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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
Fig. 2: it appears that reference number 20 should be reference number 40
Fig. 15: it appears that upper reference number 30 should be reference number 20.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-13 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.
Claim 1 recites:
An electrical connection apparatus used for inspecting an object to be inspected, the electrical connection apparatus comprising:
a terminal for inspection having a tip arranged so as to be in contact with the object to be inspected and a proximal end connected to the tip;
a probe head holding the terminal for inspection;
a wiring sheet with flexibility including a first connection portion arranged on a first sheet surface facing the probe head and a second connection portion arranged on a second sheet surface facing in an opposite direction of the first sheet surface; and
a wiring board that is arranged facing the second sheet surface and includes a first electrode which is electrically connected to the second connection portion, wherein
a press-fit pin has a head that elastically deforms in a direction perpendicular to an axial direction and a main body that is embedded in the wiring sheet, the head being exposed from at least any of the first sheet surface and the second sheet surface,
the head of the press-fit pin exposed from the first sheet surface is fitted into a recess formed in the probe head to fix the probe head to the wiring sheet, and
the head of the press-fit pin exposed from the second sheet surface is fitted into a recess formed in the wiring board to fix the wiring board to the wiring sheet.
The language “a press-fit pin has a head” implies a single head. The subsequent language “the head of the press-fit pin exposed from the first sheet surface is fitted into a recess formed in the probe head to fix the probe head to the wiring sheet” and “the head of the press-fit pin exposed from the second sheet surface is fitted into a recess formed in the wiring board to fix the wiring board to the wiring sheet” seems to imply two heads, thus rendering the scope of the claim unclear. The examiner suggests amendment of the claim language to clarify “the head of the press-fit pin when exposed from the first sheet surface is fitted into a recess formed in the probe head to fix the probe head to the wiring sheet” and “the head of the press-fit pin when exposed from the second sheet surface is fitted into a recess formed in the wiring board to fix the wiring board to the wiring sheet”. This interpretation is applied for purposes of the present examination. Further, the examiner interprets the claim language (both as originally presented and under the suggested amendment above) to require the presence of both a recess formed in the probe head and a recess formed in the wiring board, even though the single press-fit pin head will be fitted into only one of these recesses. Clarification is required so that the scope of the claim is clear. Claims 2-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) by virtue of their dependence from claim 1.
Claim 7 depends directly from claim 1 and recites “wherein a maximum diameter of the head exposed from the first sheet surface is different from a maximum diameter of the head exposed from the second sheet surface”. As discussed above in connection with claim 1, the language ““a press-fit pin has a head” implies a single head. Accordingly, in claim 1 there is only one head having one diameter. The language of claim 7, by contrast, seems to require two heads based on the characterization of the relative maximum diameters. The examiner interprets claim 7 to mean that for a head that is exposed from the first sheet surface and has a maximum diameter, the maximum diameter is different than it otherwise would be if the head was instead exposed from the second sheet surface, and vice-versa. Because the claim appears to rely on a hypothetical or alternative arrangement for specifying the maximum diameter of a single head, the scope of the claim is unclear.
Claim 13 depends directly from claim 1 and recites “wherein the terminal for inspection is arranged in a test socket connected to an external terminal of a package in which the object to be inspected is mounted”. Claim 1, on the other hand, recites “a probe head holding the terminal for inspection”. The terms “probe head” and “test socket”, interpreted in light of the specification (see, e.g., paragraph 71 of specification), see to represent distinct structures that are not used in combination, e.g., a probe head is used when the object to be tested is unpackaged, e.g., a wafer for example, whereas a test socket is used when the object to be tested is packaged. In other words, a probe head and a test socket relate to different disclosed embodiments. For this reason, the test socket of claim 13 appears to be inconsistent with the probe head of claim 1. Clarification is required so that the scope of the claim is clear.
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-6 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2008/0048698 to Amemiya et al. (Amemiya) in view of US 2021/0172978 to Funatoko et al. (Funatoko).
Regarding claim 1, and with reference of annotated Fig. 3 of Amemiya set forth below, Amemiya discloses an electrical connection apparatus used for inspecting an object to be inspected, the electrical connection apparatus comprising:
a terminal for inspection having a tip arranged so as to be in contact with the object to be inspected and a proximal end connected to the tip (Amemiya, annotated Fig. 3, any of probes 11B);
a probe head holding the terminal for inspection (Amemiya, annotated Fig. 3, ceramic substrate 11A in combination with terminal electrodes 11C and connection wirings 11D);
a wiring sheet with flexibility including a first connection portion arranged on a first sheet surface facing the probe head and a second connection portion arranged on a second sheet surface facing in an opposite direction of the first sheet surface (Amemiya, annotated Fig. 3, interposer 16 including a substrate 16A in combination with elastically deformable contacts 16B provided on an upper surface of the substrate 16A and elastically deformable contacts 16C provided, on a lower surface of the substrate 16A; the interposer 16 has flexibility in the top to bottom direction by virtue of the elastically deformable contacts 16B, 16C); and
a wiring board that is arranged facing the second sheet surface and includes a first electrode which is electrically connected to the second connection portion (Amemiya, annotated Fig. 3, printed wiring board 12 including as a first electrode any of terminal electrodes 12A), wherein
has a head and a main body that is embedded in the wiring sheet, the head being exposed from at least any of the first sheet surface and the second sheet surface (Amemiya, annotated Fig. 3, coupling member 19 having main body embedded in interposer 16 via elastic portions 21 and heads exposed from first and second surfaces of the interposer 16 that couple to printed wiring board 12 and probe head in the form of ceramic substrate 11A in combination with terminal electrodes 11C and connection wirings 11D),
the head of exposed from the first sheet surface is to fix the probe head to the wiring sheet (Amemiya, annotated Fig. 3), and
the head of exposed from the second sheet surface is fitted into a recess formed in the wiring board to fix the wiring board to the wiring sheet (Amemiya, annotated Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
583
791
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Amemiya is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing that the coupling member is in the form of a press-fit pin having a head that elastically deforms in a direction perpendicular to an axial direction, with the head of the press-fit pin such that when exposed from the first sheet surface is fitted into a recess formed in the probe head to fix the probe head to the wiring sheet by a press-fit connection, and with the head such that when exposed from the second sheet surface is fitted into a recess formed in the wiring board to fix the wiring board to the wiring sheet by a press-fit connection.
Funatoko discloses the probe system art that suitable structures, such as may be known to the art of probe cards, examples of which include a mechanical fastener, a fastener receiver, a press-fit fastener, a socket, and/or a zero insertion force (ZIF) connector, may be used as a mounting structure 112 (Funatoko, e.g., Fig. 1 and paragraph 69, with mounting structure including one more fasteners 62 as shown in Fig. 1). In the field of press-fit fasteners in particular, the examiner takes Official notice of the fact that a press-fit fastener having a head that elastically deforms in a direction perpendicular to an axial direction of the press-fit fastener so as to enable the head to be retained in a recess when the head is pressed into the recess parallel to the axial direction (such as the head 322/recess 220 of Fig. 3 of the present application) was well known and conventional before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. It 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 to modify Amemiya such that the coupling member is in the form of a press-fit pin having a head that elastically deforms in a direction perpendicular to an axial direction, with the head of the press-fit pin such that when exposed from the first sheet surface is fitted into a recess formed in the probe head to fix the probe head to the wiring sheet by a press-fit connection, and with the head such that when exposed from the second sheet surface is fitted into a recess formed in the wiring board to fix the wiring board to the wiring sheet by a press-fit connection. In this way, by using a well-known and conventional press-fit fastener having a head that elastically deforms in a direction perpendicular to an axial direction of the press-fit fastener, connections between Amemiya’s probe head, wiring sheet and wiring board can be realized in a manner analogous to that disclosed by Funatoko.
Regarding claim 2, Amemiya in view of Funatoko discloses wherein the head is provided in plurality, and the press-fit pin has the main body passing through the wiring sheet, from the first sheet surface to the second sheet surface, a first head of the heads connected to one end of the main body is exposed from the first sheet surface, and a second head of the heads connected to the other end of the main body is exposed from the second sheet surface (see Amemiya in view of Funatoko as applied to claim 1, recognizing that in modified Amemiya the each coupling member 19 will include first and second heads as claimed).
Regarding claim 3, Amemiya in view of Funatoko discloses wherein the head connected to the main body of the press-fit pin is exposed only from either the first sheet surface or the second sheet surface (see Amemiya in view of Funatoko as applied to claim 1, note that in modified Amemiya the heads of the coupling member 19 in annotated Fig. 3 are modified to have press-fit functionality, i.e., elastically deformable in a direction perpendicular to an axial direction of the connection member; each of the modified heads is exposed only from either the first sheet surface or the second sheet surface of the wiring sheet, e.g., interposer 16).
Regarding claims 4-5, Amemiya in view of Funatoko is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing wherein the press-fit pin is a metal material (claim 4) and wherein the head is star-shaped when viewed from the axial direction of the press-fit pin (claim 5). The examiner takes Official notice of the fact that metal press-fit fasteners, as well as press-fit fasteners having a star-shaped head that deforms to provide an interference fit when pressed into a recess were well known and conventional before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. The prior art included each element claimed, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately. Moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. For these reasons, the recitations wherein the press-fit pin is a metal material (claim 4) and wherein the head is star-shaped when viewed from the axial direction of the press-fit pin (claim 5) do not patentably define over Amemiya in view of Funatoko considered in light of well-known and conventional features of press-fit fasteners.
Regarding claim 6, Amemiya in view of Funatoko discloses wherein an outer edge of the wiring board is positioned outward from an outer edge of the wiring sheet in plan view (Amemiya, e.g., annotated Fig. 3, noting that outer edge of printed wiring board 12 is positioned outward from an outer edge of interposer 16).
Regarding claim 12, Amemiya in view of Funatoko discloses wherein the terminal for inspection is a probe having a tip that is arranged so as to be in contact with a signal terminal of the object to be inspected and a proximal end connected to the first connection portion of the wiring sheet (see Amemiya in view of Funatoko as applied to claim 1, noting that each of probes 11B is a probe having a tip that is arranged so as to be in contact with a signal terminal of the object to be inspected (e.g., a wafer, see Amemiya, paragraph 1), and noting that each of probes 11B has a proximal end connected to a corresponding first connection portion of the wiring sheet via a respective terminal electrode 11C and respective elastically deformable contact 16C provided, on a lower surface of the substrate 16A).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amemiya in view of Funatoko, and further in view of US 2010/0079159 to Kemmerling (Kemmerling).
Regarding claim 10, Amemiya in view of Funatoko is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing wherein the wiring board includes a second electrode electrically connected to the first electrode via internal wiring, the electrical connection apparatus further comprising: a printed board that is arranged facing the wiring board and has a wiring pattern connected to the second electrode. In related art, Kemmerling discloses a wiring board that includes a second electrode electrically connected to the first electrode via internal wiring (Kemmerling, e.g., Fig. 6 and paragraph 30, wiring board 602 including second electrode 604 electrically connected to the first electrode 606 via internal wiring). Kemmerling discloses in connection with the probe card assembly of Fig. 6 that the electrical connectors 604 may be configured to make electrical connections with a plurality of test channels from the test instruments 104 (see, e.g., Kemmerling, Fig. 1), but is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing a printed board that is arranged facing the wiring board and has a wiring pattern connected to the second electrode. The examiner takes Official notice of the fact that the use of a printed circuit board for interfacing with wiring boards of the type disclosed by Kemmerling (e.g., wiring substrate 602 in Fig. 6 of Kemmerling) in a facing arrangement with the wiring board were well-known and conventional before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. The prior art included each element claimed, although not necessarily in a single prior art reference, with the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art being the lack of actual combination of the elements in a single prior art reference. One of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and that in combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately. Moreover, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable. For these reasons, the recitation wherein the wiring board includes a second electrode electrically connected to the first electrode via internal wiring, the electrical connection apparatus further comprising: a printed board that is arranged facing the wiring board and has a wiring pattern connected to the second electrode does not patentably define over Amemiya in view of Funatoko when considered in light of Kemmerling’s teachings and the well-known and conventional use of printed circuit boards for interfacing with probe care assemblies.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amemiya in view of Funatoko and Kemmerling, and further in view of US 2010/0308854 to Garabedian et al. (Garabedian).
Regarding claim 11, Amemiya in view of Funatoko and Kemmerling discloses wherein the terminal for inspection is provided in plurality, the wiring pattern is provided in plurality (see Amemiya in view of Funatoko and Kemmerling as applied to claim 10, noting that Amemiya discloses a plurality of probes 11B in annotated Fig. 1 above, and noting that Amemiya discloses a plurality of terminal electrodes 12A of the printed wiring board 12 such that in the combination of Amemiya in view of Funatoko and Kemmerling a plurality of wiring patterns withing the printed wiring board 12 will be provided; also see paragraph 30 of Kemmerling, electrically conductive paths may be provided from the connectors 604 through the wiring substrate 602 to a plurality of electrically conductive spring interconnect structures 606). Kemmerling is not relied upon as explicitly disclosing the wiring board is a space transformer that transforms a distance between the terminals for inspection into a distance between the wiring patterns of the printed board, when viewed from a direction normal to a main surface of the wiring board. Garabedian discloses that printed wiring boards may function as space transformers (Garabedian, e.g., paragraph 30, space transformer may be a printed wiring board). It 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 to modify Amemiya in view of Funatoko and Kemmerling such that the wiring board is a space transformer that transforms a distance between the terminals for inspection into a distance between the wiring patterns of the printed board, when viewed from a direction normal to a main surface of the wiring board. In this way, in the manner disclosed by Garabedian, the known benefits of a space transformer (e.g., transform the spatial arrangement of electrical connections) can be obtained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 3,545,080 to Evan relates to a method of making resilient pins; see, e.g., Fig. 4.
US 7,372,286 to Lee et al. relates to a modular probe card; see, e.g., Fig. 2.
US 7,377,823 to Chen relates to a press-fit pin; see, e.g., Fig. 1.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL R MILLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1964. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-5PM EST M-F.
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 at 571-270-5628. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANIEL R MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights