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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 5 are objected to because of the following informalities: where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation, 37 CFR 1.75(i). Appropriate correction is required.
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 and 2 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, “wherein a distance (G) between the first supply port and the second supply port along the substrate conveyance direction” and “an entire length region along the substrate conveyance direction between the first supply port and the second supply port”. It is unclear if this length is the same distance (G). Note that the figures do not depict any other length that this could be. For the purposes of this examination, this limitation will be interpreted as noted in the rejection below.
Claim 2 recites, “a first drive unit” and “a second drive unit” while claim 1 recites “a drive unit”. It is unclear if there are three drive units or if the drive unit is one of those in claim 2. For the purposes of this examination, this limitation will be interpreted as the drive unit is one of those in claim 2.
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Grasmann (DE 41 32 582 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Grasmann discloses:
A method of processing a substrate [PCB (16)] using a jet soldering apparatus [device for soldering in figures 1, 2, and 7] having:
a first housing [first nozzle (24)];
a first supply port [first nozzle orifice (36)] provided on the first housing and configured to provide a first molten solder [a first solder wave];
a second housing [second nozzle (26)]; and
a second supply port [second nozzle orifice (50)] provided on the second housing and, configured to provide a second molten solder [a second solder wave],
the method comprising:
a step of providing the first molten solder from the first supply port [the first solder wave; figure 7]; and
a step of providing the second molten solder from the second supply port [the second solder wave; figure 7],
wherein the first molten solder supplied from the first supply port and the second molten solder supplied from the second supply port are mixed [the area of the combined solder wave to the right of edge (40)], and the mixed molten solder is not separated from a substrate conveyed by a conveyance unit [track (14)] between the first supply port and the second supply port [a PCB placed on track (14), like that shown in figure 5, would not be separated from the combined wave along a portion of track (14), as shown in figure 7].
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.
Claims 1, 2, and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grasmann (DE 41 32 582 A1) in view of Suzuki et al. (US 2019/0039159 A1) and Okano et al. (JP 63-281768 A).
Regarding claim 1, Grasmann teaches:
A method of processing a substrate [PCB (16)] using a jet soldering apparatus [device for soldering in figures 1, 2, and 7] having:
a first housing [first nozzle (24)];
a first supply port [first nozzle orifice (36)] provided on the first housing and configured to provide first molten solder [a first solder wave];
a second housing [second nozzle (26)];
a second supply [second nozzle orifice (50)] port provided on the second housing and configured to provide second molten solder [a second solder wave], the second supply port being a slit-shaped opening [compare figures 1 and 2 to see that orifice (50) is rectangular and thus slit shaped];
a conveyance unit [runs means not shown and track; abstract and pg. 4] configured to convey the substrate, the conveyance unit including a conveyance rail [track (14)]; and
a drive unit [first and second pumps (64, 54)],
wherein a distance (G) [width of edge (40)] between the first supply port and the second supply port along the substrate conveyance direction is smaller than a width (Z1), along the substrate conveyance direction, of the first supply port [see figure 1]; and
the distance (G) [width of edge (40)] between the first supply port and the second supply port along the substrate conveyance direction is smaller than a width (Z2) of the second supply port along the substrate conveyance direction [see figure 1],
the method comprising:
a step of providing the first molten solder from the first supply port [a first solder wave]; and
a step of providing the second molten solder from the second supply port [a second solder wave],
wherein the first molten solder and the second molten solder are mixed so as to obtain mixed molten solder [see figure 7],
wherein the mixed molten solder does not fall back into a solder supply between the first supply port and the second supply port along the substrate conveyance direction [see figure 7], and
wherein an upper surface of the mixed molten solder is not positioned below a lower end of the conveyance rail in an entire length region along the substrate conveyance direction between the first supply port and the second supply port such that the mixed molten solder is not separated from the substrate conveyed along the conveyance rail by the conveyance unit in an entire area between the first supply port and the second supply port [a PCB placed on track (14), like that shown in figure 5, would not be separated from the combined wave along a portion of track (14), as shown in figure 7; note that the entire length region and entire area are where the combined solder is above the track]; and
wherein an amount of the first molten solder is 0.8 times or more and 1.2 times or less of an amount of the second molten solder [One can easily select an amount of the first solder that is within this range. Note that since there is no when, where, or how and a vague what, a portion of the amount of molten solder supplied form the first nozzle can be chosen to meet this limitation. Additionally, note that nozzle flow (74) is greater than nozzle flow (70); figure 7.].
Grasmann does not teach:
the first supply port having a plurality of openings arranged in a plurality of rows along a substrate conveyance direction; and
the width, along the substrate conveyance direction, is between: (i) the furthest upstream point of the furthest upstream opening of the plurality of openings of the first supply port; and (ii) the furthest downstream point of the furthest downstream opening of the plurality of openings of the first supply port.
Concerning the plurality of rows of openings and the width:
Okano teaches a jet soldering apparatus wherein nozzles (32) and (72) have no place where the mixed solder falls back into the solder supply therebetween, nozzle (32) is a single opening, and nozzle (72) comprises porous plate (71) having a plurality of openings in rows; wherein the openings span a distance wider than the gap between nozzles (72) and (32), i.e. G<Z1, and the openings span is larger than that of nozzle (32); i.e. Z2<Z1; figure 3.
Suzuki teaches primary jet nozzle (30) comprises solder flow forming plate (32) which is a flat plate being the same size as jet injection opening (31) and is provided with a plurality of jet injection holes (32b) in four rows from which the molten solder (S) is stably injected to a desired height with strong energy; 0061 and figure 4.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate plates like that of Okano and Suzuki; i.e. plates having arrayed openings, into Grasmann since they are well-known soldering plates, to increase the width of the first supply port, and/or in order to stably inject molten solder to a desired height with strong energy, minus any unexpected results.
Regarding claim 2, Grasmann teaches:
wherein a driving force to the first molten solder is given by a first drive unit [first pump (64)]; and
wherein a driving force to the second molten solder is given by a second drive unit [second pump (54)].
Regarding claim 4, Grasmann does not teach:
a step of adjusting the amount of the first molten solder using an upstream adjusting part which is adjacent to the first supply port, the upstream adjusting part being arcuate or oblique with respect to the first housing; or
a step of adjusting the amount of the second molten solder using a downstream adjusting part which is adjacent to the second supply port, the downstream adjusting part being arcuate or oblique with respect to the second housing.
Suzuki teaches jet solder bath (20B) comprising secondary jet nozzle (60) adjacent to oblique downstream forming portion (66) that forms the flow of the molten solder to change a jet injection width; 0090 and figure 7.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the Suzuki downstream forming portion into Grasmann in order to be able to control the height of the solder wave or to change the width of the second nozzle.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grasmann (DE 41 32 582 A1) in view of Suzuki et al. (US 2019/0039159 A1) and Okano et al. (JP 63-281768 A), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yoshino et al. (JP 8-335773).
Regarding claim 3, Grasmann does not teach:
wherein the width (Z2) of the second supply port along the substrate conveyance direction is 1/3 or less of the width (Z1), along the substrate conveyance direction, between: (i) the furthest upstream point of the furthest upstream opening of the plurality of openings of the first supply port; and (ii) the furthest downstream point of the furthest downstream opening of the plurality of openings of the first supply port.
Okano teaches the distance spanned by the porous plate openings is greater than the distance of opening of nozzle (32); figure 3.
Yoshino teaches a double wave soldering apparatus comprising nozzle (A) and nozzle (B) wherein nozzle (A) has a plurality of openings (1) having an overall width greater than the width of ejection port (3) of nozzle (B); see figure 1.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to make the difference between widths any desired amount, including 1/3 less, to control the flow of solder, and/or to limit the size of the solder wave, minus any unexpected results.
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 CARLOS J GAMINO whose telephone number is (571)270-5826. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6.
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, Keith Walker can be reached at 5712723458. 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.
/CARLOS J GAMINO/Examiner, Art Unit 1735
/KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735