`“x
`‘\\f
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMIVHSSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria1 Virginia 22313-1450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`
`
`
`
`14/867,079
`
`09/28/2015
`
`Masayuki MANTANI
`
`PIPMM—55108
`
`3312
`
`12/29/2016 —PEARNE&GORDON LLP m
`7590
`52054
`1801 EAST 9TH STREET
`FERGUSON SAMRETH, MARISSA LIANA
`S UITE 1 200
`CLEVELAND, OH 441 14-3 108
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`ART UNIT
`2854
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`12/29/2016
`
`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):
`
`patdocket @ pearne.c0m
`
`PTOL—90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`
`
`AIA (First Inventor to File)
`Art Unit
`Examiner
`itatus
`2854
`MARISSA FERGUSON-
`
`SAM RETH es
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Applicant(s)
`Application No.
` 14/867,079 MANTANI, MASAYUKI
`
`
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address --
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE g MONTHS FROM THE MAILING DATE OF
`THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR1. 136( a).
`after SIX () MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`If NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any
`earned patent term adjustment. See 37 CFR 1 .704(b).
`
`In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed
`
`Status
`
`1)IZI Responsive to communication(s) filed on 10/13/16.
`
`[I A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)|:I This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)|Z| This action is non-final.
`
`3)I:I An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview on
`
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4)|:| Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`
`closed in accordance with the practice under Exparte Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)IZI Claim(s) 1 and 4-7is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`is/are allowed.
`6)I:I Claim(s)
`
`7)|Z| Claim(s)_1 and4- 7is/are rejected.
`8)|:I Claim(s)_ is/are objected to.
`
`9)I:I Claim((s)
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement.
`* If any claims have been determined allowable, you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`htt
`://www.us tocov/ atents/init events/
`
`h/Endex.'s orsend an inquiry to PPeredback@ usgtogov.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)I:l The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`is/are: a)I:I accepted or b)I:I objected to by the Examiner.
`11)|:l The drawing(s) filed on
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12)IXI Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`a)IXI All
`b)I:I Some” c)I:I None of the:
`1.IXI Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`2.|:| Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`3.|:l Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`
`
`3) D Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`1) I] Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date.
`.
`.
`—
`4) I:I Other'
`2) I] InformatIon DIsclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`
`Paper No(s)/Mai| Date
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL—326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20161213
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/867,079
`
`Page 2
`
`Art Unit: 2854
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined
`
`under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1. 1 14
`
`2.
`
`A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set
`
`forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this
`
`application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set
`
`forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action
`
`has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on October
`
`17, 2016 has been entered.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 1 12
`
`3.
`
`The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
`
`IN GENERAL—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of
`(a)
`the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable
`any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and
`use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying
`out the invention.
`
`The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
`
`The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and
`process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person
`skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same,
`and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
`
`4.
`
`Claims 1 and 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-
`
`AIA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/867,079
`
`Page 3
`
`Art Unit: 2854
`
`claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a
`
`way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint
`
`inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had
`
`possession of the claimed invention.
`
`With respect to claim 1, “wherein the paste is directly deposited on the mask of
`
`the intermediate region during after filling the first opening with the paste to before filling
`
`the second opening with the paste” appears to be new matter. Specifically, the
`
`language does not appear to be supported by the specification and was not previously
`
`presented in the original disclosure as filed.
`
`5.
`
`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.
`
`6.
`
`Claims 1 and 4-7 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 pre-AIA
`
`the applicant regards as the invention.
`
`Specifically, the recitation “wherein the paste is directly deposited on the mask of
`
`the intermediate region during after filling the first opening” is indefinite. The language
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/867,079
`
`Page 4
`
`Art Unit: 2854
`
`does not make sense. There is no description in the specification that reasonably
`
`conveys a clear interpretation on the deposition of paste. The language is unclear as to
`
`whether applicant intends to deposit the paste “during” or “after” filling the first opening.
`
`Furthermore, the language appears to be a functional recitation of a desired mode of
`
`operation.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`7.
`
`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 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.
`
`8.
`
`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.
`
`9.
`
`Claims 1, 4, 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated
`
`by Tan (US Patent 5,813,331).
`
`With respect to claim 1, Tan teaches a screen printing apparatus, comprising:
`
`a mask (14’) which has a first opening (142') provided in a first region (refer to
`
`marked-up Figure 7), and a second opening (142) provided in a second region (refer to
`
`marked-up Figure 7) which is thicker than the first region (Figure 7); and
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/867,079
`
`Page 5
`
`Art Unit: 2854
`
`a printing head (16) which fills the first opening (142’) with a paste in a state
`
`where a substrate is in contact with the first region (Figure 9), and fills the second
`
`opening with the paste in a state where the substrate is in contact with the second
`
`region (Figure 11),
`
`wherein the printing head comprises at least one squeegee (16) which slidably
`
`moves on the mask and fills the first opening and the second opening with the paste
`
`(Figures 8-11),
`
`wherein the printing head fills the second opening with the paste in a state where
`
`the substrate is in contact with the second region (Figure 11) after filling the first
`
`opening with the paste in a state where the substrate is in contact with the first region
`
`(Figure 9 and Column 3, Line 60-Column 4, Line 23), and
`
`wherein the mask has an intermediate region provided between the first region
`
`and the second region on the mask (refer to marked-up Figure 7 in the detailed region),
`
`and
`
`wherein the paste is directly deposited on the mask of the intermediate region
`
`during after filling the first opening with the paste to before filling the second opening
`
`with the paste (note: the recitation is merely a functional recitation of a desired mode of
`
`operation. It has been held that apparatus claims must be structurally distinguishable
`
`from the prior art. Particular attention is invited to MPEP 2114(l) which states, "While
`
`features of an apparatus may be recited either structurally or functionally, claims
`
`directed to an apparatus must be distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure
`
`rather than function, In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473. 1477-78.44 USPO.2d 1429, 1431-
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/867,079
`
`Page 6
`
`Art Unit: 2854
`
`32 (Fed. Cir. 1997)." Furthermore, MPEP 2114 (11) states, "A claim containing a
`
`'recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be
`
`employed does not differentiatet
`
`'
`I
`I
`I
`I
`I
`'
`Intermediate region; Inclination surface
`
`
`
`ratus' if the
`
`prior art apparatus teaches all t - s ruc ura lml a Ions o
`
`e c aIm.
`
`erefore, there is
`
`no controller system that co
`
`ols the squeegee and since Tan et al. teaches all of the
`
`structure as recited, Tan = al. is capable of being used in the manner recited and meets
`
`the claim language).
`
`surface of
`
`the first
`
`region is
`flush with a
`
`lower
`
`region.
`
`surface of
`
`the second
`
`With respect to claim 4, Tan teaches a lower surface of the first region is flush
`
`with a lower surface of the second region (refer to marked-up Figure 7).
`
`With respect to claim 6, Tan teaches the claimed invention with the exception of
`
`an upper surface of the first region is flush with an upper surface of the second region
`
`(note: in the broadest interpretation, depending on how the screen is positioned in the
`
`printing device the 1st lower region/2nd lower region can be turned upside down and
`
`therefore would become the 1st upper region/2nd upper region and therefore both
`
`regions upper regions would be flush with respect to each other).
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/867,079
`
`Page 7
`
`Art Unit: 2854
`
`With respect to claim 7, Tan et al. teaches a component mounting line,
`
`comprising: the screen printing apparatus (100) according to claim 1 ; and
`
`a component mounting apparatus which mounts a component onto a substrate
`
`on which the paste is printed by the screen printing apparatus (Column 2, Lines 60-67).
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`10.
`
`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 of this title, 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.
`
`11.
`
`Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan in view
`
`of Nakatsuji (US Publication 2015/0163925).
`
`With respect to claim 5, Tan teaches the claimed invention including a lower
`
`surface of the first region is flush with a lower surface of the second region (refer to
`
`marked-up Figure 7), however does not explicitly disclose an intermediate region
`
`comprises an inclination surface except for an inclination angle of substantial 90 degree.
`
`Nakatsuji et al. teaches a mask with an intermediate region comprises an inclination
`
`surface except for an inclination angle of substantial 90 degree (Figure 10A).
`
`It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of
`
`filing of the present application to modify the screen printing apparatus to provide a
`
`mask with an intermediate region with an inclination surface except for an inclination
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/867,079
`
`Page 8
`
`Art Unit: 2854
`
`angle of substantial 90 degree as taught by Nakatsuji et al. as it would require obvious
`
`substitution of one known mask with another mask for the purpose of providing versatile
`
`apparatus that can compensate for different pastes.
`
`Response to Arguments
`
`12.
`
`Applicant's arguments filed 10/13/16 have been fully considered but they are not
`
`persuasive.
`
`Specifically, with respect to applicant’s arguments on page 5 that Tan fails to
`
`disclose that the paste is not directly deposited on the mask of the intermediate region.
`
`However, the examiner notes that the limitation is a functional recitation of a desired
`
`mode of operation as recited above. Since, Tan et al. teaches all of the structure as
`
`recited, Tan et al. is capable of being used in the manner recited and meets the claim
`
`language. Therefore, it is examiner’s position that Tan et al. thereby meets the claim
`
`language.
`
`Conclusion
`
`13.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
`
`examiner should be directed to MARISSA FERGUSON-SAMRETH whose telephone
`
`number is (571)272—2163. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00am-6:00pm.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s
`
`supervisor, Judy Nguyen can be reached on 571-272—2258. The fax phone number for
`
`the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 14/867,079
`
`Page 9
`
`Art Unit: 2854
`
`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.
`
`/MARISSA FERGUSON-SAMRETH/
`
`Examiner, Art Unit 2854
`
`/LESLIE J EVANISKO/
`
`Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2854
`
`