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 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) 1-6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by KR-20150012335A (hereafter KR ‘335).
With respect to claim 1, KR ‘335 teaches a head assembly (110) for mounting conductive balls (B), which mounts the conductive balls in mounting recesses in a mask (30) while being transported with respect to an upper surface of the mask in which the mounting recesses are formed (figures), the head assembly comprising: a head body (figures 2-5, and 7a-f) comprising a first wall member and a second wall member (longitudinal walls of the ball guide unit 110) which are arranged to face each other and extend in parallel to each other (figures 2-5, and 7a-f), a first connection member and a second connection member (transverse walls of the ball guide unit 110) which connect both ends of the first wall member to both ends of the second wall member (figures 2-5, and 7a-f), a central chamber (the inner empty space chamber of 110) formed as an empty space inside by being surrounded by the first wall member, the second wall member, the first connection member, and the second connection member so that the conductive balls stay therein (figures 2-5, and 7a-f), and a cover member (112) covering an upper side of the central chamber (figures 2-5, and 7a-f); a first main nozzle (120/124/126 on the left side of 110) extending along a lengthwise direction of the first wall member on a lower portion of the first wall member so as to eject a compressed gas to a lower side in the central chamber; and a second main nozzle (120/124/126 on the right side of 110) extending along a lengthwise direction of the second wall member on a lower portion of the second wall member so as to eject a compressed gas (sprayed nitrogen gas) to a lower side in the second wall member (figures 2-5 and 7a-f; and the machine translation).
With respect to claim 2, KR ‘335 teaches wherein the first main nozzle is formed to be inclined in a direction closer to the central chamber toward the lower side of the first wall member, and the second main nozzle is formed to be inclined in a direction closer to the central chamber toward the lower portion of the second wall member (figures 2-4 and 7a-f; and the machine translation wherein it is taught that: [t]he gas ejection port 126 may be formed in the horizontal direction, It may be formed slightly downwardly inclined).
With respect to claim 3, KR ‘335 teaches wherein the first main nozzle is formed to be in communication with a lower surface of the first wall member, and the second main nozzle is formed to be in communication with a lower surface of the second wall member (figures 2-4 and 7a-f; and the machine translation).
With respect to claim 4, KR ‘335 teaches wherein the first main nozzle is formed to be in communication with a wall surface of the first wall member toward the central chamber, and the second main nozzle is formed to be in communication with a wall surface of the second wall member toward the central chamber (figures 2-4 and 7a-f; and the machine translation).
With respect to claim 5, KR ‘335 teaches wherein the first main nozzle includes a plurality of first guide recesses arranged in a direction, in which the first wall member extends, so as to guide a ejecting direction of the compressed gas, and the second main nozzle includes a plurality of second guide recesses arranged in a direction, in which the second wall member extends, so as to guide a ejecting direction of the compressed gas (the machine translation wherein it is taught that: [t]he gas jet opening 126 may be formed in a plurality of holes communicating with the diffusion channel 124, or may be formed in a slit shape. It is preferable that the gas ejection openings 126 are arranged symmetrically with respect to the center of the housing 112 in any form).
With respect to claim 6, KR ‘335 teaches wherein the plurality of first guide recesses of the first main nozzle are formed to be inclined so as to proceed in the direction in which the first wall member extends, toward the lower side thereof, and the plurality of second guide recesses of the second main nozzle are formed to be inclined so as to proceed in the direction in which the second wall member extends, toward the lower side thereof (figures 2-4 and 7a-f; and the machine translation wherein it is taught that: [t]he gas ejection port 126 may be formed in the horizontal direction, It may be formed slightly downwardly inclined).
With respect to claim 8, KR ‘335 teaches wherein the plurality of first guide recesses in the first main nozzle and the plurality of second guide recesses of the second main nozzle are formed to be inclined in opposite directions to each other (since the air is directed into the chamber of KR ‘335 the inclined ports would intrinsically be facing in opposite directions).
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.
Claim(s) 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR ‘335 as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Odashima et al. (US 5,279,045) (hereafter Odashima).
With respect to claim 9, KR ‘335 teaches spraying gas from first and second nozzles (see citation above), but does not teach a controller configured to control a pressure of compressed gas supplied to each of the first main nozzle and the second main nozzle.
However, Odashima teaches an air pressure controller (figures 10a-d; column 7, lines 28-48; and column 11, lines 24-39).
At the time of filing the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the air pressure controller of Odashima in the apparatus of KR ‘335 in order to obtain the desired air flow and conductive ball movement.
With respect to claim 10, KR ‘335 teaches wherein the first main nozzle includes a plurality of first guide recesses (holes 126) arranged in a direction, in which the first wall member extends, so as to guide a ejecting direction of the compressed gas, and the second main nozzle includes a plurality of second guide recesses (holes 126) arranged in a direction, in which the second wall member extends, so as to guide a ejecting direction of the compressed gas (the machine translation wherein it is stated that: [t]he gas jet opening 126 may be formed in a plurality of holes communicating with the diffusion channel 124).
With respect to claim 11, KR ‘335 teaches wherein the plurality of first guide recesses of the first main nozzle are formed to be inclined so as to proceed in the direction in which the first wall member extends, toward the lower side thereof, and the plurality of second guide recesses of the second main nozzle are formed to be inclined so as to proceed in the direction in which the second wall member extends, toward the lower side thereof (figures 2-4 and 7a-f; and the machine translation wherein it is taught that: [t]he gas ejection port 126 may be formed in the horizontal direction, It may be formed slightly downwardly inclined).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,325,088B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the instant application are generally broader than the claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,325,088B2 and thus the instant claims are envisaged by the claims of U.S. Patent No. 12,325,088B2.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 12-20 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 and the obvious double patenting rejection is overcome.
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