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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement filed on 11/26/2025 has been acknowledged and considered by examiner.
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 7 and 8 are 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.
As to claim 7, recites the limitation “wherein a pair of the insertion blocks disposed symmetrically to each other is provided” (Pg. 3, lines 3-4). This claim is indefinite because it contains a limitation that lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim from which it depends, rendering the claim boundaries unclear. Specifically, the phrase “the insertion blocks” lacks proper antecedent basis because base claim 1 only introduces a singular “an insertion block”. A possible correction would read “The automated mounting test system of claim 1, further comprising a second insertion block the insertion block, wherein the insertion block and the second insertion block each have an insertion slot that extends”.
Claim 8 is rejected for being dependent on a rejected claim.
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.
Claims 1-4, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 2022/0236320) in view of Son et al. (KR 2023/0015585) and Jeong et al. (KR 102040775).
With regards to claim 1, Lee teaches an automated mounting test system for testing a semiconductor product… , the automated mounting test system comprising (“a system level test device” [0007]):
a test tray (“test tray 30”) including a plurality of inserts (“plurality of inserts 31”) and having a tray groove into which each insert is inserted (“test tray 30 may include inserts 31 to selectively hold the memory modules 10, in which a plurality of inserts 31 are provided to have a predetermined array…” [0061] – [0062]);
a handler (“handler 100”) configured to load a semiconductor product to be tested into an empty insert and collect the tested semiconductor product from the insert (“handler 100 is structured to transfer and load the memory module 10 from the user tray 20… to the test tray 30 to perform the system level test, and transfer and load the memory module 10 from the test tray 30 to the user tray 20 to thereby be ready to take the memory module 10 to the outside after the system level test is over” [0033]);
a tester (“test cell 330”) including a plurality of socket modules (“sockets 333/ motherboards 332”), each facing one of the inserts, in a state where the test tray is seated (“test cell 330 is structured to be internally loaded with a plurality of motherboards 332, and includes a plurality of sockets 333, into which the memory modules 10 are inserted…” and “when the transfer unit 200 transfers and seats the test tray 30 to the upper side of the test cell 330, the plurality of memory modules 10 seated on the test tray 30 are arrayed to be disposed above the socket 333” [0049] and [0057]);
and a rack master (“transfer unit 200”) configured to transport the test tray between the handler and the tester (“transfer unit 200 is structured to transfer the test tray 30 between the test unit 300 and the handler 100” [0034]);
and the socket module includes a socket block accommodated in a free space of the tray groove in a state where the test tray is seated on the tester (“when the transfer unit 200 transfers and seats the test tray 30 to the upper side of the test cell 330, the plurality of memory modules 10 seated on the test tray 30 are arrayed to be disposed above the socket 333” [0057]), and a connector which is positioned on one surface of the socket block, formed to transmit or receive signals for testing with the semiconductor product (“the press may maintain a pressing state for a predetermined period of time to maintain electric connection between the plurality of memory modules and the sockets while the plurality of memory modules are being subjected to a system level test in the test cell” [0008]).
Lee does not teach testing a semiconductor product in a standing state, wherein the insert includes an insert housing inserted into an inside of the tray groove, and an insertion block supporting the semiconductor product in a standing posture while supporting the semiconductor product so that one surface of the semiconductor product is exposed to the tray groove.
However, Son et al. teaches testing a semiconductor product in a standing state (“the electronic component D inserted into the insert base 100 to be placed in a standing state” [0041]), wherein the insert includes an insert housing (“insert base 100”) inserted into an inside of the tray groove (“a plurality of inserts 20 may be provided and arranged in a grid pattern on the base portion 10 . The insert 20 may include an insert base 100… insert base 100 may be supported by the base part 10… the lower surface of the insert base 100 may be connected to the upper surface of the base part 10” [0027] – [0028]),
and an insertion block (“gripping protrusion 220”) supporting the semiconductor product in a standing posture while supporting the semiconductor product so that one surface of the semiconductor product is exposed to the tray groove (“electronic component accommodating groove 220a may allow the electronic component D inserted into the insert base 100 to be placed in a standing state. The standing state means a state in which the thickness direction of the electronic component D is perpendicular to the vertical direction” [0041]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the test tray inserts of Lee to incorporate the insert housing and standing state of Son et al. wherein testing a semiconductor product in a standing state, wherein the insert includes an insert housing inserted into an inside of the tray groove, and an insertion block supporting the semiconductor product in a standing posture while supporting the semiconductor product so that one surface of the semiconductor product is exposed to the tray groove to “stably and accurately support the electronic component even if the size of the electronic component is changed” ([0015] Son et al.).
Lee as modified by Son et al. does not teach a moving block connected to the insertion block and provided to be able to advance or retreat inside the insert housing and the connector being electrically connected to the semiconductor product by being in close contact with one surface of the semiconductor product by advancement of the moving block.
However, Jeong et al. teaches a moving block (“moving block 200”) connected to the insertion block and provided to be able to advance or retreat inside the insert housing (“the main moving block 200 is configured to move in the horizontal direction in conjunction with the vertical movement of the operation member 410… The pair of second shaft rails R2 long in the left and right directions are coupled to the fixed block 100. The first main moving block 210 and the second main moving block 220 are mounted to be slidably movable on the second shaft rail R2…” [0036] and [0038])
and the connector being electrically connected to the semiconductor product by being in close contact with one surface of the semiconductor product by advancement of the moving block (“Since the main moving block 200 is coupled to the first contact member 421, the first main moving block 210 and the second main moving block 220 move… At this time, the first connecting pin (P1) installed in the first main moving block 210 moves toward the first terminal” [0061]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the standing device system of Lee as modified by Son et al. to incorporate the moving block of Jeong et al. wherein a moving block connected to the insertion block and provided to be able to advance or retreat inside the insert housing and the connector being electrically connected to the semiconductor product by being in close contact with one surface of the semiconductor product by advancement of the moving block to allow for “horizontal connection” of terminals on the side of the device, while keeping the top of the device unobstructed so that “the laser test of the Z axis and the inclined angle is possible” ([0008] and [0016] Jeong et al.).
With regards to claim 2, Lee as modified by Son et al. and Jeong et al. teaches the automated mounting test system of claim 1. Jeong et al. further teaches wherein the insert further includes a support block (“first contact member 421”) that is provided to be able to advance or retreat inside the insert housing to push the moving block in a direction of the insertion block, and positioned on the back side of the semiconductor product in a state of contacting the moving block (“A first contact member provided on the main moving block and forming a slope in a horizontal direction… Since the first contact member 421 forms a downhill slope SL facing the main moving block 200, the pair of first contact members 421 move in a direction closer to each other… Since the main moving block 200 is coupled to the first contact member 421, the first main moving block 210 and the second main moving block 220 move” [0009], [0060], and [0061]).
With regards to claim 3, Lee as modified by Son et al. and Jeong et al. teaches the automated mounting test system of claim 2. Jeong et al. further teaches wherein the insert further includes a push switch (“button 411”) which protrudes upward from the insert housing, is lowered by an external force, and advances an end portion of the support block in the direction of the insertion block (“The operation member 410 is configured to move in the vertical direction when the user operates… The button 411 that the user presses with a finger is coupled to the operation member 410... When the user presses the button 411 in the non-connected state, the sliding member 422 descends together with the operation member 410 to lower the slope SL” [0046] and [0060]).
With regards to claim 4, Lee as modified by Son et al. and Jeong et al. teaches the automated mounting test system of claim 3. Jeong et al. further teaches wherein the support block has a forward-movement-inducing inclined surface that is in contact with the push switch and is higher as getting closer to the insertion block (“A first contact member provided on the main moving block and forming a slope in a horizontal direction; And a sliding member formed on the operation member and contacting the inclined surface… The first contact member 421 coupled to the first main moving block 210 forms a downhill slope SL facing the first main moving block 210…” [0009] and [0055]).
With regards to claim 7, Lee as modified by Son et al. and Jeong et al. teaches the automated mounting test system of claim 1. Son et al. further teaches wherein a pair of the insertion blocks (“gripping assemblies 200”) disposed symmetrically to each other is provided (“For example, a plurality of gripping assemblies 200 may be provided on both sides so that two or more opposite to each other are provided…” [0052]),
and each of the insertion blocks has an insertion slot that extends in an up-down direction so that the semiconductor product approaches from above and is inserted into the insertion slot (“The electronic component accommodating groove 220a may be formed at one end of the gripping protrusion 220 and may extend vertically… The electronic component accommodating groove 220a may allow the electronic component D inserted into the insert base 100 to be placed in a standing state” [0041]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 2022/0236320) in view of Son et al. (KR 2023/0015585), Jeong et al. (KR 102040775), and Dietrich et al. (US 5973285).
With regards to claim 6, Lee as modified teaches the automated mounting test system of claim 2.
Lee as modified does not teach wherein the support block includes a device alignment hole that is aligned with a through hole formed in the semiconductor product in a state where the semiconductor product is supported by the insertion block.
However, Dietrich et al. teaches wherein the support block includes a device alignment hole (“An alignment assembly 172 is rigidly mounted to the contact plunger 168 and includes two alignment pins 176 and 178” [Col. 7, lines 28-30]; Reversing the location of a mating pin and its receiving hole is a mere reversal of parts (MPEP § 2144.04) and an obvious design choice that yields the identical mechanical alignment and locking function.) that is aligned with a through hole formed in the semiconductor product (“alignment holes 171 and 173 are formed into the electronic memory modules 14 during fabrication” [Col. 7, lines 46-48] and the alignment mechanism is arranged such that “the tips 212 of respective ones of the alignment pins 176 and 178 will pass into the appropriate ones of the alignment holes 171 and 173 of the electronic memory module 14” [Col. 14, lines 29-32]) in a state where the semiconductor product is supported by the insertion block (This alignment occurs when the module is physically stopped and supported in the testing position, “such that the tips 212 of the alignment pins 176 and 178 will fully enter into and pass through the upper opening of respective ones of the alignment holes 171 and 173 prior to the tip 216 of the plunger 168 engaging the top” [Col. 9, lines 20-24]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the test socket assembly of Lee as modified to incorporate the through hole mechanism of Dietrich et al. as modified via a reversal of parts wherein the support block includes a device alignment hole that is aligned with a through hole formed in the semiconductor product in a state where the semiconductor product is supported by the insertion block to cause the surface contacts of the electronic memory module to align appropriately for registering with the terminal end tips of the test contacts which provides a fine positioning, or micropositioning, of the electronic memory module ([Col. 14, lines 34-38] Dietrich et al.).
Claims 8, 9, 11, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 2022/0236320) in view of Son et al. (KR 2023/0015585), Jeong et al. (KR 102040775), and Na et al. (KR 2021/0119344).
With regards to claim 8, Lee as modified teaches the automated mounting test system of claim 7.
Lee as modified does not teach wherein the insert further includes a holding member protruding into an inside of the insertion slot, and a device holding elastic member that elastically supports the holding member within the insertion block.
However, Na et al. teaches wherein the insert further includes a holding member (“pressing member 432”) protruding into an inside of the insertion slot (“loading space LS”), and a device holding elastic member (“coil spring 431”) that elastically supports the holding member within the insertion block (“The coil spring 431 elastically supports the pressing member 432” [0072] – [0074]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the insert of Lee as modified to incorporate the elastic pressing member of Na et al. wherein the insert further includes a holding member protruding into an inside of the insertion slot, and a device holding elastic member that elastically supports the holding member within the insertion block to significantly buffer the corresponding impacts and the probability that the electronic component is separated from the loading space LS by a strong impact is minimized ([0058] Na et al.).
With regards to claim 9, Lee as modified teaches the automated mounting test system of claim 1.
Lee as modified does not teach wherein the socket block includes a block alignment pin extending parallel to a direction in which the insertion block approaches, so as to guide an advancement direction of the insertion block.
However, Na et al. teaches wherein the socket block includes a block alignment pin (“second matching pin AP2”) extending parallel to a direction in which the insertion block approaches, so as to guide an advancement direction of the insertion block (“while the second matching pin AP2 of the test socket TS is inserted into the second matching hole AH2 during the pressurization process, the second matching pin AP2 applies an external force to the insert 200 to insert the insert 200… to match between the test socket TS and the insert 200” [0053]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the test socket assembly of Lee as modified to incorporate the matching pins of Na et al. wherein the socket block includes a block alignment pin extending parallel to a direction in which the insertion block approaches, so as to guide an advancement direction of the insertion block to ensure that electronic components and test sockets are electrically connected precisely, matching between the insert and the pusher and between the insert and the test socket are required ([0011] Na et al.).
With regards to claim 11, Lee as modified teaches the automated mounting test system of claim 1.
Lee as modified does not teach wherein the socket module further includes a seating plate on which the insert housing is seated, and in which a housing alignment pin inserted into the insert housing in a process of the insert housing being seated protrudes upward.
However, Na et al. teaches wherein the socket module further includes a seating plate (“test socket TS” serving as the tester interface) on which the insert housing is seated, and in which a housing alignment pin (“second matching pin AP2”) inserted into the insert housing in a process of the insert housing being seated protrudes upward (“while the second matching pin AP2 of the test socket TS is inserted into the second matching hole AH2 during the pressurization process, the second matching pin AP2 applies an external force to the insert 200 to insert the insert 200… to match between the test socket TS and the insert 200” [0053]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the socket module interface of Lee as modified to incorporate the matching pins of Na et al. wherein the socket module further includes a seating plate on which the insert housing is seated, and in which a housing alignment pin inserted into the insert housing in a process of the insert housing being seated protrudes upward to ensure that electronic components and test sockets are electrically connected precisely, matching between the insert and the pusher and between the insert and the test socket are required ([0011] Na et al.).
With regards to claim 12, Lee as modified teaches the automated mounting test system of claim 11.
Lee as modified does not teach wherein the seating plate includes a block accommodating groove which accommodates a lower end portion of the insertion block in a state where the insert housing is seated and is formed along an advancement direction of the insertion block.
However, Na et al. teaches wherein the seating plate includes a block accommodating groove (“guide groove GS”) which accommodates a lower end portion of the insertion block in a state where the insert housing is seated and is formed along an advancement direction of the insertion block (“forming a guide groove GS into which a portion can be slightly inserted, the inclined surfaces of the body 410 can be aligned” [0075]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the socket module interface of Lee as modified to incorporate the accommodating groove of Na et al. wherein the seating plate includes a block accommodating groove which accommodates a lower end portion of the insertion block in a state where the insert housing is seated and is formed along an advancement direction of the insertion block to minimize or prevent the degree of twisting and the degree of flow of the insert ([0017] Na et al.)
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 2022/0236320) in view of Son et al. (KR 2023/0015585), Jeong et al. (KR 102040775), Na et al. (KR 2021/0119344), and Dietrich et al. (US 5973285).
With regards to claim 10, Lee as modified teaches the automated mounting test system of claim 9.
Lee as modified does not teach wherein the connector includes a device alignment pin that extends parallel to the block alignment pin and is inserted into a through hole formed in the semiconductor product to align the semiconductor product.
However, Dietrich et al. teaches wherein the connector includes a device alignment pin (“An alignment assembly 172 is rigidly mounted to the contact plunger 168 and includes two alignment pins 176 and 178” [Col. 7, lines 28-30]; Reversing the location of a mating pin and its receiving hole is a mere reversal of parts (MPEP § 2144.04) and an obvious design choice that yields the identical mechanical alignment and locking function.) that extends parallel to the block alignment pin (When Dietrich’s device alignment pin is moved to the stationary connecter via a reversal of parts, it inherently extends parallel to the block alignment pin of Na et al. which is disposed on the same connector block.) and is inserted into a through hole formed in the semiconductor product (“the tips 212 of respective ones of the alignment pins 176 and 178 will pass into the appropriate ones of the alignment holes 171 and 173 of the electronic memory module 14” [Col. 14, lines 29-32]) to align the semiconductor product (“cause the surface contacts 174 of the electronic memory module 14 to align appropriately” [Col. 14, lines 34-38]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the test socket assembly of Lee as modified to incorporate the through hole mechanism of Dietrich et al. as modified via a reversal of parts wherein the support block includes a device alignment hole that is aligned with a through hole formed in the semiconductor product in a state where the semiconductor product is supported by the insertion block to provide a fine positioning, or micropositioning, of the electronic memory module ([Col. 14, lines 34-38] Dietrich et al.).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Son et al. (KR 2023/0015585) in view of Lee (US 2022/0236320) and Jeong et al. (KR 102040775).
With regards to claim 13, Son teaches an insert for testing a semiconductor product in a standing state, (“the electronic component D inserted into the insert base 100 to be placed in a standing state” [0041]) the insert comprising:
an insert housing (“insert base 100”);
an insertion block (“gripping protrusion 220”) supporting the semiconductor product in a standing posture while supporting the semiconductor product so that one surface of the semiconductor product is exposed (“electronic component accommodating groove 220a may allow the electronic component D inserted into the insert base 100 to be placed in a standing state. The standing state means a state in which the thickness direction of the electronic component D is perpendicular to the vertical direction” [0041]).
Son et al. does not teach the insert housing inserted into an inside of a tray groove formed in a test tray.
However, Lee teaches the insert housing inserted into an inside of a tray groove formed in a test tray (figs. 9A and 9B; “test tray 30 may include inserts 31 to selectively hold the memory modules 10, in which a plurality of inserts 31 are provided to have a predetermined array…” [0061] – [0062]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the standing state insert of Son et al. to incorporate the tray groove of Lee wherein the insert housing inserted into an inside of a tray groove formed in a test tray to minimize space limitation and enhance spatial efficiency ([0019] Lee)
Son et al. as modified does not teach a moving block connected to the insertion block and provided to be able to advance or retreat inside the insert housing.
However, Jeong et al. teaches a moving block (“main moving block 200”) connected to the insertion block and provided to be able to advance or retreat inside the insert housing (“the main moving block 200 is configured to move in the horizontal direction in conjunction with the vertical movement of the operation member 410… The pair of second shaft rails R2 long in the left and right directions are coupled to the fixed block 100. The first main moving block 210 and the second main moving block 220 are mounted to be slidably movable on the second shaft rail R2…” [0036] and [0038]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the standing device system of Son et al. as modified by Lee to incorporate the moving block of Jeong et al. wherein a moving block connected to the insertion block and provided to be able to advance or retreat inside the insert housing to allow for “horizontal connection” of terminals on the side of the device, while keeping the top of the device unobstructed so that “the laser test of the Z axis and the inclined angle is possible” ([0008] and [0016] Jeong et al.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 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.
While the prior art of record, Lee as modified by Son et al. and Jeong et al., teaches an automated mounting test system having a support block advanced by a generic forward-movement-inducing inclined surface, the prior art does not teach or suggest wherein the inclined surface comprises a first inclined surface and a steeper second inclined surface specifically adapted to induce a decelerating approach speed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OSAMAH MURSHED whose telephone number is (571)272-9534. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 11 a.m. 8 p.m. ET..
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, Judy Nguyen can be reached at (571) 272-2258. 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.
/OSAMAH MURSHED/ Examiner, Art Unit 2858
/JUDY NGUYEN/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights