DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to amendment filed 2/25/2026.
Claims 7-12, 21, 25-26 and 28-38 are pending. Claims 33-38 are new. Claims 1-6, 13-20, 22-24 and 27 have been canceled. Claims 7, 11, 21, and 29-31 have been amended.
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 7-12, 21, 25-26, 28-32 and 38 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.
Claim 7 reciting “the dielectric layer of the second RDL comprises a first portion coupled to a bottom surface of the second conductive line of the second RDL and the top surface of the magnetic core, and a second portion coupled to a bottom surface of another second conductive line of the second RDL and a top surface of the die” renders the claim indefinite. Firstly, “the second conductive line of the second RDL” is indefinite because it is unclear if it is intended to refer to one of the plurality of second conductive lines or each of the plurality of second conductive lines. Furthermore, “another second conductive line of the second RDL” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear how if it is intended to refer another one of the plurality of second conductive lines or is referring to conductive line that is different from the plurality of second conductive lines. If another second conductive line is one of the plurality of second conductive lines, it is unclear how does another one of the plurality of second conductive lines couples to a second portion of the dielectric layer on a top surface of the die. More specifically, the plurality of second conductive lines are previously recited to form a coil surrounding the magnetic core with the plurality of first through vias and the first conductive lines.
Claim 7 reciting “a direction perpendicular to surface of the magnetic core” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what constitutes “surface of the magnetic core” and whether it is intended to refer to the top surface of the magnetic core recited previously.
Claim 22 reciting “the dielectric layer of the second RDL comprises a first portion coupled to a bottom surface of the second conductive line of the second RDL and the top surface of the magnetic core, and a second portion coupled to a bottom surface of the third conductive line of the second RDL and a top surface of the die” renders the claim indefinite. Firstly, “the second conductive line of the second RDL” is indefinite because it is unclear if it is intended to refer to one of the plurality of second conductive lines or each of the plurality of second conductive lines. Furthermore, “the third conductive line of the second RDL” is indefinite because it is unclear if it is intended to refer to one of the plurality of third conductive lines or each of the plurality of third conductive lines.
Claim 22 reciting “the bottom surfaces of the second conductive lines and the bottom surfaces of the third conductive lines” render the claim indefinite. Only one “bottom surface of the second conductive line” and one “bottom surface of the third conductive line” has been recited previously in the claim. There is no antecedent basis for a bottom surface of each of the plurality of second/third conductive lines.
Claim 22 reciting “a direction perpendicular to top surface of the magnetic core” renders the claim indefinite due to improper antecedent basis because it is unclear if this is intended to refer to the top surface of the magnetic core recited previously.
Claim 38 reciting “the external connector” renders the claim indefinite due to improper correspondence. It is unclear if “the external connector” is the referring to one of the “at least one external connector” or each of the “at least one external connector”.
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.
(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.
Claims 7-12, 21, 25-26 and 28-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Liao et al. US 2018/0315706 A1 (Liao’706).
PNG
media_image1.png
571
1040
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In re claim 7, as best understood, Liao’706 discloses (FIGs. 1 & 3Z) a semiconductor package structure, comprising:
a die 320;
a magnetic core 334 adjacent to the die 320;
a molding 328 surrounding the die 320 and the magnetic core 334;
a first RDL (wiring structure below 328) under the die 320, the magnetic core 334 and the molding 328, wherein the first RDL comprises a plurality of first conductive lines 310 under the magnetic core 334;
a second RDL (wiring structure above 328) over the die 320, the magnetic core 334 and the molding 328, wherein the second RDL comprises a plurality of second conductive lines 338,344,350 and a dielectric layer 342+346+352 (may also include 336) over the magnetic core 334, and the second conductive lines 338,344,350 are disposed in the dielectric layer 342+346+352;
a plurality of first through vias 316 in the molding 328 coupling (can be direct or indirect electrical coupling) the first conductive lines 310 to the second conductive lines 338,344,350 to form a coil 310+316+338 surrounding the magnetic core 334 (¶ 81, see FIG. 1C; some of the second conductive lines, e.g. 338, form the coil with first conductive lines 310 and through vias 316; it is not required for each of the second conductive lines to be a part of the coil); and
a pad 354 over the second RDL, wherein in a cross-sectional view (e.g. cross-sectional through the coil), a width span of the pad 354 is within a width span of the coil 310+316+338 surrounding the magnetic core 334 (the coil has a width span along its winding cross-section corresponding to its total extension dimension (see FIG. 1C), and such width span is greater than the width span of the discrete pad 354),
wherein a top surface of the magnetic core 334 and a top surface of the molding 328 are separated from the second conductive lines 338,344,350 of the second RDL by the dielectric layer 336,342,346,352 of the second RDL (e.g. second conductive lines 338 are separated by dielectric 336; second conductive lines 344 are separated by dielectric 336 and 342; second conductive lines 350 are separated by dielectric 336, 342 and 346; furthermore, it is not required for each of the second conductive lines to be separated by the dielectric layer; e.g. in one interpretation, some of the second conductive lines 344 are separated from the magnetic core 334 and the molding 328 by dielectric 342),
wherein the dielectric layer 336,342,346,352 of the second RDL comprises a first portion (336 or 342) coupled to a bottom surface of “the second conductive line” 338 or 344 of the second RDL (portion of dielectric 336 is “coupled to” bottom of 338 (directly contact) or 344 (indirectly contact); portion of dielectric 342 is “coupled to” bottom of 344 through direct contact) and the top surface of the magnetic core 334 (dielectric 336 is “coupled to” top of magnetic core 334 through direct contact; dielectric 342 is indirectly “coupled to” top of magnetic core 334), and a second portion 342,346 coupled to a bottom surface of “another second conductive line” (a different 344 or 350) of the second RDL and a top surface of the die 320 (dielectric 342 is “coupled to” top surface passivation 324 of die 320; dielectric 346 is indirectly “coupled to” top of die 320),
wherein a thickness of the first portion of the dielectric layer 336,342 and a thickness of the second portion of the dielectric layer 342,346 are the same (in the case the first portion and second portion are different parts of dielectric layer 342, their thickness are the same in region above the die 320 and in region above magnetic core 334 between adjacent windings of 338 (see FIG. 1C); alternatively, the first portion can be a portion of 336, the second portion can be a portion of 342, the “portions” being selected to have the same thickness; similarly, portion of 342 and portion of 346 can be selected to have the same thickness), and
wherein the pad 354 overlaps the magnetic core 334 in a direction perpendicular to “surface” of the magnetic core 334 (vertical overlap between 354 and 334), and the pad 354 is physically isolated from the coil 310+316+338.
In re claim 8, Liao’706 discloses (FIGs. 1C & 3Z) wherein the first RDL (wiring structure below 328) further comprises at least a third conductive line (some of the plurality of lower trace portions 108b,310 correspond to the first conductive lines, other ones of the lower trace portions 108b,310 correspond to at least a third conductive line) electrically connected to the die 320 (through 316,338, see FIG. 3Z), and the second RDL (wiring structure above 328) further comprises at least a fourth conductive line 344 electrically connected to the third conductive line 310 (through 338,316, see FIG. 3Z).
In re claim 9, Liao’706 discloses (FIGs. 3Z) further comprising at least a second through via 316 (another one of vias 316) in the molding 328, wherein the second through via 316 electrically connects the third conductive line 310 to the fourth conductive line 344.
In re claim 10, Liao’706 discloses (FIG. 3Z) further comprising a conductive connector 356 disposed over the pad 354, wherein the conductive connector 356 and the pad 354 are electrically connected to the die 320.
In re claim 11, the magnetic core correspond to the combined structure 334+336 of Liao’706, which is considered a “core” structure including magnetic material 334 within the coil. As such, Liao’706 teaches (see FIG. 3S) the top surface of the magnetic core 334+336, the top surface of the die 320 (including passivation 324 and pads 326) and a top surface of the molding 328 have co-planar heights.
In re claim 12, Liao’706 discloses (e.g. FIG. 3Z) wherein the die 320 is electrically connected to the coil 310+316+338.
PNG
media_image2.png
621
1378
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In re claim 21, as best understood, Liao’706 discloses (FIGs. 1 & 3Z) a semiconductor package structure, comprising:
a die 320;
a magnetic core 334 adjacent to the die 320;
a molding 328 surrounding the die 320 and the magnetic core 334;
a first RDL (wiring structure below 328) under the die 320, the magnetic core 334 and the molding 328, wherein the first RDL comprises a plurality of first conductive lines 310 under the magnetic core 334;
a second RDL (wiring structure 342-352 above 328) over the die 320, the magnetic core 334 and the molding 328, wherein the second RDL comprises a dielectric layer 336+342+346, a plurality of second conductive lines 338,344,350 over the magnetic core 334 and the dielectric layer 336,342,346, and a plurality of third conductive lines 344,350 over the die 320 and the dielectric layer 336,342,346;
a plurality of first through vias 316 in the molding 328 coupling (can be direct or indirect electrical coupling) the first conductive lines 310 to the second conductive lines 338,344,350 to form a coil 310+316+338 surrounding the magnetic core 334 (¶ 81, see FIG. 1C; some of the second conductive lines, e.g. 338, form the coil with first conductive lines 310 and through vias 316; it is not required for each of the second conductive lines to be a part of the coil), wherein the die 320 is electrically connected to the third conductive lines 344,350 of the second RDL and the coil 310+316+338 (see FIG. 3Z); and
a first external connector 354+356 over the second RDL 342-352,
wherein the second RDL (wiring structure above 328) further comprises a first connecting via 348 (right side via) coupled to one of the first through vias 316 (right side via 348 indirectly electrically coupled to 316 through other wirings and/or die 320), and a second connecting via 348 (left side via) coupled to the die 320 (indirectly electrically coupled to die 320 through other wirings), and a height of the first connecting via (height measured from the bottom of layer 342 to top surface of right via 348) is equal to a height of the second connecting via (height measured from the bottom of layer 342 to top surface of left via 348),
wherein the dielectric layer 336,342,346 of the second RDL comprises a first portion (336 or 342) coupled to a bottom surface of “the second conductive line” 338 or 344 of the second RDL (portion of dielectric 336 is “coupled to” bottom of 338 (directly contact) or 344 (indirectly contact); portion of dielectric 342 is “coupled to” bottom of 344 through direct contact) and a top surface of the magnetic core 334 (dielectric 336 is “coupled to” top of magnetic core 334 through direct contact; dielectric 342 is indirectly “coupled to” top of magnetic core 334), and a second portion 342,346 coupled to a bottom surface of “the third conductive line” (a different 344 or 350) of the second RDL and a top surface of the die 320 (dielectric 342 is “coupled to” top surface passivation 324 of die 320; dielectric 346 is indirectly “coupled to” top of die 320),
wherein a thickness of the first portion of the dielectric layer 336,342 and a thickness of the second portion of the dielectric layer 342,346 are the same (in the case the first portion and second portion are different parts of dielectric layer 342, their thickness are the same in region above the die 320 and in region above magnetic core 334 between adjacent windings of 338 (see FIG. 1C); alternatively, the first portion can be a portion of 336, the second portion can be a portion of 342, the “portions” being selected to have the same thickness; similarly, portion of 342 and portion of 346 can be selected to have the same thickness), and
wherein “the bottom surfaces of the second conductive lines” (left 344 or left 350) and “the bottom surfaces of the third conductive lines” (right 344 or right 350) are aligned with each other (bottom surfaces 344 are “aligned” on a same horizontal plane and bottom surfaces of 350 are “aligned” on a same horizontal plane),
wherein the first external connector 354+356 overlaps the magnetic core 334 in a direction perpendicular to “top surface” of the magnetic core 334 (vertical overlap between 354+356 and 334), and the first external connector 354+356 (e.g. right side connector) is physically isolated from the coil 310+316+338.
PNG
media_image3.png
516
1217
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In re claim 25, Liao’706 discloses (e.g. see annotated FIG. 3Z above) wherein a thickness of the die 320 (corresponding to only the active body below the pads 326, e.g. body portion below the dashed line annotated in FIG. 3Z above), a thickness of the magnetic core 334, and a thickness of the molding (corresponding to the portion below 336, see FIG. 3Z above) are equal.
Alternatively, the magnetic core correspond to the combined structure 334+336 considered a “core” structure including magnetic material 334 within the coil. As such, the thickness of the die 320 (including pad 326), the thickness of the magnetic core 334+336, and the thickness of the molding 328 (in its entirety) are equal.
In re claim 26, Liao’706 discloses (FIG. 3Z) wherein a top surface of the first RDL (top of 308,310,318), a bottom surface of the magnetic core 334, a bottom surface of the molding 328, and a bottom surface of the die 320+322 (die attach 322 considered to be part of the die) are level with each other.
In re claim 28, Liao’706 discloses (e.g. FIG. 3Z) further comprising a second external connector (another one of 354+356, e.g. the left side connector 354+356 in FIG. 3Z) over the second RDL and electrically connected to the die 320 (left connector 354+356 shown to be connected to die 320).
In re claim 29, Liao’706 discloses (FIGs. 1C & 3Z) wherein the first connecting via (right via 348) and the second connecting via (left via 348) are disposed in the dielectric layer 336+342+346.
In re claim 30, Liao’706 discloses (FIGs. 1C & 3Z) wherein the magnetic core 334 is separated from the second conductive lines (338 or 344 or 350) by the dielectric layer 336,342,346.
In re claim 31, Liao’706 discloses (FIGs. 1C & 3Z) wherein the dielectric layer 336+342+346 is in contact with the top surface of the magnetic core 334 (bottom of dielectric part 336 contacts top of 334), a top surface of the molding 328 (bottom of dielectric part 342 contacts top of 328), and top surfaces of the first through vias 316 (bottom of dielectric part 342 contacts the peripheral edges of the top surfaces of 316, i.e. the contact occurs at the corners where the bottom of 342 and top of 316 meet). Alternatively, “contact” does not require direct physical contact and may be, e.g. a thermal contact. Under such interpretation, the dielectric layer 336+342+346 is in thermal contact with the top surface of the magnetic core 334, the top surface of the molding 328, and the top surfaces of the firs through vias 316.
In re claim 32, Liao’706 discloses (FIGs. 1C & 3Z) wherein the first RDL (wiring structure below 328) further comprises a plurality of third connecting vias (portion of 316 in layer 318) coupled to the first through vias (portion of 316 in layer 328) and the first conductive lines 310.
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 33 and 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liao et al. US 2018/0315706 A1 (Liao’706) in view of Jou et al. US 2015/0371772 A1 (Jou).
In re claim 33, Liao’706 discloses (FIGs. 1 & 3Z) a semiconductor package structure, comprising:
a magnetic core 334 having a first (top) surface and a second (bottom) surface opposite to the first (top) surface;
a molding 328 surrounding the magnetic core 334, wherein the molding 328 has a second (bottom) surface aligned with the second (bottom) surface of the magnetic core 334;
a first redistribution layer RDL (wiring structure below 328) comprising a plurality of first conductive lines 310 under the magnetic core 334;
a second RDL (wiring structure above 328) comprising a dielectric layer 342+346+352 over the magnetic core 334 and the molding 328 and a plurality of second conductive lines 338 disposed in the dielectric layer 342+346+352;
a plurality of through vias 316 in the molding 328, wherein the through vias are coupled to the first conductive lines 310 and the second conductive lines 338 to form a coil 310+316+338 surrounding the magnetic core 334 (¶ 81, see FIG. 1C); and
at least one external connector 354,356 over the second RDL,
wherein the at least one external connector 354,356 overlaps the first (top) surface of the magnetic core 334 in a direction perpendicular to the first (to) surface of the magnetic core 334, and the at least one external connector 354,356 is physically isolated from the coil 310+316+338.
Liao’706 teaches an inductor coil with a magnetic core. Liao’706 does not explicitly disclose
wherein the molding 328 has a first (top) surface aligned with the first (top) surface of the magnetic core 334;
each through via 316 has a first (top) surface aligned with the first (top) surface of the magnetic core 334, and a second (bottom) surface aligned with the second (bottom) surface of the magnetic core 334; and
wherein the dielectric layer of the second RDL comprises a first portion coupled to a bottom surface of one of the second conductive lines 338 of the second RDL and the first (top) surface of the magnetic core 334, and a second portion coupled to the bottom surface of the one of the second conductive lines 338 of the second RDL and the first (top) surface of the molding 328,
wherein a thickness of the first portion of the dielectric layer and a thickness of the second portion of the dielectric layer are the same.
However, Jou teaches (FIGs. 1-14) forming an inductor coil 100 with a magnetic core 700 comprising a magnetic core 700 having a first (top) surface and a second (bottom) surface opposite to the first (top) surface;
a molding 104 surrounding the magnetic core 700 (FIGs. 5-7), wherein the molding 104 has a first (top) surface aligned with the first (top) surface of the magnetic core 700, and a second (bottom) surface aligned with the second (bottom) surface of the magnetic core 700;
a first redistribution layer RDL (bottom wiring structure) comprising a plurality of first conductive lines 1400,1402 under the magnetic core 700;
a second RDL (top wiring structure) comprising a dielectric 800 over the magnetic core 700 and the molding 104 and a plurality of second conductive lines 1100,1048 disposed on the dielectric layer 800;
a plurality of through vias 500,506,512 in the molding 104, wherein the through vias 500,506,512 are coupled to the first conductive lines 1400,1402 (through 1300,1302,1304) and the second conductive lines 1100,1048 (through 1000,1002,1004) to form a coil surrounding the magnetic more 700 (FIG. 14B), and each through via 500,506,512 has a first (top) surface 520 aligned with the first (top) surface 804 of the magnetic core 700 (FIG. 8), and a second (bottom) surface 1204 aligned with the second (bottom) surface 1208 of the magnetic core 700 (FIG. 12); and
wherein the dielectric layer 800 of the second RDL comprises (FIG. 11A) a first portion (portion of 800 above 700) coupled to a bottom surface of one of the second conductive lines 1100,1408 of the second RDL and the first (top) surface 804 of the magnetic core 700, and a second portion (portion of 800 between 104 and 1100,1048) coupled to the bottom surface of the one of the second conductive lines 1100,1408 of the second RDL and the first (top) surface of the molding 104,
wherein a thickness of the first portion of the dielectric layer (portion of 800 above 700) and a thickness of the second portion of the dielectric layer (portion of 800 above 104) are the same.
Jou teaches the RDL structure above and below the magnetic core 700 connecting the through vias 500,506,512 to form the inductor coil (¶ 49,56,57) with intervening dielectric layer 800,1200 to insulate the magnetic core 700 (¶ 43,51).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form Liao’706’s RDL structures as taught by Jou to provide interconnected inductor coil around the magnetic core with intervening dielectric layers to isolate the magnetic core. As such, the second conductive lines 338 of the second RDL is disposed in the dielectric layer including dielectric 342+346+352 and an intervening dielectric below 338.
In re claim 38, as best understood, Liao’706 discloses (e.g. FIGs. 1C and 3Z) a width “the external connector” 354,356 is less than a width of the magnetic core 334. The magnetic core a width L1 corresponding to its total extension dimension (see FIG. 1C), and such width is greater than the width of the discrete connector 354,356.
Claims 34-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Liao and Jou as applied to claim 33 above, and further in view of Yu et al. US 2019/0051604 A1 (Yu).
In re claims 34 and 36, Jou teaches the top RDL further comprise top connecting vias 1000,1002,1004 coupling the top conductive lines 1100,1048 to through vias 500,506,512 and bottom RDL further comprises bottom connecting vias 1300,1302,1304 coupling the bottom conductive lines 1400,1402 to through vias 500,506,512. Jou does not explicitly disclose a width of each top connecting vias and bottom connecting vias is less than a width of each through via.
However, Yu teaches a semiconductor package structure (see FIG. 4K) comprising a molding layer 131 surrounding device 140, a first RDL 110 below the molding layer 131, the second RDL 260 above the molding layer 131, and through vias 150 in the molding layer 131 coupling first conductive lines 114 of the first RDL 110 and second conductive lines 264 of the second RDL 260.
Yu discloses the first RDL 110 further comprises a plurality of connecting vias (vias below 150) coupling the first conductive lines 114 to the through vias 150, and the second RDL 260 further comprises a plurality of second connecting vias (vias above 150) coupling the second conductive lines 264 to the through vias 150, a width of each top connecting vias and bottom connecting vias is less than a width of each through via 150. Yu teaches such RDL structures facilitate electrical routing for high density integrations (¶ 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the RDL structures taught by Liao’706’s and Jou to include connecting vias having smaller width than the through mold vias as taught by Yu to provide high density electrical routing.
In re claim 35, Jou discloses (e.g. FIG. 14A) wherein a distance between a top surface of the first conductive lines 1400,1402 and the second (bottom) surface of the magnetic core 700 is equal to a height of the first connecting vias 1300,1302,1304 (height of above 1400,1402).
In re claim 37, Jou discloses (e.g. FIG.14A) wherein a distance between the bottom surface of the second conductive lines 1100,1048 and the first (top) surface of the magnetic core 700 is equal to a height of the second connecting vias 1000,1002,1004 (height above molding 104).
Claims 33-38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tang et al. US 2021/0183794 A1 (Tang).
PNG
media_image4.png
522
726
media_image4.png
Greyscale
In re claim 33, Tang discloses (FIGs. 8A-8D) a semiconductor package structure, comprising:
a magnetic core MC having a first (top) surface and a second (bottom) surface opposite to the first (top) surface;
a molding 142 surrounding the magnetic core MC, wherein the molding 142 has a first (top) surface aligned with the first (top) surface of the magnetic core MC (FIG. 8D), and a second (bottom) surface aligned with the second (bottom) surface of the magnetic core MC (FIG. 8D);
a first redistribution layer RDL 106 comprising a plurality of first conductive lines S11 under the magnetic core MC;
a second RDL 144 comprising a dielectric 146,150 over the magnetic core MC and the molding 142 and a plurality of second conductive lines S13 disposed in the dielectric layer 146,150;
a plurality of through vias B1 in the molding 142, wherein the through vias B1 are coupled to the first conductive lines S11 and the second conductive lines S13 to form a coil I-11’ surrounding the magnetic more MC, and each through via B1 has a first (top) surface aligned with the first (top) surface of the magnetic core MC (FIG. 8D), and a second surface (bottom surface of B1 above C11 and on top of 112) aligned with the second (bottom) surface of the magnetic core MC; and
at least one external connector (UBMs or bumps under dies 226) over the second RDL 144,
wherein the dielectric layer 146,150 of the second RDL 144 comprises a first portion (portion of 146 above MC) coupled to a bottom surface of one of the second conductive lines S13 (FIG. 8D) of the second RDL and the first (top) surface of the magnetic core MC, and a second portion (portion of 146 above 142 in region between B1 and MC in A-A’ cross-section, see FIG. 8B) coupled to the bottom surface of the one of the second conductive lines S13 of the second RDL and the first (top) surface of the molding 142,
wherein a thickness of the first portion of the dielectric layer (portion of 146 above MC) and a thickness of the second portion of the dielectric layer (portion of 146 above 142) are the same, and
wherein the at least one external connector (UBMs or bumps under top dies 226) is physically isolated from the coil I-11’.
Tang does not show, in FIG. 8, the at least one external connector (UBMs or bumps under top dies 226) overlaps the first (top) surface of the magnetic core in a direction perpendicular to first (top) surface of the magnetic core.
However, Tang does teach in another embodiment as shown in FIG. 6E, the at least one external connector (UBMs 162 or bumps 264 under top dies 226) overlaps the top surface of the inductor coil I-11. Although the inductor coil I-11 shown in FIG. 6E does not include a magnetic core, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a magnetic core MC inside the inductor coil as shown in FIG. 8 to increase magnetic flux (¶ 108). As such, the at least one external connector (UBMs or bumps under top dies 226) overlaps the first (top) surface of the magnetic core MC in a direction perpendicular to first (top) surface of the magnetic core MC.
In re claim 34, Tang discloses (e.g. FIG. 8C) wherein the first RDL 106 further comprises a plurality of first connecting vias C11 coupling the first conductive lines S11 to the through vias B1, and a width of each first connecting vias C11 is less than a width of each through via B1.
In re claim 35, Tang discloses (e.g. FIGs. 8C-8D) wherein a distance between a top surface of the first conductive lines S11 and the second (bottom) surface of the magnetic core MC is equal to a height of the first connecting vias C11 (height of C11 above S11).
In re claim 36, Tang discloses (e.g. FIG. 8C) wherein the second RDL 144 further comprises a plurality of second connecting vias C12 coupling the second conductive lines S13 to the through vias B1, and a width of each second connecting vias C12 is less than a width of each through via B1.
In re claim 37, Tang discloses (e.g. FIGs. 8C-8D) wherein a distance between the bottom surface of the second conductive lines S13 and the first (top) surface of the magnetic core MC is equal to a height of the second connecting vias C12 (height of C12 above B1).
In re claim 38, as best understood, Tang discloses (e.g. FIGs. 2 & 6 & 8) wherein a width of “the external connector” (e.g. width of UBMs 162) is less than a width of the magnetic core MC (MC having same “width” L1 as the coil I-11 in the Y-direction (see FIG. 8A and 2B)). Tang teaches the width L1 is greater than the side of die 226. Thus, the width of the external connector 162 confined under the die 226 is less than the width of the magnetic core (corresponding to width L1 of the coil).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Liao’706 and Yu does not teach the dielectric layer of the second RDL having the first portion and the second portion having the same thickness (Remark, page 2).
This is not persuasive.
Liao’706 teaches the dielectric layer 342 comprises a first portion coupled to bottom surface of conductive line 334 and a second portion coupled to a bottom surface of another conductive line (e.g. another 334). The dielectric layer 342 also indirectly couples to the top surface of the magnetic core 334 and a top surface of the die 320. In this case, the first portion and second portion are different parts of the same dielectric layer 342, and their thickness are the same in region above the die 320 and in region above magnetic core 334 between adjacent windings of 338.
In an alternative interpretation, the dielectric layer corresponding to 336+342+346+352 which comprises a first portion corresponding to a portion of 336 coupled to a bottom surface of the second conductive line 338 and a second portion corresponding to a portion of 342 or 346 coupled to a bottom surface of “another second conductive line” 344 or 350. The dielectric portions in layers 336,342,346 either directly or also indirectly couples to the top surface of the magnetic core 334 and a top surface of the die 320. These “portions” in layers 336,342,346 can be selected to have the same thickness.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2014/0111273 teaches (FIG. 9) a die 904 mounted adjacent a solenoid inductor.
US 2016/0233292 teaches (FIG. 6F) a die 13 adjacent inductor having magnetic core 20
US 9,799,722 teaches (FIG. 5) die 142,144 adjacent inductor coil formed in magnetic body 110
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YU CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7881. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9AM-5PM ET.
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, WILLIAM KRAIG can be reached on 5712728660. 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.
/YU CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815
Prosecution Insights