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 .
This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 5/04/26. Claims 1-12 are pending.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9-11 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yabuta et al. (US PGPub 2020/0251423, hereinafter referred to as “Yabuta”).
Yabuta discloses the semiconductor device substantially as claimed. See figures 1-15 and corresponding text, where Yabuta teaches, in claim 1, a semiconductor device comprising:
an insulation board (1); (figure 2; [0043-0066])
an electrode provided ([0049-0052]) on the insulation board (1);
a sintered bonding layer (2) provided on the electrode and made of a sintered body of metal particles having an average particle size of nano-order (figure 2; [0052-0056]); and
a semiconductor element (3) bonded to the electrode via the sintered bonding layer (2).
However, Yabuta fails to show, in claim 1, wherein a layer thickness of the sintered bonding layer is greater than or equal to 290 µm and less than or equal to 700 µm.
Yabuta teaches, that the thickness of the sintered bonding layer thickness is from 30 µm to 200 µm ([0071]). In addition, Yabuta provides the advantages of preventing peeling, creating high bonding strength and excellent bonding life, [0021-0023]), such that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. MPEP 2144.05
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate, wherein a layer thickness of the sintered bonding layer is greater than or equal to 290 µm and less than or equal to 700 µm, in the device of Yabuta according to the teachings of Yabuta, with the motivation of preventing peeling, creating high bonding strength and excellent bonding life.
Yabuta teaches, in claim 2, wherein a side surface of the sintered bonding layer has a stair-like step in cross-sectional view (figure 2; [0043]).
Yabuta teaches, in claim 3, wherein the sintered bonding layer is provided on the electrode (figure 2).
However, Yubuta fails to teach wherein the sintered bonding layer includes a first sintered bonding layer, a second sintered bonding layer, and a third sintered bonding layer.
The examiner notes that where the claim does not differentiate between first, second, and third sintered bonding layers other than by naming label, one of ordinary skill in the art would appreciate sintering in multiple layering steps with optimized thickness would ensure whole layer sintering such that it would be obvious to make separable, resulting a first sintered body provided on the electrode, a second sintered boding layer provided on the first sintered bonding layer, and a third sintered bonding layer provided on the second sintered bonding layer. MPEP 2144.04.
Additionally, Yabuta teaches, that the thickness of the sintered bonding layer thickness is from 30 µm to 200 µm ([0071]), providing the advantages of peeling prevention, creating high bonding strength and excellent bonding life, ([0021-0023]), such that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. MPEP 2144.05
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to separate the sintered bonding layer as taught by Yabuta to ensure sintering of the entirety of the sintered bonding layer on the electrode.
Yabuta fails to teach, in claim 4 wherein the layer thickness of the second sintered bonding layer is greater than or equal to 200 µm and less than or equal to 500 µm.
Yabuta teaches, that the thickness of the sintered bonding layer thickness is from 30 µm to 200 µm ([0071]). In addition, Yabuta provides the advantages of preventing peeling, creating high bonding strength and excellent bonding life, [0021-0023]), such that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. MPEP 2144.05
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to separate the sintered bonding layer as taught by Yabuta to ensure proper bonding.
Yabuta fails to teach, in claim 5, wherein the layer thickness of each of the first sintered bonding layer and the third sintered bonding layer is greater than or equal to 10 µm and less than or equal to 100µm.
Yabuta teaches, that the thickness of the sintered bonding layer thickness is from 30 µm to 200 µm ([0071]). In addition, Yabuta provides the advantages of preventing peeling, creating high bonding strength and excellent bonding life, [0021-0023]), such that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. MPEP 2144.05
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate, wherein the layer thickness of each of the first sintered bonding layer and the third sintered bonding layer is greater than or equal to 10 µm and less than or equal to 100µm, in the device of Yabuta according to the teachings of Yabuta, to ensure proper bonding.
Yabuta fails to teach in claim 6, wherein areas of the first sintered bonding layer, the second sintered bonding layer, and the third sintered bonding layer in plane view satisfy the following expression, area of first sintered bonding layer > area of second sintered bonding layer area of third sintered bonding layer
Yabuta teaches, that the thickness of the sintered bonding layer thickness is from 30 µm to 200 µm ([0071]). Similarly, the sintered bonding layer would have an associated area. In addition, Yabuta provides the sintered body layer is designed to preventing peeling, create high bonding strength and excellent bonding life, ([0021-0023]), such that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. MPEP 2144.05.
Yabuta fails to teach, in claim 7, having stair-like steps in cross-sectional view.
Yabuta teaches, in claim 7, wherein side surfaces of the first sintered bonding layer, the second sintered bonding layer, and the third sintered bonding layer (figure 2; [0043]). In addition, Yabuta provides the sintered body layer is designed to prevent peeling, create high bonding strength and excellent bonding life ([0021-0023]), such that the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device. MPEP 2144.04 IV
Yabuta fails to teach, in claim 8, wherein the average particle size of the metal particles is greater than or equal to 10 nm and less than or equal to 100 nm.
Yabuta teaches, that the thickness of the sintered bonding layer thickness is from 30 µm to 200 µm ([0071]). In addition, Yabuta provides the advantages of preventing peeling, creating high bonding strength and excellent bonding life, [0021-0023]), such that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. MPEP 2144.05
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate, wherein the average particle size of the metal particles is greater than or equal to 10 nm and less than or equal to 100 nm, in the device of Yabuta according to the teachings of Yabuta, with the motivation of preventing peeling, creating high bonding strength and excellent bonding life.
Yabuta teaches, in claim 9, wherein a material of the metal particles is Ag ([0054]).
Yabuta teaches, in claim 10, wherein a material of the electrode is Cu or Al ([0049]).
Yabuta teaches, in claim 11, wherein a metal layer including a material different from a metal material of the electrode is provided on the electrode, and the material of the metal layer is any of Au, Pt, Pd, Ag, Cu, Ti and Ni ([0049]).
Yabuta teaches, in claim 12, wherein a material of the semiconductor element is any of silicon carbide, gallium nitride, gallium arsenide and diamond ([0044]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant’s amendment has necessitated new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
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 STANETTA D ISAAC whose telephone number is (571)272-1671. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10-6.
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, Leonard Chang can be reached at 571-270-3691. 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.
/STANETTA D ISAAC/Examiner, Art Unit 2898 July 16, 2026
/Leonard Chang/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights