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 § 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) 1-3, 5-13 and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. [U.S. Publication No. 2008/0213966 A1] in view of Ikeda [U.S. Patent No. 5111169] and Rostoker [U.S. Patent No. 5662768].
Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses an inductor (comprising coil 120, Paragraph 0035, 0042, Fig. 2-4) comprising:
a substrate (e.g., 110, Paragraph 0035, Fig. 2-4) having a first side (e.g., top surface of substrate 110) and a second side (e.g., bottom surface of substrate 110) opposite the first side;
a trench (e.g., 111, etched out trench of substrate 110, Paragraph 0041, Fig. 4C) extending from the first side of the substrate 110 toward the second side of the substrate 110 (e.g., similar to the trench 11 extends from the first side to the second side of the substrate 10, Paragraph 0032, Fig. 1A, 1B);
wherein the trench 111 includes an electrically conductive material (e.g., copper, Paragraph 0042) that extends from the first side of the substrate to a depth of the trench 111; and
wherein a length of the trench 111 forms an overlapping spiral (Paragraph 0041) in the substrate 111 (see also Fig. 2A).
Lee discloses the instant claimed invention discussed above except for the trench having tapered sidewalls.
Ikeda discloses spiral trench (e.g., groove 12, column 13, lines 15-23, Fig. 14) have tapered sidewalls.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide trench having tapered sidewalls as taught by Ikeda to the spiral trench of Lee and have the tapered sidewalls extend from first side of the substrate towards the second side to ensure penetration of the electrically conductive material through the whole depth of the trench for a definite conductive solid structure.
Lee discloses the instant claimed invention discussed above except for the substrate, the trench tapered sidewalls having a width at a mid-point of the trench narrower than a top of the trench and narrower than a bottom of the trench.
Rostoker discloses substrate trench sidewalls having a width at a mid-point of the trench narrower than a top of the trench and narrower than a bottom of the trench (e.g., hour-glass shape, see column 3, lines 10-15).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substrate trench sidewalls having a width at a mid-point of the trench narrower than a top of the trench and narrower than a bottom of the trench as taught by Rostoker to the substrate trench of Lee to provide the inductor with larger conductor area to lower resistance of the coil and reduce heat generation.
Regarding claim 2, Lee discloses the trench 111 is substantially perpendicular (e.g., trench 111 is etched in thickness direction of substrate 110, Fig. 2-4) to the first side of the substrate 110.
Regarding claim 3, Lee discloses the substrate 110 can be a glass substrate (e.g., similar to substrate 10 disclosed in Paragraph 0033).
Regarding claim 5, Lee discloses the electrically conductive material (e.g., copper) is fully filled within the trench 111 (Paragraph 0042).
Regarding claim 6, Lee discloses the electrically conductive material (e.g., copper) is plated on a side of the trench 111 (Paragraph 0042).
Regarding claim 7, Lee discloses further comprising traces (e.g., 140, 145, Paragraph 0035, 0043, Fig. 2A-2B) electrically and physically coupled with the electrically conductive material (e.g., copper) at the first side of the substrate 110.
Regarding claim 8, Lee discloses the traces (e.g., 140, 145) extend above the first side of the substrate 110 (Fig. 2A, 2B).
Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses the trench 111 extends from the first side (top surface) of the substrate 110 to the second side (bottom surface) of the substrate 110 (see Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 10, Lee discloses further comprising traces (e.g., 160, Paragraph 0035, Fig. 2B) that are electrically and physically coupled with the electrically conductive material at the second side of the substrate 100 (bottom surface of 110, Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 11, Lee discloses an inductor (comprising coil 120, Paragraph 0035, 0042, Fig. 2-4), comprising:
a substrate (e.g., 110, Paragraph 0035) having a first side (e.g., top surface) and a second side (e.g., bottom surface of 110) opposite the first side;
a plurality of trenches (e.g., 111, Paragraph 0041, Fig. 2-4) extending from the first side of the substrate 110 toward the second side of the substrate 110, the plurality of trenches 111 being substantially parallel (see Fig. 2-4);
wherein the plurality of trenches 111 include an electrically conductive material (e.g., copper) that extends from the first side of the substrate 110 to a depth (e.g., full depth of trench from top to bottom surface of 110), respectively, of the plurality of trenches 111; and
wherein the plurality of trenches 111 form an overlapping spiral (Paragraph 0041, Fig. 2A) in the substrate 110.
Lee discloses the instant claimed invention discussed above except for each of the plurality of trenches has tapered sidewalls.
Ikeda discloses spiral trench (e.g., groove 12, column 13, lines 15-23, Fig. 14) have tapered sidewalls.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide trench having tapered sidewalls as taught by Ikeda to the plurality of spiral trench of Lee and have the tapered sidewalls extend from first side of the substrate towards the second side to ensure penetration of the electrically conductive material through the whole depth of the trench for a definite conductive solid structure.
Lee discloses the instant claimed invention discussed above except for the substrate, the trench tapered sidewalls having a width at a mid-point of the trench narrower than a top of the trench and narrower than a bottom of the trench.
Rostoker discloses substrate trench sidewalls having a width at a mid-point of the trench narrower than a top of the trench and narrower than a bottom of the trench (e.g., hour-glass shape, see column 3, lines 10-15).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substrate trench sidewalls having a width at a mid-point of the trench narrower than a top of the trench and narrower than a bottom of the trench as taught by Rostoker to the substrate trench of Lee to provide the inductor with larger conductor area to lower resistance of the coil and reduce heat generation.
Regarding claim 12, Lee discloses further comprising traces (e.g., 140, 145, Paragraph 0035, 0043, Fig. 2A-2B) electrically and physically coupled with the electrically conductive material (e.g., copper) at the first side of the substrate 110.
Regarding claim 13, Lee discloses the substrate 110 can be a glass substrate (Paragraph 0033).
Regarding claim 15, Lee discloses at least one of the plurality of trenches 111 extends from the first side (top surface) of the substrate 110 to the second side (bottom surface) of the substrate 110 (see Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 16, Lee discloses further comprising traces (e.g., 160, Paragraph 0035, Fig. 2B) that electrically and physically couple with the electrically conductive material at the second side of the substrate 100 (bottom surface of 110, Fig. 2B).
Regarding claim 17, Lee discloses a system (micro device package, Paragraph 0036, Fig. 3), comprising:
a device (e.g., micro device 210, Paragraph 0035, Fig. 3);
an inductor (e.g., comprises coil 120, Paragraph 0042, Fig. 3, 4D) electrically coupled with the device 210 to provide power to the device 210 (Paragraph 0020 discloses an inverter connected with the coil), the inductor (e.g., comprising coil 120) comprising:
a glass substrate 110 (Paragraph 0033 discloses substrate 110 could be glass) having a first side (e.g., top surface) and a second side (e.g., bottom surface) opposite the first side;
a trench (e.g., hole 111, Paragraph 0041) extending from the first side of the glass substrate 110 toward the second side of the glass substrate 110;
wherein the trench 111 includes an electrically conductive material (e.g., copper, Paragraph 0042) that extends from the first side of the glass substrate 110 to a depth of the trench 111 (see Fig. 2B-4); and
wherein the trench 111 forms an overlapping spiral (Fig. 2A) in the glass substrate 110 (Paragraph 0041).
Lee discloses the instant claimed invention discussed above except for the trench having tapered sidewalls.
Ikeda discloses spiral trench (e.g., groove 12, column 13, lines 15-23, Fig. 14) have tapered sidewalls.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide trench having tapered sidewalls as taught by Ikeda to the spiral trench of Lee and have the tapered sidewalls extend from first side of the substrate towards the second side to ensure penetration of the electrically conductive material through the whole depth of the trench for a definite conductive solid structure.
Lee discloses the instant claimed invention discussed above except for the substrate, the trench tapered sidewalls having a width at a mid-point of the trench narrower than a top of the trench and narrower than a bottom of the trench.
Rostoker discloses substrate trench sidewalls having a width at a mid-point of the trench narrower than a top of the trench and narrower than a bottom of the trench (e.g., hour-glass shape, see column 3, lines 10-15).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substrate trench sidewalls having a width at a mid-point of the trench narrower than a top of the trench and narrower than a bottom of the trench as taught by Rostoker to the substrate trench of Lee to provide the inductor with larger conductor area to lower resistance of the coil and reduce heat generation.
Regarding claim 18, Lee discloses the electrically conductive material (e.g., copper) is a selected one of fully filled within the trench 111 plated on a side of the trench 111 (Paragraph 0042).
Regarding claim 19, Lee discloses further comprising traces (e.g., 140, 145, Paragraph 0035, 0043, Fig. 2A-2B) electrically and physically coupled with the electrically conductive material (e.g., copper) at the first side of the substrate 110.
Regarding claim 20, Lee discloses the trench 111 extends from the first side (top surface) of the substrate 110 to the second side (bottom surface) of the substrate 110 (see Fig. 2B), and further comprising traces (e.g., 160, Paragraph 0035, Fig. 2B) that are electrically and physically coupled with the electrically conductive material at the second side of the substrate 100 (bottom surface of 110, Fig. 2B).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Ikeda and Rostoker as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Baram et al. [U.S. Publication No. 2012/0235779 A1].
Regarding claim 4, Lee in view of Ikeda and Rostoker discloses the instant claimed invention discussed above except for wherein a width of the trench is 10 µm or the depth of the trench is at least 250 µm.
Baram discloses a width of trench is 10 µm or the depth of trench is at least 250 µm (Paragraph 0065).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the coil trench is 10 µm or the depth of the trench is at least 250 µm as taught by Baram to the coil trench structure of Lee in view of Ikeda and Rostoker to provide the inductor device with the maximized magnetic flux density in a compact structure.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of Ikeda and Rostoker as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Baram et al. [U.S. Publication No. 2012/0235779 A1].
Regarding claim 14, Lee in view of Ikeda discloses the instant claimed invention discussed above except for wherein a width of the trench is 10 µm or the depth of the trench is at least 250 µm.
Baram discloses a width of trench is 10 µm or the depth of trench is at least 250 µm (Paragraph 0065).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the coil trench is 10 µm or the depth of the trench is at least 250 µm as taught by Baram to the coil trench structure of Lee in view of Ikeda and Rostoker to provide the inductor device with the maximized magnetic flux density in a compact structure.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments (dated 08/06/2025) with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are not persuasive.
The applicant argues that prior art Rostoker does not teach the limitations of claims 1, 11 and 17 which recite “…trench sidewalls having a width at a mid-point of the trench narrower than a top of the trench and narrower than a bottom of the trench …”.
The applicant argues that Rostoker does not teach the required limitation above and pointed out to Fig. 1e of Rostoker. There is none in the office action using Fig. 1e of Rostoker to reject the claims.
However, Rostoker discloses substrate trench sidewalls having a width at a mid-point of the trench narrower than a top of the trench and narrower than a bottom of the trench (e.g., hour-glass shape, see column 3, lines 10-15).
A person having ordinary skill in the art would have the substrate trench sidewalls having a width at a mid-point of the trench narrower than a top of the trench and narrower than a bottom of the trench as taught by Rostoker to the substrate trench of Lee to provide the inductor with larger conductor area to lower resistance of the coil and reduce heat generation.
The Examiner did not point out any figure or drawing in Rostoker that shows the claimed structure except of what is disclosed in column 3, lines 10-15 (shown below). The structural limitation of the trench as required in the claims has the hour-glass shape. Therefore, the teaching of Rostoker satisfies the requirement.
PNG
media_image1.png
304
496
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JOSELITO SASIS BAISA whose telephone number is (571)272-7132. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8AM to 4PM.
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, Shawki Ismail can be reached on 571 272 3985. 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.
/J.S.B/Examiner, Art Unit 2837
/SHAWKI S ISMAIL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837