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 § 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 8, 17, 20 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 8 recites the limitation " the preset instruction from the printed circuit board" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “preset instruction” is not mentioned. Also it is indefinite because it is not clear how “the printed circuit board” provides “the preset instruction”. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as " [[the]] a preset instruction from a component of the printed circuit board". Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “the signal pin” in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “signal pin” is not mentioned. Because the claim is indefinite and cannot be properly construed, for purposes of examination, this limitation is being interpreted as “[[the]] a signal pin”. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 20 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 17 because dependent claim 20 is unclear, at least, in that it depends on unclear claim 17.
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.
Claims 1-2, 5-9, 11-12, 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steinbuch (DE 102010028154, hereafter Steinbuch) in view of Kollmann et al. (US 10,284,248, hereafter Kollmann).
Regrading claim 1, Steinbuch (‘154) discloses that A solder ball detecting device { Fig.1; Fig.2; page 4 lines 4 (several solder balls 105), 10 (a power sensor 115), 14-15 (The power sensor 115 is formed as a bidirectional power sensor and includes a first detector dode 119 and a second detector diode 121); Examiner’s note: Fig.2 for “A solder ball detecting device”}, configured to be electrically connected to a solder ball and to detect a welding state of the solder ball that fixes a signal pin of a radar chip to a printed circuit board { Fig.1; Fig.2; title (Detecting High Frequency Solder Bead Crack); abstract lines 2-3 (a power sensor that is coupled to an electrical interconnection.); page 1 lines 5-6 from bottom (The solder balls are melted during soldering, for example, during reflow soldering, and connect to the copper of the circuit board); page 3 lines 12-13 from bottom (The electronic component, in particular the integrated monolithic microwave circuit, can be integrated in a radar sensor.); page 4 lines 1-2 (a printed circuit board 103, electronic component 107,), 4 (several solder balls 105), 9-10 (solder bead 105 is an electrical connection 109 (please refer 2 ) between the circuit board 103 and the electronic component 107, a power sensor 115), 12 (the electronic component comprises 107 an integrated monolithic microwave circuit 108), 14-15 (The power sensor 115 is formed as a bidirectional power sensor and includes a first detector dode 119 and a second detector diode 121), 4 from bottom (electronic device 101 integrated in a radar sensor 125); page 5 lines 16-18 (Method for detecting a solder bead tear in an electronic device ( 101 ) comprising a printed circuit board (103),on which by means of a solder bead (105 ) an electronic component (107 ) is soldered, so that between the circuit board (103) and the electronic component (107) an electrical connection (109) is formed); Examiner’s note: “integrated monolithic microwave circuit” for “radar chip”. Page 4 lines 9-10 for “fixes a signal pin”}, the solder ball detecting device comprising:
a sampling unit, configured to collect a sampled signal from a circuit loop that includes the solder ball {Fig.1; Fig.2; page 4 lines 16-17 (power sensor includes 115 a directional coupler 117 , which with the two detector diodes 119 and 121 electrically connected); page 5 lines 16-18 (Method for detecting a solder bead tear in an electronic device ( 101 ) comprising a printed circuit board (103),on which by means of a solder bead (105 ) an electronic component (107 ) is soldered, so that between the circuit board (103) and the electronic component (107) an electrical connection (109) is formed); Examiner’s note: signal from item 103 to 107 via 105 and back to 105 form “a circuit loop”. “directional coupler 117” for “a sampling unit” }; and
a detecting unit, configured to detect the sampled signal and to output state information reflecting the welding state of the solder ball based on the sampled signal { Fig.3; Fig.4; page 3 lines 2-3 from bottom (3 a characteristic of a detector diode, 4 a calibration characteristic of a detector diode ); page 4 lines 16-17 (power sensor includes 115 a directional coupler 117 , which with the two detector diodes 119 and 121 electrically connected); Examiner’s note: Fig.3 and Fig.4 for “output state information reflecting the welding state of the solder ball based on the sampled signal”};
wherein the radar chip is configured to transmit a critical signal { page 3 lines 12-13 from bottom (The electronic component, in particular the integrated monolithic microwave circuit, can be integrated in a radar sensor.); page 4 line 3 (the solder bead is 105 an RF solder bead or a NF solder bead); page 5 lines 16-18 (Method for detecting a solder bead tear in an electronic device ( 101 ) comprising a printed circuit board (103),on which by means of a solder bead (105 ) an electronic component (107 ) is soldered, so that between the circuit board (103) and the electronic component (107) an electrical connection (109) is formed); Examiner’s note: any signal on circuit board is “critical”}.
However, Steinbuch (‘154) does not explicitly disclose that (see words with underline) “wherein the radar chip is configured to transmit a critical signal related to object detection via the signal pin and the solder ball”. In the same field of endeavor, Kollmann (‘248) discloses that
wherein the radar chip is configured to transmit a critical signal related to object detection via the signal pin and the solder ball { Fig.1; Fig.5(a)(b) (transmission line 7 to antenna); Fig.6 PTX; col.6 lines 15- 16 (a defective connection, a chip contact and the respective solder ball 4,); col.8 line 4 (output port PTx); Examiner’s note: “chip contact” for “the signal pin”.}
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that applying a known technique (e.g. transmit radar signal from MMIC to other radar components (e.g. antenna, oscillator, etc.) , which is important for radar operation in object detection, via signal pins on radar integrated circuits mounted on printed circuit board) to a known device (e.g. electronic device integrated in a radar sensor) ready for improvement to yield predictable results (e.g. feeding the RF transmit signal to a signal path which is operably connected to an RF output port of the MMIC) and result in an improved system (e.g. obtain reliable distance and speed measurement, as recognized by Kollmann (‘248) {col.1 lines 42-43 (reliable distance and speed measurement.), 45 (reliability of the radar measurements); col.2 lines 20-22 (feeding the RF transmit signal to a signal path which is operably connected to an RF output port of the MMIC)}).
Regarding claim 2, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Steinbuch (‘154) and Kollmann (‘248) discloses that in the solder ball detecting device,
the welding state of the solder ball is a normal connection state, a disengagement state, or an abnormal connection state {see Steinbuch (‘154) page 1 lines 5-6 from bottom (The solder balls are melted during soldering, for example, during reflow soldering, and connect to the copper of the circuit board); page 2 lines 15-17 (how intact the solder ball connection is. If, for example, the solder bead has a crack, this results in a mismatch of the electronic component with the printed circuit board.); page 4 lines 23-24 (how intact the solder ball connection is., indicates the solder bead 105 an incipient crack,)}.
Regarding claim 5, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Steinbuch (‘154) and Kollmann (‘248) discloses that in the solder ball detecting device,
the solder ball is disposed on a copper cladding layer of the printed circuit board {see Steinbuch (‘154) page 1 lines 5-6 from bottom (The solder balls are melted during soldering, for example, during reflow soldering, and connect to the copper of the circuit board); page 4 lines 1-2 (a printed circuit board 103, solder bead 105 on the circuit board 103)}, and
the solder ball detecting device is disposed on the printed circuit board and electrically connected to the copper cladding layer of the printed circuit board {see Steinbuch (‘154) Fig.1; Fig.2; Fig.5; page 1 lines 5-6 from bottom (The solder balls are melted during soldering, for example, during reflow soldering, and connect to the copper of the circuit board); page 3 lines 1 from bottom (5 a radar sensor with the electronic device), 4 from bottom (1 an electronic device 2 a detailed view of the electronic device 1 .)}.
Regarding claim 6, which depends on claim 1, Steinbuch (‘154) discloses that in the solder ball detecting device,
the critical signal includes at least one of the following: at least one of a radio frequency { page 4 line 3 (the solder bead is 105 an RF solder bead or a NF solder bead), 18-19 (an electrical RF voltage is applied, so one is formed in the direction of the solder ball 105 propagating traveling electromagnetic wave 111);}; and
However, Steinbuch (‘154) does not explicitly disclose that (see words with underline) “the critical signal includes at least one of the following: at least one of a radio frequency transmit signal and a radio frequency receive signal for detecting a surrounding object” and “at least one of a local oscillation signal, a synchronization clock signal or a synchronization control signal required for cooperative operations of a plurality of chips”. In the same field of endeavor, Kollmann (‘248) discloses that
the critical signal includes at least one of the following: at least one of a radio frequency transmit signal and a radio frequency receive signal for detecting a surrounding object { Fig.1; Fig.10 PTx, STX, SRX; Fig.11 (PTx1, PTX2, PTx3)); Fig.5(a)(b) (transmission line 7 to antenna); Fig.6 PTX; col.6 lines 15- 16 (a defective connection, a chip contact and the respective solder ball 4,); col.8 line 4 (output port PTx)}; and
at least one of a local oscillation signal, a synchronization clock signal or a synchronization control signal required for cooperative operations of a plurality of chips { Fig.11 (SLO(t))}.
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that applying a known technique (e.g. transmit radar signal from MMIC to other radar components (e.g. antenna, oscillator, etc.) and receive radar signal from other radar components (e.g. antenna, oscillator, etc.) to MMIC, which is important for radar operation in object detection, via signal pins on radar integrated circuits mounted on printed circuit board) to a known device (e.g. electronic device integrated in a radar sensor) ready for improvement to yield predictable results (e.g. feeding the RF transmit/receive signal to a signal path which is operably connected to an RF output port of the MMIC and operate radar device with oscillating signals) and result in an improved system (e.g. obtain reliable distance and speed measurement, as recognized by Kollmann (‘248) {col.1 lines 42-43 (reliable distance and speed measurement.), 45 (reliability of the radar measurements), 58-59 (fronted circuit includes a local oscillator (LO) configured to generate an RF transmit signal); col.2 lines 20-22 (feeding the RF transmit signal to a signal path which is operably connected to an RF output port of the MMIC), 35-36 (an operating principle of a frequency modulated continuous-wave (FMCW) radar system)}).
Regarding claim 7, which depends on claim 1, Steinbuch (‘154) does not explicitly disclose “the detecting unit is further configured to initiate state detection of the solder ball according to a self-test instruction from the radar chip”. In the same field of endeavor, Kollmann (‘248) discloses that in the solder ball detecting device ,
the detecting unit is further configured to initiate state detection of the solder ball according to a self-test instruction from the radar chip { col.2 lines 16-18 (a self-test method for an RF front-end integrated in a monolithic microwave integrated circuit (MMIC) is described); col.6 lines 32-33 (a radar device may include monitoring and self-test functions. monitoring and self-test circuits may be included in the MMIC and configured to); Examiner’s note: “configured” for “initiate” and “according to a self-test instruction from the radar chip”}.
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that applying a known technique (e.g. transmit radar signal from MMIC to other radar components (e.g. antenna, oscillator, etc.), which is important for radar operation in object detection, via signal pins on radar integrated circuits mounted on printed circuit board with monitoring and self-test circuits) to a known device (e.g. electronic device integrated in a radar sensor) ready for improvement to yield predictable results (e.g. monitor and self-test feeding of the RF transmit/receive signal to a signal path which is operably connected to an RF output port of the MMIC and operate radar device with oscillating signals) and result in an improved system (e.g. obtain reliable distance and speed measurement, as recognized by Kollmann (‘248) {col.1 lines 42-43 (reliable distance and speed measurement.), 45 (reliability of the radar measurements), 58-59 (fronted circuit includes a local oscillator (LO) configured to generate an RF transmit signal); col.2 lines 20-22 (feeding the RF transmit signal to a signal path which is operably connected to an RF output port of the MMIC), 35-36 (an operating principle of a frequency modulated continuous-wave (FMCW) radar system)}).
Regarding claim 8, which depends on claim 1, Steinbuch (‘154) does not explicitly disclose “initiate state detection of the solder ball according to the preset instruction from the printed circuit board”. In the same field of endeavor, Kollmann (‘248) discloses that in the solder ball detecting device, the detecting unit is further configured to
initiate state detection of the solder ball according to the preset instruction from the printed circuit board {col.2 lines 16-18 (a self-test method for an RF front-end integrated in a monolithic microwave integrated circuit (MMIC) is described); col.6 lines 32-33 (a radar device may include monitoring and self-test functions. monitoring and self-test circuits may be included in the MMIC and configured to); Examiner’s note: “configured” for “initiate” and “according to the preset instruction from the printed circuit board”}.
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that applying a known technique (e.g. transmit radar signal from MMIC to other radar components (e.g. antenna, oscillator, etc.), which is important for radar operation in object detection, via signal pins on radar integrated circuits mounted on printed circuit board with monitoring and self-test circuits) to a known device (e.g. electronic device integrated in a radar sensor) ready for improvement to yield predictable results (e.g. monitor and self-test feeding of the RF transmit/receive signal to a signal path which is operably connected to an RF output port of the MMIC and operate radar device with oscillating signals) and result in an improved system (e.g. obtain reliable distance and speed measurement, as recognized by Kollmann (‘248) {col.1 lines 42-43 (reliable distance and speed measurement.), 45 (reliability of the radar measurements), 58-59 (fronted circuit includes a local oscillator (LO) configured to generate an RF transmit signal); col.2 lines 20-22 (feeding the RF transmit signal to a signal path which is operably connected to an RF output port of the MMIC), 35-36 (an operating principle of a frequency modulated continuous-wave (FMCW) radar system)}).
Regarding claim 9, which depends on claim 1, the combination of Steinbuch (‘154) and Kollmann (‘248) discloses that the solder ball detecting device further comprising
a power supply connected to the sampling unit {see Steinbuch (‘154) Fig.2 item 111 from 103 to item 115; page 4 lines 14-19 (The power sensor 115 is formed as a bidirectional power sensor, power sensor includes 115 a directional coupler 117, electrically connected an electrical RF voltage is applied, so one is formed in the direction of the solder ball 105 propagating traveling electromagnetic wave 111); Examiner’s note: “directional coupler 117” for “a sampling unit” },
wherein the sampling unit is a voltage dividing circuit that outputs the sampled signal { see Steinbuch (‘154) Fig.2 item 111 from 103 to item 115; Fig.3; page 3 lines 16-18 (two points with the coordinates (U .sub.HF1 , U .sub.DC1 ) for a voltage measured by means of the first detector .sub.diode and (U .sub.HF2 , U .sub.DC2 ) for a voltage measured by means of the second detector.); page 4 lines 14-16 (The power sensor 115 is formed as a bidirectional power sensor and includes a first detector dode 119 and a second detector diode 121, power sensor includes 115 a directional coupler 117, which with the two detector diodes 119 and 121 electrically connected); Examiner’s note: “directional coupler 117, which with the two detector diodes 119 and 121 electrically connected” for “a voltage dividing circuit”. Fig.3 for “outputs the sampled signal”}.
Regarding claim 11, as modified above, Steinbuch (‘154) discloses that A radar sensor { Fig.5; page 3 line 1 from bottom (5 a radar sensor with the electronic device); page 4 line 4 from bottom (electronic device 101 integrated in a radar sensor 125)}, comprising:
a radar chip { page 3 lines 12-13 from bottom (The electronic component, in particular the integrated monolithic microwave circuit, can be integrated in a radar sensor.) };
a solder ball, configured to fix the radar chip on a printed circuit board { Fig.1 items 107, 105, 103; page 1 lines 5-6 from bottom (The solder balls are melted during soldering, for example, during reflow soldering, and connect to the copper of the circuit board); page 3 lines 12-13 from bottom (The electronic component, in particular the integrated monolithic microwave circuit, can be integrated in a radar sensor.); page 4 lines 1-2 (a printed circuit board 103, electronic component 107,), 4 (several solder balls 105) }; and
a solder ball detecting device, electrically connected to the solder ball and configured to detect a welding state of the solder ball, a signal pin of the radar chip being fixed to the printed circuit board by the solder ball, the solder ball detecting device comprising:
a sampling unit, configured to collect a sampled signal from a circuit loop in which the solder ball is located; and
a detecting unit, configured to detect the sampled signal to output state information reflecting the welding state of the solder ball;
wherein the radar chip is configured to transmit a critical signal related to object detection via the signal pin and the solder ball.
{The claim limitations above are the same or substantially the same scope as the corresponding claim limitations in claim 1. Therefore the claim limitations above are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as in claim 1. See the rejections of claim 1}.
Regarding claim 12, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 2. Accordingly, claim 12 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 2, shown above.
Regarding claim 15, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 7 or 8. Accordingly, claim 15 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 7 or 8, shown above.
Regarding claim 16, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claim 6. Accordingly, claim 16 is rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claim 6, shown above.
Regarding claim 17, as modified above, Steinbuch (‘154) discloses that A radar chip { Fig.5; page 3 line 1 from bottom (5 a radar sensor with the electronic device); page 4 line 4 from bottom (electronic device 101 integrated in a radar sensor 125)}, comprising:
a solder ball detecting device;
wherein the solder ball detecting device is electrically connected to a solder ball of the radar chip, and includes:
a sampling unit, configured to collect a sampled signal from a circuit loop in which the solder ball is located; and
a detecting unit, configured to detect the sampled signal to output state information reflecting a welding state of the solder ball;
wherein the radar chip is configured to transmit a critical signal related to object detection via the signal pin and the solder ball.
{The claim limitations above are the same or substantially the same scope as the corresponding claim limitations in claim 1. Therefore the claim limitations above are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as in claim 1. See the rejections of claim 1}.
Regarding claim 18, which depends on claim 17, the combination of Steinbuch (‘154) and Kollmann (‘248) discloses that in the radar chip, the sampled signal includes at least one of:
a measured voltage signal, a power level signal, or a direct current voltage dividing signal {see Steinbuch (‘154) Fig.3}.
Regarding claim 19, as modified above, Steinbuch (‘154) discloses that An electronic equipment, comprising the radar sensor { Fig.1; Fig.5; page 3 lines 4-5 from bottom (figures, 1 an electronic device), 1 from bottom (5 a radar sensor with the electronic device); page 4 line 4 from bottom (electronic device 101 integrated in a radar sensor 125)} according to claim 11 {see the rejection of claim 11}.
Regarding claim 20, as modified above, Steinbuch (‘154) discloses that An electronic equipment, comprising the radar chip { Fig.1; Fig.5; page 3 lines 4-5 from bottom (figures, 1 an electronic device), 1 from bottom (5 a radar sensor with the electronic device); page 4 line 4 from bottom (electronic device 101 integrated in a radar sensor 125)} according to claim 17 {see the rejection of claim 17}.
Claims 3-4, 10, 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steinbuch (‘154) and Kollmann (‘248) as applied to claims 1 and 11, respectively, above, and further in view of Mutnury et al. (US 11,513,150, hereafter Mutnury).
Regarding claim 3, which depends on claim 1, Steinbuch (‘154) discloses that in the solder ball detecting device,
the detecting unit is configured to detect a deviation of a voltage of the sampled signal { see Steinbuch (‘154) Fig.3; Fig.4; page 3 lines 16-22 (two points with the coordinates (U .sub.HF1 , U .sub.DC1 ) for a voltage measured by means of the first detector .sub.diode and (U .sub.HF2 , U .sub.DC2 ) for a voltage measured by means of the second detector. Since, as stated above, the amplitudes of the outgoing and returning waves generally differ by one order of magnitude, U .sub.HF1 is greater than U .sub.HF2 . The efficiency, which corresponds to the slope of the characteristic curve, is thus greater at point (U .sub.HF1 , U .sub.DC1 ) than at point (U .sub.HF2 , U .sub.DC2 ), which deviate only slightly from the actual powers)}.
However, Steinbuch (‘154) and Kollmann (‘248) do not explicitly disclose (see words with underline) “the detecting unit is configured to detect a deviation of a voltage of the sampled signal from a reference threshold and to output the state information based on the deviation”. In the same field of endeavor, Mutnury (‘150) discloses that
the detecting unit is configured to detect a deviation of a voltage of the sampled signal from a reference threshold and to output the state information based on the deviation { col.4 line 41-44 (report logic 264 performs processing on the digitized magnitudes, such as by defining one or more threshold for the digitized magnitudes.), 46-50 (when the digitized magnitudes are above the first threshold but below a second threshold, report logic 264 may interpret that no moderate cracking is being exhibited and may provide a crack warning indication 50)}.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the combination of Steinbuch (‘154) and Kollmann (‘248) with the teachings of Mutnury (‘150) {use repot logic by defining one or more threshold for digitized magnitudes to interpret crack indication} to use repot logic by defining one or more threshold for digitized magnitudes to interpret crack indication. Doing so would interpret magnitude of process signal so as to interpret cracks in different levels based on the magnitude of process signal, as recognized by Mutnury (‘150) {col.4 lines 35-38 (ADC 262 provides a digitized representation of the magnitude of the reflected signal to report logic 264. Report logic 264 operates to interpret the digitized magnitudes as needed or desired), 45-53 (a first threshold, no significant cracking, second threshold, no moderate cracking, significant cracking)}.
Regarding claim 4, which depends on claim 1, Steinbuch (‘154) and Kollmann (‘248) do not explicitly disclose “the solder ball detecting device further includes: an alarm unit, configured to receive the state information and issue an alarm message based on the state information indicating that the welding state is a disengagement state or an abnormal connection state”. In the same field of endeavor, Mutnury (‘150) discloses that in the solder ball detecting device, the solder ball detecting device further includes:
an alarm unit, configured to receive the state information and issue an alarm message based on the state information indicating that the welding state is a disengagement state or an abnormal connection state {col.4 lines 46-54 (when the digitized magnitudes are above the first threshold but below a second threshold, report logic 264 may interpret that no moderate cracking is being exhibited and may provide a crack warning indication. when the digitized magnitudes are above the second threshold, report logic 264 may interpret that significant cracking is being exhibited and may provide a critical crack warning indication.)}.
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have recognized that applying a known technique (e.g. give warning when cracking indicated from report logic is moderate or significant) to a known device (e.g. electronic device integrated in a radar sensor) ready for improvement to yield predictable results (e.g. report crack situation) and result in an improved system (e.g. interpret cracks in different levels based on the magnitude of process signal and provide warning indication accordingly when the crack is moderate or significant, as recognized by Mutnury (‘150) {col.4 lines 35-38 (ADC 262 provides a digitized representation of the magnitude of the reflected signal to report logic 264. Report logic 264 operates to interpret the digitized magnitudes as needed or desired), 45-53 (a first threshold, no significant cracking, second threshold, no moderate cracking, significant cracking)}).
Regarding claim 10, which depends on claim 1, Steinbuch (‘154) and Kollmann (‘248) do not explicitly disclose “the detecting unit includes: an analog signal converter configured to convert a received analog signal into a digital sampled signal for detection and generation of the state information at a digital side”. In the same field of endeavor, Mutnury (‘150) discloses that in the solder ball detecting device, the detecting unit includes:
an analog signal converter configured to convert a received analog signal into a digital sampled signal for detection and generation of the state information at a digital side { Fig.2 items 260 (detector), 262 (ADC), 264 (report logic), large cracks }.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the combination of Steinbuch (‘154) and Kollmann (‘248) with the teachings of Mutnury (‘150) {use repot logic by defining one or more threshold for digitized magnitudes to interpret crack indication} to use repot logic by defining one or more threshold for digitized magnitudes to interpret crack indication. Doing so would interpret magnitude of process signal so as to interpret cracks in different levels based on the magnitude of process signal, as recognized by Mutnury (‘150) {col.4 lines 35-38 (ADC 262 provides a digitized representation of the magnitude of the reflected signal to report logic 264. Report logic 264 operates to interpret the digitized magnitudes as needed or desired), 45-53 (a first threshold, no significant cracking, second threshold, no moderate cracking, significant cracking)}.
Regarding claims 13-14, Applicant recites claim limitations of the same or substantially the same scope as that of claims 3-4, respectively. Accordingly, claims 13-14 are rejected in the same or substantially the same manner as claims 3-4, respectively, shown above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 11513150 discloses that “the welding state of the solder ball is a normal connection state, a disengagement state, or an abnormal connection state” { Fig.2 (No cracks, small cracks, large cracks }, which further support the rejection of claim 2.
US 11513150 also discloses that “the solder ball is disposed on a copper cladding layer of the printed circuit board, and the solder ball detecting device is disposed on the printed circuit board and electrically connected to the copper cladding layer of the printed circuit board” { Fig.2}, which further support the rejection of claim 5.
US 20170315214 discloses that “the detecting unit is further configured to initiate state detection of the solder ball according to a self-test instruction from the radar chip” {[0011] lines 1-7 ( the component (MMIC) is thus itself modified in such a way that it is able to generate well-defined error conditions on the basis of an internal program and/or an external command so that it may be tested during operation of the radar sensor with the permissible series software whether these errors are correctly detected and appropriately treated)} , which further support the rejection of claim 7.
US 20170315214 also discloses that “the detecting unit is further configured to initiate state detection of the solder ball according to the preset instruction from the printed circuit board” {[0003] lines 1-4 (Prior to the initial operation of the radar sensor , the monitoring functions should also be subjected to a functional test in order to ensure that the monitoring functions correctly detect the error conditions that they are to monitor); [0011] lines 1-7 ( the component (MMIC) is thus itself modified in such a way that it is able to generate well-defined error conditions on the basis of an internal program and/or an external command so that it may be tested during operation of the radar sensor with the permissible series software whether these errors are correctly detected and appropriately treated)} , which further support the rejection of claim 8.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YONGHONG LI whose telephone number is (571)272-5946. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am - 5:00pm.
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, Vladimir Magloire can be reached at (571)270-5144. 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.
/YONGHONG LI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights