this limitation. A zig zag is a line or pattern that looks like a ‘z’ (Cambridge dictionary) or series of short lines inclined at angles in alternate directions (Oxford dictionary). If the Applicant is attempting to claim what is in the drawings, that it is different from a “zigzag form” The Examiner is not sure what is meant by this claim and requests that the Applicant please clarify.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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)(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.
Claim(s) 1, 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Straub (6,257,478).
Regarding claim 1, Straub discloses a reflow flip chip bonding tool apparatus comprising: a heater 6 configured to heat air; and a bonding tool body 5 disposed on an upper surface of the chip, wherein a movement path (arrows) is formed between a lower surface of the bonding tool body and the upper surface of the chip, the air heated by the heater heats the chip through non-contact convection heat transfer while flowing through the movement path and a solder disposed between the lower surface of the chip and an electrode pad of the substrate is melted (figure 4).
The italicized limitations are functional language and/or material worked upon. These limitations do not further limit the structure of the apparatus. It is the Examiner’s position that the prior art would be capable of performing the claimed function.
Regarding claim 3, Straub discloses an air inlet path (downward arrows in the middle of 6) which vertically passes through the bonding tool body and is connected to the movement path is formed at each of both end portions of the bonding tool body (figure 4).
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 7-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a2 as being anticipated by Zovko et al. (4,552,300).
Regarding claim 1, Zovko discloses a reflow flip chip bonding tool apparatus comprising: a heater 62 configured to heat air; and a bonding tool body 12, 14 disposed on an upper surface of the chip, wherein a movement path is formed between a lower surface of the bonding tool body and the upper surface of the chip, the air heated by the heater heats the chip through non-contact convection heat transfer while flowing through the movement path, and a solder disposed between the lower surface of the chip and an electrode pad of the substrate is melted (figure 1).
Regarding claim 3, Zovko discloses an air inlet path (downward arrows, figure 1) which vertically passes through the bonding tool body and is connected to the movement path is formed at each of both end portions of the bonding tool body.
The italicized limitations are functional language and/or material worked upon. These limitations do not further limit the structure of the apparatus. It is the Examiner’s position that the prior art would be capable of performing the claimed function.
Regarding claim 4, Zovko discloses an air outlet path (upward arrows, figure 1), which vertically passes through the bonding tool body and discharges the heated air passing through the movement path to the outside, is formed at a center of the bonding tool body.
Regarding claim 7, Zovko discloses that the heater comprises: a body (where 62 is located on 14) including an internal path through which the air flows (figure 1, 5); and a heating cable 62 configured to surround the body, convert electrical energy into thermal energy, and heat the air by using the thermal energy (column 3 lines 1-13).
Regarding claim 8, Zovko discloses the internal path is formed in a zigzag form (figure 5). The heater segments form a zigzag form. The claim does not require the air to flow in the zigzag form. This zigzag is based on the Applicant’s figure showing a “zigzag”. Please refer to the 112 rejection above.
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) 5, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Straub (6,257,478) as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Cox et al. (6,220,503).
Regarding claim 5, Straub does not disclose a vacuum valve configured to discharge the heated air, discharged through the air outlet path, to the outside. However, Cox discloses a rework and underfill nozzle for electronic components where there is a vacuum valve configured to discharge heated air through the air outlet path (figure 5, column 5 line 55 to column 6 line 38). To one skilled in the art at the time of the invention it would have been obvious to have a vacuum valve as claimed in order to control the heated air in the apparatus. This allows the user to control the amount of heated air within the apparatus and the amount of air being released from the apparatus during use. This allows one skilled in the art to ensure a proper heating.
Regarding claim 6, Straub does not disclose an air valve configured to allow the air to flow into the heater, based on an opening operation. However, Cox a rework and underfill nozzle for electronic components where there is an air valve configured to allow the air to flow into the heater, based on an opening operation (figure 5, column 5 line 55 to column 6 line 38).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN B SAAD whose telephone number is (571)270-3634. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30a-6p.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 571-272-3458. 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.
/ERIN B SAAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735