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) 11-17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2015/0009645 A1 (Kaneko).
The Examiner notes that terms such as “below” and “upward” do not denote intrinsic properties of a device, but, rather, are dependent on a certain orientation. Thus any direction may be considered “below” or “upward” as long as a consistent scheme is used.
Kaneko discloses, referring primarily to figures 1A and 1B, a printed circuit board comprising: a first insulating layer (12); and a first metal layer (11) having a protruding part protruding beyond the first insulating layer, a buried part buried in the first insulating layer, and a protrusion (11a, 11b) protruding outwards with respect to a side surface of the buried part and a side surface of the protruding part where the B) [claim 11], further comprising: a second insulating layer (14) disposed below the first insulating layer; and a first wiring layer disposed (13) on the second insulating layer and including a first pad and a first pattern ([0037]) [claim 12], wherein a width between both ends of the protrusion is narrower than a width of the first pad (figure 1A) [claim 13], wherein the first metal layer includes the protruding part, a seed layer extending along outside of the protrusion and the buried part, and a plating layer disposed on the seed layer ([0036]) [claim 14], further comprising a surface treatment layer disposed on the first metal layer ([0036]) [claim 15], wherein the surface treatment layer covers at least portions of the protruding part and the protrusion ([0036]) [claim 16], wherein the buried part has a shape tapered upward [claim 17], wherein the protruding part, the buried part, and the protrusion are formed integrally with one another (figures 3A, 3B) [claim 19].
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2009/0145635 A1 (Shimizu) in view of US 6,089,442 (Ouchi).
Shimizu discloses, referring primarily to figure 5, a printed circuit board comprising: a first insulating layer (27); a first metal layer (28bb, 28ba) having a part (28ba) protruding beyond the first insulating layer and another part (28bb) buried in the first insulating layer; and a barrier layer (29) disposed on the first insulating layer, wherein the barrier layer includes solder resist ([0066]). Shimizu does not specifically state that the barrier layer includes an inorganic oxide film [claim 1]. However, it is well known in the art to use inorganic oxide as a solder resist film as evidenced by Ouchi (col. 6, lines 25-35). Therefore, it would have been obvious, to one having ordinary skill in the art, to incorporate the claimed features into the invention of Shimzu as is known in the art and evidenced by Ouchi. The motivation for doing so would have been to use a known material for its intended purpose of isolating solder (MPEP 2144).
Additionally, the modified invention of Shimzu teaches, wherein the buried part of the first metal layer passes through upper and lower surfaces of the first insulating layer [claim 2], further comprising: a second insulating layer (25) disposed below the first insulating layer; a first wiring layer (24ba) disposed on the second insulating layer; and a first via layer (26bb) passing through at least a portion of the second insulating layer to connect the first wiring layer and the first metal layer to each other [claim 3], wherein the first insulating layer and the second insulating layer include insulating materials substantially the same as each other ([0038]) [claim 4], wherein the barrier layer is disposed on at least a portion of the first insulating layer, and in contact with a side of the first metal layer (figure 5) [claim 5], wherein the barrier layer is thinner than the first insulating layer [claim 6].
Claim(s) 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimzu in view of Ouchi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kaneko.
The modified invention of Shimzu teaches the claimed invention as described above with respect to claim 1 except modified Shimzu does not specifically teach that the first metal layer includes a seed layer disposed on outside of the first metal layer and a plating layer disposed on the seed layer, and the barrier layer is thinner than the seed layer [claim 7]. However, such an arrangement is well known in the art as evidenced by Kaneko ([0036]). Therefore, it would have been obvious, to one having ordinary skill in the art, to incorporate the claimed features into the modified invention of Shimzu. The motivation for doing so would have been to prevent oxidation.
Similarly, the twice modified invention of Shimzu teaches further comprising a surface treatment layer disposed on the first metal layer [claim 8], wherein the surface treatment layer covers the part protruding beyond the first insulating layer [claim 9].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18 and 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 18 states the limitation “further comprising: a barrier layer disposed on the first insulating layer, wherein the barrier layer is in contact with the protrusion.” This limitation, in conjunction with the other claimed features, was neither found to be disclosed in, nor suggested by the prior art. Claim 20 states the limitation “wherein the protrusion includes one portion disposed at a level above one surface of the first insulating layer and another portion disposed at a level below the one surface of the first insulating layer.” This limitation, in conjunction with the other claimed features, was neither found to be disclosed in, nor suggested by the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEREMY C NORRIS whose telephone number is (571)272-1932. The examiner can normally be reached 7:15-15:15 M-F.
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.
JEREMY C. NORRIS
Examiner
Art Unit 2847
/JEREMY C NORRIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights