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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 & 19-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 & 19-20 of copending Application No. 19/060915 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they only change the method by which data is gathered.
Application # 19/050905
Application # 19/050915
Claim 1,
An automated test equipment, ATE, for testing a device under test, DUT, the automated test equipment comprising: a testing profile analyzer, and a temperature control instruction provider; wherein the testing profile analyzer is configured to acquire a testing profile indicating an evolution of a DUT temperature during an execution of a given test flow; wherein the testing profile analyzer is configured to analyze the testing profile, in order determine an information describing a plurality of temperature peaks using a fitting approach; and wherein temperature control instruction provider is configured to provide a plurality of temperature control instructions for an execution of a test flow on the basis of the information describing the plurality of temperature peaks.
Claim 1,
An automated test equipment, ATE, for testing a device under test, DUT, the automated test equipment comprising: a testing profile analyzer; and a temperature control instruction provider; wherein the testing profile analyzer is configured to acquire a testing profile indicating an evolution of a DUT temperature during an execution of a given test flow; wherein the testing profile analyzer is configured analyze the testing profile, in order determine an information describing a plurality of temperature peaks; and wherein the temperature control instruction provider is configured to acquire a plurality of temperature control instructions for an execution of a test flow on the basis of the information describing the plurality of temperature peaks; wherein the temperature control instruction provider is configured to iteratively acquire the temperature control instructions.
Claim 19,
A method for testing a device under test, DUT, the method comprising: acquiring a testing profile indicating an evolution of a DUT temperature during an execution of a given test flow; analyzing the testing profile, in order determine an information describing a plurality of temperature peaks using a fitting approach; and acquiring a plurality of temperature control instructions for an execution of an updated test flow on the basis of the information describing the plurality of temperature peaks.
Claim 19,
A method for testing a device under test, DUT, the method comprising: acquiring a testing profile indicating an evolution of a DUT temperature during an execution of a given test flow; analyzing the testing profile, in order determine an information describing a plurality of temperature peaks; and acquiring a plurality of temperature control instructions for an execution of a test flow on the basis of the information describing the plurality of temperature peaks; and wherein the temperature control instructions are acquired iteratively.
Claim 20,
A non-transitory digital storage medium having a computer program stored thereon to perform a method for testing a device under test, DUT, wherein the method comprises acquiring a testing profile indicating an evolution of a DUT temperature during an execution of a given test flow; wherein the method comprises analyzing the testing profile, in order determine an information describing a plurality of temperature peaks using a fitting approach; and wherein the method comprises acquiring a plurality of temperature control instructions for an execution of an updated test flow on the basis of the information describing the plurality of temperature peaks, when said computer program is run by a computer.
Claim 20,
A non-transitory digital storage medium having a computer program stored thereon to perform a method for testing a device under test, DUT, wherein the method comprises acquiring a testing profile indicating an evolution of a DUT temperature during an execution of a given test flow; wherein the method comprises analyzing the testing profile, in order determine an information describing a plurality of temperature peaks; and wherein the method comprises acquiring a plurality of temperature control instructions for an execution of a test flow on the basis of the information describing the plurality of temperature peaks; and wherein the method comprises iteratively acquiring the temperature control instructions, when said computer program is run by a computer.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 5-6, 10-17, & 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) & (a)(2) as being anticipated by Yoshino et al (U.S. PGPub # 2019/0086468).
Regarding Independent claim 1, Yoshino teaches:
An automated test equipment, ATE, for testing (Fig. 7 Element 100.) a device under test, DUT (Fig. 7 Element 105.), the automated test equipment comprising:
a testing profile analyzer (Fig. 7 Element 106. See paragraphs 0031, 0035-0038, 0044, 0046, & 0049.), and
a temperature control instruction provider (Fig. 7 Elements 108, 204 & 206. See paragraphs 0033-0034, 0039-0040, 0042-0043, & 0048 wherein the sensors provide information to the system that controls the cooling.);
wherein the testing profile analyzer is configured to acquire a testing profile indicating an evolution of a DUT temperature during an execution of a given test flow (Fig. 7 Element 210, the synchronized temperature profile.);
wherein the testing profile analyzer is configured to analyze the testing profile (Fig. 7 Element 210, the synchronized temperature profile.), in order determine an information describing a plurality of temperature peaks using a fitting approach (Fig. 7 Element 210, the synchronized temperature profile. The ATE analyzes the testing profile e.g. by identifying which cycles within the testing profile cause a temperature spike, i.e. a peak, and determines the synchronized temperature profile curve 210 in fig.7, which is information describing the whole curve, thus also describing the temperature peaks of the curve, see paragraphs 0050 & 0062.); and
wherein temperature control instruction provider is configured to provide a plurality of temperature control instructions for an execution of a test flow on the basis of the information describing the plurality of temperature peaks (Fig. 7 Elements 108, 204 & 206. See paragraphs 0033-0034, 0039-0040, 0042-0043, & 0048 wherein the sensors provide information to the system that controls the cooling. The ATE feeds thermal control signals, i.e. temperature control instructions, based on the determined synchronized temperature profile 210 to handler 108 with cooling system 109 to start to increase cooling before said temperature peaks arise, so that temperature control instructions are provided and obtained. Said instructions are for an execution of a test flow which includes said cooling
and which instructions are on the basis of the synchronized temperature profile curve 210 being information describing the temperature peaks, see paragraphs 0052, 0060, 0051-0052 and fig.7-9, in particular step 910 of fig.9, and also paragraphs 0061-0063. It is noted that an ATE as such is per se configured to obtain, e.g. receive, said control instructions, SO that the last three lines of claim 1 do not add any substantial features to the ATE as such anyway).
PNG
media_image1.png
506
446
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Yoshino teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino teaches the testing profile analyzer or the temperature control instruction provider is configured to classify thermal events as thermal events comprising a small significance and as thermal events comprising a high significance; and wherein the temperature control instruction provider is configured to provide the temperature control instructions on the basis of the thermal events comprising the high significance (See paragraphs 0050-0052, 0060, & 0062 wherein some thermal events, disclosed as thermal spikes represent thermal events having higher relevance that are mitigated. There is no need to advance cooling if no thermal spikes are anticipated in the cycle. Therefore, nothing needs to be done because there is no perceived significant problem anticipated in another part of the cycle.).
Regarding claim 6, Yoshino teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino teaches the testing profile analyzer is configured to take into account a minimum overheat event duration threshold value when determining the information describing the plurality of temperature peaks (See paragraphs 0050-0052, 0060, & 0062 wherein some thermal events, disclosed as thermal spikes represent thermal events having higher relevance that are mitigated. There is no need to advance cooling if no thermal spikes are anticipated in the cycle. Therefore, nothing needs to be done because there is no perceived significant problem anticipated in another part of the cycle.).
Regarding claim 10, Yoshino teaches all elements of claim 9, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino teaches the testing profile analyzer or the temperature control instruction provider is configured to automatically adjust a criterion for providing a combined temperature control event or a combined temperature control instruction on the basis of two or more fitted temperature peaks such that a total number of temperature control events or a total number of temperature control instructions does not exceed a predetermined maximum value (See paragraphs 0008,0033-0035, & 0049-0050. See Fig.7. Irrespective of said passages, it is noted that an ATE as such is configured to obtain, e.g. receive, said event or instruction).
Regarding claim 11, Yoshino teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino teaches the testing profile analyzer is configured to select a limited a number of temperature peaks, out of an overall number of temperature peaks within testing profile, for a determination of the information describing the plurality of temperature peaks, or wherein the testing profile analyzer or the temperature control instruction provider is configured to select a limited a number of temperature peaks, out of an overall number of temperature peaks within testing profile, for providing the plurality of temperature control instructions (See paragraphs 0050-0052, 0060, & 0062 wherein some thermal events, disclosed as thermal spikes represent thermal events having higher relevance that are mitigated. There is no need to advance cooling if no thermal spikes are anticipated in the cycle. Therefore, nothing needs to be done because there is no perceived significant problem anticipated in another part of the cycle.).
Regarding claim 12, Yoshino teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino teaches a temperature control instruction inserter (Fig. 7 Element Feed-Forward Data.); wherein the temperature control instruction inserter is configured to correlate a timing information of the information describing the plurality of temperature peaks with test flow events (See paragraphs 0050-0052. Fig. 7 Element Feed-Forward Data.).
Regarding claim 13, Yoshino teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino teaches a temperature control instruction inserter (Fig. 7 Element Feed-Forward Data.); wherein the temperature control instruction inserter is configured to receive an input test flow and to insert a plurality of temperature control instructions into the input test flow, to acquire an updated test flow, wherein the temperature control instruction inserter is configured to insert the plurality of temperature control instructions into the input test flow to start the temperature control before a beginning of a respective temperature peak. (See paragraphs 0035-0038 & 0049-0051 wherein synchronization including alignment and correlation between the temperature data and the respective cycle times of the testing profile are disclosed and stored in memory.).
Regarding claim 14, Yoshino teaches all elements of claim 13, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino teaches the temperature control instruction inserter (Fig. 7 Element Feed-Forward Data.) is configured to acquire a test log file which is associated with the thermal profile (See paragraphs 0035-0038 & 0049-0051 wherein synchronization including alignment and correlation between the temperature data and the respective cycle times of the testing profile are disclosed and stored in memory.), and wherein the temperature control instruction inserter is configured to insert the plurality of temperature control instructions into the test flow using information of the test log file (See paragraphs 0035-0038 & 0049-0051 wherein synchronization including alignment and correlation between the temperature data and the respective cycle times of the testing profile are disclosed and stored in memory.).
Regarding claim 15, Yoshino teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino teaches a visualizer (Fig. 7 Element 20 wherein the temperature data is plotted and therefore visualized.); wherein the visualizer is configured to jointly visualize - the testing profile indicating the evolution of a DUT temperature during the execution of the given test flow (Fig. 7 Element 20 wherein the temperature data during a cycle is plotted and therefore visualized.), and- respective fitting functions fitted to the plurality of temperature peaks within the testing profile (Paragraphs 0026-0028 wherein modules are disclosed.).
Regarding claim 16, Yoshino teaches all elements of claim 15, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino teaches wherein the visualizer (Fig. 7 Element 20 wherein the temperature data is plotted and therefore visualized.) is configured to also visualize temperature control periods determined using the information describing the plurality of temperature peaks (Fig. 7 Element 20 wherein the temperature data is plotted and therefore visualized. See paragraphs 0050-0052, 0060, & 0062 wherein some thermal events are disclosed being processed and analyzed.).
Regarding claim 17, Yoshino teaches all elements of claim 15, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino teaches the visualizer is configured to update the visualization in response to a user interaction changing one or more parameters (Fig. 7 Element 20 wherein the temperature data is plotted and therefore visualized. See paragraphs 0050-0052, 0060, & 0062 wherein some thermal events are disclosed being processed and analyzed.).
Regarding Independent claim 19, Yoshino teaches:
A method for testing (Fig. 7 Element 100.) a device under test, DUT(Fig. 7 Element 105.), the method comprising:
acquiring a testing profile indicating an evolution of a DUT temperature during an execution of a given test flow (Fig. 7 Element 210, the synchronized temperature profile.);
analyzing the testing profile, in order determine an information describing a plurality of temperature peaks using a fitting approach (Fig. 7 Element 210, the synchronized temperature profile. The ATE analyzes the testing profile e.g. by identifying which cycles within the testing profile cause a temperature spike, i.e. a peak, and determines the synchronized temperature profile curve 210 in fig.7, which is information describing the whole curve, thus also describing the temperature peaks of the curve, see paragraphs 0050 & 0062.); and
acquiring a plurality of temperature control instructions for an execution of an updated test flow on the basis of the information describing the plurality of temperature peaks (Fig. 7 Elements 108, 204 & 206. See paragraphs 0033-0034, 0039-0040, 0042-0043, & 0048 wherein the sensors provide information to the system that controls the cooling. The ATE feeds thermal control signals, i.e. temperature control instructions, based on the determined synchronized temperature profile 210 to handler 108 with cooling system 109 to start to increase cooling before said temperature peaks arise, so that temperature control instructions are provided and obtained. Said instructions are for an execution of a test flow which includes said cooling and which instructions are on the basis of the synchronized temperature profile curve 210 being information describing the temperature peaks, see paragraphs 0052, 0060, 0051-0052 and fig.7-9, in particular step 910 of fig.9, and also paragraphs 0061-0063. It is noted that an ATE as such is per se configured to obtain, e.g. receive, said control instructions, SO that the last three lines of claim 1 do not add any substantial features to the ATE as such anyway).
PNG
media_image1.png
506
446
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Independent claim 20, Yoshino teaches:
A non-transitory digital storage medium having a computer program stored thereon to perform a method for testing (Fig. 7 Element 100.) a device under test, DUT (Fig. 7 Element 105.),
wherein the method comprises acquiring a testing profile indicating an evolution of a DUT temperature during an execution of a given test flow (Fig. 7 Element 210, the synchronized temperature profile.);
wherein the method comprises analyzing the testing profile, in order determine an information describing a plurality of temperature peaks using a fitting approach (Fig. 7 Element 210, the synchronized temperature profile. The ATE analyzes the testing profile e.g. by identifying which cycles within the testing profile cause a temperature spike, i.e. a peak, and determines the synchronized temperature profile curve 210 in fig.7, which is information describing the whole curve, thus also describing the temperature peaks of the curve, see paragraphs 0050 & 0062.); and
wherein the method comprises acquiring a plurality of temperature control instructions for an execution of an updated test flow on the basis of the information describing the plurality of temperature peaks (Fig. 7 Elements 108, 204 & 206. See paragraphs 0033-0034, 0039-0040, 0042-0043, & 0048 wherein the sensors provide information to the system that controls the cooling. The ATE feeds thermal control signals, i.e. temperature control instructions, based on the determined synchronized temperature profile 210 to handler 108 with cooling system 109 to start to increase cooling before said temperature peaks arise, so that temperature control instructions are provided and obtained. Said instructions are for an execution of a test flow which includes said cooling and which instructions are on the basis of the synchronized temperature profile curve 210 being information describing the temperature peaks, see paragraphs 0052, 0060, 0051-0052 and fig.7-9, in particular step 910 of fig.9, and also paragraphs 0061-0063. It is noted that an ATE as such is per se configured to obtain, e.g. receive, said control instructions, SO that the last three lines of claim 1 do not add any substantial features to the ATE as such anyway),
when said computer program is run by a computer (Fig. 1 Element 101. Fig. 7 Element 100 wherein the ATE in figure 7 would have the processor disclosed in figure 1.).
PNG
media_image1.png
506
446
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claims 2-3 & 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshino et al (U.S. PGPub # 2019/0086468) in view of Bu Lingqi et al (Translation of CN # 109116216).
Regarding claim 2, Yoshino teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino does not explicitly teach the testing profile analyzer is configured to fit respective fitting functions to the plurality of temperature peaks within the testing profile, in order to acquire parameters of the plurality of temperature peaks.
Bu Lingqi teaches the testing profile analyzer is configured to fit respective fitting functions to the plurality of temperature peaks within the testing profile, in order to acquire parameters of the plurality of temperature peaks (Paragraphs 0005, 0013, & 0023.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to apply the teachings of Bu Lingqi to the teachings of Yoshino such that the testing profile analyzer would be configured to fit respective fitting functions to the plurality of temperature peaks within the testing profile, in order to acquire parameters of the plurality of temperature peaks because curve fitting is a well-known, reliable technique to aid in observing trends in data and simplifying complex information.
Regarding claim 3, Yoshino teaches all elements of claim 2, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino teaches the temperature control instruction provider is configured to determine the plurality of temperature control instructions in dependence on one or more parameters of the fitting functions.
Bu Lingqi teaches the temperature control instruction provider is configured to determine the plurality of temperature control instructions in dependence on one or more parameters of the fitting functions (Paragraphs 0012-0013.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to apply the teachings of Bu Lingqi to the teachings of Yoshino such that the temperature control instruction provider would be configured to determine the plurality of temperature control instructions in dependence on one or more parameters of the fitting functions because this solves “the shortcomings of traditional test methods, such as poor linearity of offset voltage temperature drift curve, low test efficiency, inaccurate temperature, and inability to automatically fit the temperature drift curve.” See paragraph 0013 of translation of Bu Lingqi.
Regarding claim 7, Yoshino teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino does not explicitly teach the testing profile analyzer is configured to fit a common fitting function to two or more adjacent temperature peaks within the testing profile.
Bu Lingqi teaches the testing profile analyzer is configured to fit a common fitting function to two or more adjacent temperature peaks within the testing profile (Paragraphs 0005, 0013, & 0023.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to apply the teachings of Bu Lingqi to the teachings of Yoshino such that the testing profile analyzer is configured to fit a common fitting function to two or more adjacent temperature peaks within the testing profile because curve fitting is a well-known, reliable technique to aid in observing trends in data and simplifying complex information.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshino et al (U.S. PGPub # 2019/0086468) in view of Li et al (U.S. PGPub # 2002/0151092).
Regarding claim 9, Yoshino teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino does not explicitly teach the temperature control instruction provider is configured to provide a combined temperature control event or a combined temperature control instruction on the basis of two or more fitted temperature peaks.
Li teaches the temperature control instruction provider is configured to provide a combined temperature control event or a combined temperature control instruction on the basis of two or more fitted temperature peaks (See Fig. 11 Elements 53, 54, & 55. See paragraphs 0043, 0049, 0071. See also Fig. 5-10, the curves that are analyzed.).
PNG
media_image2.png
508
418
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
728
428
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
218
352
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to apply the teachings of Li to the teachings of Yoshino such that the temperature control instruction provider would be configured to provide a combined temperature control event or a combined temperature control instruction on the basis of two or more fitted temperature peaks because this allows one to monitor various conditions in a material and observe possible problems. See paragraph 0044 of Li.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 8, & 18 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: the prior art listed does not anticipate alone or combine in an obvious manner to teach the invention claimed by applicant.
Regarding claim 4, Yoshino teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino does not explicitly teach the testing profile analyzer is configured to identify the plurality of temperature peaks in the testing profile using a temperature threshold value and/or wherein the testing profile analyzer is configured to identify the plurality of temperature peaks in the testing profile in dependence on an extension of respective ones of the plurality of temperature peaks, and wherein the testing profile analyzer is configured to fit respective fitting functions to the identified temperature peaks, or to a subset of the identified temperature peaks, in order to acquire the information describing the plurality of temperature peaks.
Regarding claim 8, Yoshino & Bu Lingqi teach or make obvious all elements of claim 7, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino & Bu Lingqi do not explicitly teach the testing profile analyzer is configured to evaluate a maximum overheat event proximity parameter to decide whether the common fitting function should be fitted to the two or more adjacent temperature peaks within the testing profile.
Regarding claim 18, Yoshino teaches all elements of claim 1, upon which this claim depends.
Yoshino does not explicitly teach an iteration controller; wherein the iteration controller is configured to control the automated test equipment to execute an updated test flow, which is based on the given test flow and into which the plurality of temperature control instructions are inserted, and wherein the testing profile analyzer is configured to evaluate an updated testing profile indicating an evolution of a DUT temperature during an execution of the updated test flow; and wherein the temperature control instruction provider is configured to refine the temperature control instructions in dependence on the updated testing profile, in order to acquire a refined test flow comprising refined temperature control instructions.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The prior art listed but not cited represents the previous state of the art and analogous art that teaches some of the limitations claimed by applicant.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER P MCANDREW whose telephone number is (469)295-9025. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 6-4:30.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached on 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.
/CHRISTOPHER P MCANDREW/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights