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 .
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.
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)(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) 1-3 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1) as being anticipated by Hasegawa et al. (Patent NO. US 6,019,612; hereinafter Hasegawa).
Regarding Claim 1, Hasegawa teaches a probe apparatus that electrically connects an electrode terminal of a device to be inspected and an electrode pad connected to an inspection device (device in fig. 23 and Fig. below; See Col. 15, Lines 20-65), the probe apparatus comprising:
a housing (housing 204 in Fig. 23 and Fig. below; See Col. 15, Lines 50-65) that has a first surface and a second surface facing the first surface (See first surface and second surface in Fig. 23 and Fig. below; See Col. 15, Lines 50-65);
a probe (probe 202 in Fig. 23 and Fig. below; See Col. 15, Lines 15-65) that has a first contact portion exposed on the first surface (first contact 210 exposed in first surface of housing 204 n Fig. 23 and Fig. below; See Col. 15, Lines 15-65) and a second contact portion exposed on the second surface (second contact 206 exposed in second surface of housing 204 n Fig. 23 and Fig. below) and is supported by the housing (supported by housing 204 in Fig. 23 and Fig. below; See Col. 15, Lines 15-65), and
in which at least either the first contact portion or the second contact portion is made of a conductive ceramic material (probe is made of conductive ceramic material, therefore probe’s contact are also conductive ceramic material in fig. 23 and Fig. below; See Col. 5, Lines 30-36),
a posture of the probe changing inside the housing (posture of probe 202 changes with electrode pad 16 inside housing 204 in fig. 23 and Fig. below) such that a position of a contact region in the second contact portion in contact with the electrode pad changes in response to a displacement of the first contact portion (first and second contact portion 210 and 206 change with electrode pad 16 in fig. 23 and Fig. below); and
an elastic portion (182 in Fig. 23 and Fig. below; See Col. 15, Lines 25-55) that is arranged inside the housing by abutting on the probe and the housing (182 is inside housing 204 abutting 202 and 204 in Fig. 23 and Fig. below; See Col. 15, Lines 25-55),
elastically deformed in response to a change in the posture of the probe inside the housing (182 deforms with posture of probe 202 in fig. 23 and Fig. below; See Col. 15, Lines 25-55), and biases the probe in a direction that cancels the displacement of the first contact portion (; See Col. 15, Lines 25-55).
PNG
media_image1.png
882
882
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Hasegawa teaches the probe apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the whole probe is made of a conductive ceramic material (See Col. 5, Lines 30-36).
Regarding Claim 3, Hasegawa teaches the probe apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the probe has a curved shape (See curve shape probe 202 in Fig. 23 and Fig. below), and the contact region is included in an outer arc-shaped region of the curved shape (See first contact 206 and second contact 210 are in outer arc shape in fig. 23 and Fig. below).
PNG
media_image2.png
738
856
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 5, Hasegawa teaches the probe apparatus according to claim 1, wherein two probes are arranged in parallel (two parallel probes 202 in Fig. 24) with a shield plate made of an insulating material therebetween (insulating material 20 is between probes 202 in Fig. 24; See Col. 5, Lines 5-10).
Regarding Claim 6, Hasegawa teaches the probe apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the probe is sandwiched from both sides by shield plates made of an insulating material (probe 132 is sandwiched both sides by shielding plate 134 in Fig. 18; See Col. 12, Lines 30-60), and a plurality of probes with which the shield plates are brought into mutual contact are arranged in parallel inside one slit provided in the housing (parallel probes 132 brought into contact inside slit 76 of housing in fig. 18; See Col. 12, Lines 30-60).
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) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hasegawa in view of Rokkaku et al. (Pub NO. US 2013/0313234 A1; hereinafter Rokkaku).
Regarding Claim 4, Hasegawa teaches the probe apparatus according to claim 1. Hasegawa is silent about wherein the probe has a higher hardness than that of a probe formed by rhenium tungsten.
Rokkaku teaches a probe formed by rhenium tungsten to increase hardness (See [0112]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to modify the system of Hasegawa and Rokkaku by using the probe has a higher hardness than that of a probe formed by rhenium tungsten, in order to achieve excellent in elasticity, toughness and electrical conductivity for the body portion (Rokkaku; [0112]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
KOPPEL et al. (Pub NO. US 2021/0302504 A1) discloses Measuring Assembly.
Pagani et al. (Patent NO. US 10,186,463 B2) discloses Method of Filling Probe Indentations.
Vallauri et al. (Pub NO. US 2017/0307656 A1) discloses Manufacturing Method of Contact Probe.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZANNATUL FERDOUS whose telephone number is (571)270-0399. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 8am to 5pm (PST).
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, Rodak Lee can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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.
/ZANNATUL FERDOUS/Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/LEE E RODAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights