www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`
`15/582,794
`
`05/01/2017
`
`ARATA KISHI
`
`PIPMM-57489
`
`4480
`
`759°
`52°“
`PEARNE & GORDON LLP
`
`05/08/2019
`
`1801 EAST 9TH STREET
`SUITE 1200
`
`CLEVELAND, OH 44114-3108
`
`PATEL DEVANG R
`
`1735
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`05/08/2019
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`patdoeket@pearne.eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`Applicant-InitiatedInterview Summary
`
`Examiner
`DEVANG R PATEL
`
`Art Unit
`1735
`
`AIA (FITF) Status
`Yes
`
`Application No.
`15/582,794
`
`Applicant(s)
`KISHI et al.
`
`All participants (applicant, applicants representative, PTO personnel):
`
`(1) DEVANG R. PATEL.
`
`(2) NOBUHIKO SUKENAGA.
`
`Date of Interview: 02 May 2019.
`
`Type:
`
`[:1 Video Conference
`Telephonic
`C] Personal [copy given to:
`[:1 applicant
`
`[3 applicant's representative]
`
`Exhibit shown or demonstration conducted:
`If Yes, brief description:
`
`Cl Yes
`
`No.
`
`IssuesDiscussed [3101-112l102 [:1103 DOthers
`(For each of the checked box(es) above, please describe below the issue and detailed description of the discussion)
`
`Claim(s) discussed: 1.
`
`Identification of prior art discussed: Igarashi {of record).
`
`Substance of Interview
`(For each issue discussed, provide a detailed description and indicate if agreement was reached. Some topics may include: identification or clarification of a
`reference or a portion thereof, claim interpretation, proposed amendments, arguments of any applied references etc...)
`
`We discussed 112 re'ection s
`
`rior art re'ection and A Iicant's
`
`ro osed amendment see attached . S ecificall
`
`claim 1, the amended step of applying a first pressure to solder material before the adhesive starts to flow by heat
`appears to overcome previous 112 reiections concerning new matter and indefiniteness. Also, the adhesive is flowing
`while applying first pressure during the connecting method in Igarashi and thus, the amendment also overcomes 102
`rejection under Igarashi. Examiner notes that further consideration and updated search is reguired for patentability
`determination and therefore it is suggested to file the amendment with RCE. Examiner will fully review next response
`
`and if necessafy, contact Applicant to expedite prosecution.
`
`
`
`Applicant recordation instructions: The formal written reply to the last Office action must include the substance of the interview. (See MPEP
`section 713.04). If a reply to the last Office action has already been filed, applicant is given a non-extendable period of the longer of one month or
`thirty days from this interview date, or the mailing date of this interview summary form, whichever is later, to file a statement of the substance of the
`interview.
`
`Examiner recordation instructions: Examiners must summarize the substance of any interview of record. A complete and proper recordation of
`the substance of an interview should include the items listed in MPEP 713.04 for complete and proper recordation including the identification of the
`general thrust of each argument or issue discussed, a general indication of any other pertinent matters discussed regarding patentability and the
`general results or outcome of the interview, to include an indication as to whether or not agreement was reached on the issues raised.
`
`Attachment
`
`/Devang R Patel/
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
`
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`PTOL-413 (Rev. 8/11/2010)
`
`Interview Summary
`
`Paper NO. 20190502
`
`