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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-19) in the reply filed on 4/14/26 is acknowledged.
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 9 and 14-16 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.
The term “high-temperature” in claims 9 and 16 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high-temperature” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The metes and bounds of “high-temperature” are unclear.
In claims 14 and 15, it is unclear how the heating member can be configured to radiate one of laser or light, when claim 13 specifically requires heating by convention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 8-9, 13, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by French et al. (6,012,624) (hereafter French).
A preamble is generally not accorded any patentable weight where it merely recites the purpose of a process or the intended use of a structure, and where the body of the claim does not depend on the preamble for completeness but, instead, the process steps or structural limitations are able to stand alone. See In re Hirao, 535 F.2d 67, 190 USPQ 15 (CCPA 1976) and Kropa v. Robie, 187 F.2d 150, 152, 88 USPQ 478, 481 (CCPA 1951).
With respect to claim 1, French teaches apparatus for repairing a solder ball (the underline portions of the claim are merely intended use) comprising: a base (10) comprising an upper surface on which a substrate (11/13) is disposed; a cover (30) forming an internal space together with the base (10); a flux receiving member (flux vaporizer 35) disposed around (broadest reasonable interpretation) the substrate disposed on the base (figures 1-2; and column 3, line 12-column 4, line 33); and a heating member (plate heated by the hot gas) configured to heat a flux received in the flux receiving member, wherein the flux received in the flux receiving member is vaporized, by an indirect application method (figures 1-2; and column 3, lines 48-58), and applied to a solder ball having a defective shape formed on the substrate. Note that the material worked upon, i.e., a solder ball, does not limit the structure of the claimed apparatus. See MPEP 2115.
With respect to claim 2, the structure of the solder ball, and the processes of re-melting and removing oxide do not limit the structure of the claimed apparatus.
With respect to claim 3, French teaches wherein a flux supply module (flux sump 40) configured to supply the flux is connected to the flux receiving member (45) (figure 2; and column 3, lines 48-58).
With respect to claim 8, French teaches wherein the heating member is configured to provide heat by convection (figures 1-2; and column 3, line 12-column 4, line 33).
With respect to claim 9, French teaches wherein the heating member is configured to provide convection heat by high-temperature (broadest reasonable interpretation) air (figures 1-2; and column 3, line 12-column 4, line 33).
With respect to claim 13, French teaches an apparatus for repairing a solder ball (the underline portions of the claim are merely intended use), comprising: a base (10) comprising an upper surface on which a substrate (11/13) is disposed; a cover (30) forming an internal space together with the base (10); a flux receiving member (flux vaporizer 35) disposed around (broadest reasonable interpretation) the substrate disposed on the base (figures 1-2; and column 3, line 12-column 4, line 33); a heating member (plate heated by the hot gas) configured to heat a flux received in the flux receiving member (figures 1-2; and column 3, lines 48-58); and a flux supply module (flux sump 40) connected to the flux receiving member and configured to supply the flux, wherein the flux received in the flux receiving member is heated, vaporized, flows within the internal space formed by the base and the cover by convection (figures 1-2; and column 3, lines 48-58), and applied to a solder ball having a defective shape formed on the substrate. Note that the material worked upon, i.e., a solder ball, does not limit the structure of the claimed apparatus. See MPEP 2115.
With respect to claim 16, French teaches wherein the heating member is configured to provide convection heat by high-temperature (broadest reasonable interpretation) air (figures 1-2; and column 3, line 12-column 4, line 33).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7, 10-12, 17-18 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.
Claims 14-15 and 19 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KILEY SHAWN STONER whose telephone number is (571)272-1183. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday.
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, Keith Walker can be reached on 571-272-3458. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KILEY S STONER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights