DETAILED ACTION
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/20/2025, 10/27/2025, and 3/10/2025 were considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Claim 6 is Ineligible due to the following analysis:
Step 1 (Statutory Category): The claim is directed to a method.
Step 2A, Prong-1 (the claim is evaluated to determine whether it is directed to a judicial-exception/abstract-idea): The claim recites “evaluating a degree of wear of a holder hole” which, as best understood by the examiner, amounts to merely looking at the hole and inspecting it which be practically performed entirely in the human mind. Thus, this step corresponds to a mental process.
Step 2A, Prong-2 (the claim is evaluated to determine whether the judicial-exception/abstract-idea is integrated into a Practical Application): The claim merely recites a single method step corresponding to the judicial exception and, therefore, does not integrate the method into a practical application.
Step 2B (the claim is evaluated to determine whether recites additional elements that amount to an inventive concept, or also, the additional elements are significantly more than the recited the judicial-exception/abstract-idea): The method merely recites visually inspecting a degree of wear of a known holder by looking at the holder and performing a determination in the mind as to the amount of wear. Additional elements such as a hole, an edge end, a stepped portion, and an opening end are known components of a probe holder which do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
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)(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 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2024/0377433 (Zhou).
Regarding claim 1, Zhou teaches a probe holder for holding contact probes each coming in contact with an electrode of a contact target on one end side of the contact probe in a longitudinal direction (test system 100 comprises a socket body 106 for holding spring probes 114 coming in contact with contact pads 104 of an IC chip 102 under test; see Figs. 2-3), the probe holder comprising:
a plurality of holder holes formed in the probe holder and configured to hold the contact probes (a plurality of cavities 115 are formed in the socket body 106 to hold the spring probes 114; see Figs. 2-3);
an opening portion formed in each of the holder holes on the one end side of the contact probes, the opening portion including a side wall extending in an axial direction of the holder hole from an opening end of the holder hole (the cavity 116 comprises a cavity neck 130 and rim 126, the rim 126 comprises a side wall of an exterior surface 118 formed in an axial direction L1 of the socket body 106; see Figs. 2-3); and
a bottom surface portion provided at an end of the side wall in the axial direction, the end being an end opposite to the opening end (a tapered portion 128 forms a bottom surface of the rim 126 at the bottom of the exterior surface 118 opposite the opening end; see Fig. 2-3).
Regarding claim 3, Zhou teaches wherein the bottom surface portion is formed by a plane inclined with respect to the axial direction (the tapered ledge 128 is inclined with respect to the axial direction L1; see Figs. 2-3).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2024/0377433 (Zhou) in view of US 2022/0011345 (Inuma).
Regarding claim 2, Zhou fails to teach wherein the bottom surface portion is formed by a plane perpendicular to the axial direction.
Inuma teaches wherein the bottom surface portion is formed by a plane perpendicular to the axial direction (a hole 332 is formed having a stepped shape with a bottom surface formed by a plane perpendicular to the axial direction at the location corresponding to P1; see Fig. 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the features of Zhou into Inuma in order to gain the advantage of a bottom surface formed as a plane instead of a tapered shape to accommodate a flange of a plunger during an inspection period.
Regarding claim 4, Zhou teaches wherein the opening portion includes:
a first opening portion extending in the axial direction from the opening end of the holder hole (rim 126 is equivalent to a first opening portion; see Figs. 2-3);
the first opening portion includes:
a first side wall extending in the axial direction of the holder hole from the opening end (exterior surface 118 is equivalent to a first side wall in the axial direction of the cavity 116 as claimed; see Figs. 2-3); and
a first bottom surface portion having a hollow plate shape and extending inward from an end of the first side wall in the axial direction, the end being an end opposite to the opening end (a tapered portion 128 forms a hollow plate shape at a bottom surface of the rim 126 at the bottom of the exterior surface 118 opposite the opening end; see Fig. 2-3).
Inuma teaches a first opening portion extending in the axial direction from the opening end of the holder hole (see opening 333a of Fig. 12); and
a second opening portion extending from the first opening portion to a side opposite to the opening end side (see opening 333b of Fig. 12),
the first opening portion includes:
a first side wall extending in the axial direction of the holder hole from the opening end; and a first bottom surface portion having a hollow plate shape and extending inward from an end of the first side wall in the axial direction, the end being an end opposite to the opening end (first hole 333a features a side wall and a bottom surface which forms a stepped shape as claimed; see Fig. 12; see [0112]-[0114]), and
the second opening portion includes:
a second side wall extending in the axial direction of the holder hole from an opening end formed by the first bottom surface portion; and a second bottom surface portion having a hollow plate shape and extending inward from an end of the second side wall in the axial direction, the end being an end opposite to the opening end of the first bottom surface portion (second hole 333b features a side wall and a bottom surface which forms a stepped shape as claimed; see Fig. 12; see [0112]-[0114]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the features of Zhou into Inuma in order to gain the advantage of a bottom surface formed as a plane instead of a tapered shape to accommodate a flange of a plunger during an inspection period and a connection to an external ground to adjust the characteristic impedance of a tip portion and a proximal portion of the signal probe.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2024/0377433 (Zhou) in view of JP 2019-144112 (Nasu).
Regarding claim 5, Zhou fails to teach wherein a hole is formed in the bottom surface portion, and a diameter of the hole of the bottom surface portion is set based on a wear limit of the holder hole.
Nasu teaches wherein a hole is formed in the bottom surface portion, and a diameter of the hole of the bottom surface portion is set based on a wear limit of the holder hole (the diameter of the opening 22is set so long as the guide hole has a diameter that passes through the tip part 12. See bottom of page 4, top of page 5 of translation. Further, it is understood when the guide hole is cracked or chipped, the probe 10 bends which can lead to problems such as damage to the device under test 4 and the probe 10 and an electrical short circuit between the probe can occur. See pages 3-5 of translation.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the features of Nasu into Inuma as a matter of routine optimization. It is understood that the opening are sized to guide the pins toward contacts of the probe. It is also understood that the process of testing leads to wear as the pins contact the guide holes. If the guide hole becomes too large due to cracking, wear, or other damage, then the probe may bend and damage the object to be inspected.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2024/0377433 (Zhou)
Regarding claim 6, Zhou fails to explicitly teach the limitations of claim 6, however, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to perform an inspection method for inspecting a probe holder configured to hold contact probes each coming in contact with one electrode of a contact target on one end side of the contact probe in a longitudinal direction, the inspection method comprising inspecting a degree of wear of a holder hole configured to hold each of the contact probes based on a condition of an edge end of a stepped portion in the holder hole, the condition being observed when viewed in an axial direction of the holder hole from an opening end on a side of the holder hole where the one end side of the contact probes extend. As stated in [0003]:
“Generally, over the course of many cycles, electrical and mechanical properties of the contacts and structures of the test socket begin to degrade as a result of, for example, oxidation, abrasion, compression, tension, or other forms of wear. Such degradation eventually impacts integrity of the testing itself, at which point the test socket reaches the end of its useful life. For example, at least some known test systems include a plunger that extend freely out of a test socket to contact the IC. Over the course of many cycles, repeated engagement with the IC may cause bending of the plungers, resulting in poor signal connection and/or rendering the system inoperable. Accordingly, test sockets that maintain good electrical and mechanical performance for long life cycles are desired.”
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to inspect a probe holder for any damage which includes damage from abrasion, compression, tension, or other forms of wear. Since probes 114 iinclude a plunger 148 which slides past the cavity neck 130 and the rim 126, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to inspect this portion in a manner as claimed for wear due to abrasion, compression, tension, or other forms of wear without requiring undue experimentation or providing any new or unexpected results since such wear may result in poor signal connection, render the system inoperable, or damage the device under test.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN LEE YENINAS whose telephone number is (571)270-0372. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 10 - 6.
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.
/STEVEN L YENINAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights