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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kawabata et al. (JP 2000269392). A copy of the English translation of Kawabata et al. was provided by Applicant with the IDS filed 01/26/2026.
Regarding claim 1, Kawabata et al. teaches a semiconductor module (Fig. 3) comprising a ceramic substrate 22 is formed of alumina, etc. (See Abstract), i.e. base including insulating member, a heat sink 29 comprising Cu-W (paragraph [0011] and [0017]), i.e. metal layer having a first nonmagnetic material (Cu) and nonmagnetic property, a Cu film 31 (paragraph [0031]), i.e. conductive film on the metal member and including the first nonmagnetic material (Cu), and Ag brazing material 30 (paragraph [0017]), i.e. joining portion joining the metal member to base and including a second nonmagnetic material (Ag).
Regarding claim 2, Kawabata et al. teaches ceramic substrate 22 is formed of alumina, i.e. third nonmagnetic material, having on both sides metalized layers 23 and 24 made of W (paragraph [0016]), i.e. nonmagnetic film.
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Kawabata et al. teaches wherein the heat sink 29 can be made of Cu-W (paragraph [0011]) and the Cu film 31 (paragraph [0031]) includes copper.
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.
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) 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawabata et al. (JP 2000269392) in view of Takeuchi et al. (JP 2010232263). A copy of the English translation of Takeuchi et al. was provided by Applicant with the IDS filed 01/26/2026.
Kawabata et al. is relied upon as disclosed above.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Kawabata et al. fails to teach a barrier film as claimed.
However, Takeuchi et al. teaches a light-emitting diode comprising a heat sink substrate 1 (See Abstract) having bonding layer 4 including barrier layer 4c that is formed in order to prevent mutual diffusion between constituent elements of the reflective layer 4b and constituent elements of the Au layer 4d and metal bonding layer 4e (paragraph [0035]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a barrier film in between the conductive film and joining portion of Kawabata et al. in order to prevent mutual diffusion of constituent elements between layers.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHENG HUANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7387. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday from 7 AM to 5 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Callie Shosho, can be reached at 571-272-1123. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CHENG YUAN HUANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Prosecution Insights