DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claim 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the US Patent US 9,423,424 by Hsu et al., (Hsu hereafter) in view of the US Patent US 5,493,230 by Swart et al., (Swart hereafter).
Regarding claim 9, Hsu teaches a guide board mechanism of a probe card device having a parallel connection configuration, the guide board mechanism comprising:
a first guide board module (upper board 30 + 32) including:
a single guide board (30) having a plurality of first thru-holes (through holes 36 on upper board 30) that are defined into at least two first thru-hole groups;
at least two first connection circuits (units 40 on upper board 30) formed on the single guide boards, wherein the at least two first connection circuits respectively correspond in position to the thru-hole groups and are respectively arranged along the at least two first thru-hole groups (as shown in Fig. 5); and
a second guide board module (lower 30+ 32) being spaced apart from the first guide board module along the thickness direction and including:
a single second guide board (lower 30) having a plurality of second thru-holes that are defined into at least two second thru-hole groups (through holes 36 on lower board 30), wherein the first thru-hole group respectively correspond in position to the second thru-hole group, and arrangements of the at least two first thru-hole groups are respectively identical to arrangements of the at least two second thru-hole groups (the through holes are identical in terms of width and shape);
at least two second connection circuits (units 40 in bottom board 30) formed on the second guide board, wherein the at least two second connection circuits respectively correspond in position to the at least two second thru-hole groups and are respectively arranged along the second thru-hole groups (as shown in Figure 5), and wherein the at least two first connection circuits respectively correspond in position to the at least two second connection circuits (as shown in Figure 5), and patterns of the at least two first connection circuits are respectively identical to patterns of the at least two second connection circuits (upper and lower units 40 have the same dimensions and share the same cylindrical conductive pattern).
Hsu substantially teaches all of the elements disclosed above, except that Hsu uses a single board in each of the first and second guide modules instead of the recited two guide boards separated by a first spacer sheet sandwiched between the guide boards in each module.
Swart teaches in Figure 4a, a guide board module (46) comprising a first board (48), a second board (50) and a spacing sheet (52) sandwiched between the first and second board.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was effectively filed, to apply the teaching of guide board modules comprising a first and second board, as well as a spacing sheet sandwiched between the boards, as taught by Swart, and modify Hsu’s first and second guide board modules so that both include two guide boards and a spacing sheet sandwiched in between. Doing so would allow the spacing sheet in each module to reduce drag forces on the probes during use, as suggested by Swart in col. 7, lines 10-11.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-8 are allowed. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 1, the prior art of record fails to teach alone or in combination a probe card, wherein at least two of the conductive probes passing through one of the at least two first thru-hole groups and the corresponding second thru-hole group are electrically coupled to each other by being in contact with the corresponding first connection circuit and the corresponding second connection circuit, thereby jointly establishing a parallel connection configuration in a three-dimensional mesh shape, in combination with all other elements recited.
As to claims 2-8, the claims are allowed as they include the allowable subject matter in claim 1 noted above.
Claim 10 is 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.
Regarding claim 10, the prior art of record fails to teach alone or in combination a guide board mechanism for a probe card, wherein one of the at least two first thru-hole groups and the corresponding first connection circuit surround an outer side of another one of the at least two first thru-hole groups and the corresponding first connection circuit, and one of the at least two second thru-hole groups and the corresponding second connection circuit surround an outer side of another one of the at least two second thru-hole groups and the corresponding second connection circuit, in combination with all other elements recited.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
- The US Patent US 5,773,988 by Sayre et al.
- The US Patent US 4,841,240 by Hsue et al.
- The US Patent US 4,061,969 by Dean.
- The US Patent US 4,551,673 by Barth et al.
- The US Patent US 4,897,598 by Doemens et al.
- The US Patent Application Publication PGPub 2025/0283915 by Lu et al.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Richard Isla whose telephone number is (571)272-5056. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9a - 5:30p.
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, Huy Phan can be reached at 571 272-7924. 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.
/RICHARD ISLA/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858 June 23, 2026
Prosecution Insights