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 Objections
Claims 1 and 17 are objected for claim language” …. member blocks a flow of a conductive medium including a plurality of conductive particles to retard said flow of said conductive medium and force said conductive particles locate on surfaces of said connecting bumps”. It’s not clear if retard refers to force or force the conductive particles to locate on surface.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1, 10-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a (1) as being anticipated by Cho et al. (US 2007/0045841, hereinafter Cho).
With respect to claim 1, A flow guiding structure of chip (Para 0006), comprising: a plurality of connecting bumps (plurality of bumps 54 of Fig. 3), disposed on a surface of a chip (Para 0019-0020); and at least one flow guiding member (58), disposed on said surface of said chip (Para 0058-0059), and adjacent to said connecting bumps (58 is adjacent to 54’s); wherein said at least one flow guiding member is at least one stuffing member (Para 0059-0060, and 0067 – 58 is filled/stuffed between the gaps/spaces); and said at least one stuffing member is stuffed in a circuit region of said chip and adjacent to said connecting bumps (Para 0016; 0019 and Fig. 3), said at least one flow guiding member blocks a flow of a conductive medium including a plurality of conductive particles to retard said flow of said conductive medium (Para 0060- The chip is bonded to the substrate using ACF 44 -since the organic insulating layer 58 having a thickness less than that of the bump 54 occupies the space between the bumps 54, a difference of pressures under the bump 54 of the driving chip 60 and in the space between the bumps, or under the organic insulating layer 58, may be decreased. Commensurate with the decrease in pressure difference, a flow of the conductive particles 42 decreases along with a flow of the ACF resin 44 and the number of the conductive particles 42 escaping into the space between the bumps 54 from under the bump 54 of the driving chip 60 may be reduced) and force said conductive particles locate on surfaces of said connecting bumps (Para 0067; and 0072-0074).
With respect to claim 10, Cho discloses wherein said at least one stuffing member includes a plurality of stuffing members (Fig. 3 – there are multiple 58’s); and said stuffing members are spaced by a gap (58’s are space apart).
With respect to claim 11, Cho discloses wherein said at least one stuffing member is further stuffed in a plurality of gaps between said connecting bumps (Fig. 3 – 58’s are stuffed in gaps between 54’s).
With respect to claim 13, Cho discloses wherein the material of said at least one stuffing member is an insulative material (Para 0058 – organic insulating layer 58).
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.
Claims 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho in view of Daubenspeck et al. (US 2010/0038780, hereinafter Daubenspeck).
With respect to claim 12, Cho discloses wherein at least one side of said at least one stuffing member is adjacent to at least one connecting bump of said connecting bumps (Fig. 3).
Cho does not explicitly disclose said at least one side of said at least one stuffing member is a sloped surface.
In an analogous art, Daubenspeck discloses said at least one side of said at least one stuffing member is a sloped surface (Para 0025). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cho’s method by having Daubenspeck’s disclosure in order to accommodate different components to improve the flow control.
With respect to claim 14, Cho discloses wherein said connecting bumps correspond to a plurality of electrical connecting members (36 of Fig. 3), respectively (Fig. 3).
Cho does not explicitly disclose that said electrical connecting members are disposed on a board member.
In an analogous art, Daubenspeck discloses said electrical connecting members are disposed on a board member (Para 0008, and 0032). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cho’s method by having Daubenspeck’s disclosure in order to accommodate different components to improve the flow control.
Claims 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Peng et al. (US 2008/0023828, hereinafter Peng) in view of Mubarakami et al. (US 2019/0041685, hereinafter Mubarakami).
With respect to claim 15, Peng disclose:
a plurality of connecting-bump groups (Para 0016; Fig. 3-4; there are multiple bumps arranged in different groups), disposed on a surface of a chip (Para 0015), each of said connecting-bump groups corresponding to an electrical connecting member individually (Para 0015; each group/row segments of bumps connect to corresponding pad /electrodes on the substrate), said each of said connecting-bump groups including a plurality of bumps individually (Para 0015-0016), and said bumps in the same said each of said connecting-bump groups group adjacent to one another (Para 0016; 0017; group members can be adjacent to each other – bumps per functional unit/row); said bumps in said each of said connecting-bump groups arranged along a long side of said each of said connecting-bump groups (bumps are linearly arranged along the long side of the chip – Fig. 4).
Peng does not explicitly disclose that the said bumps in said each of said connecting bumps groups corresponding to the same one electrical connecting member.
In an analogous art, Mubarakami discloses that the said bumps in said each of said connecting bumps groups corresponding to the same one electrical connecting member (Fig. 4; Para 0049; bumps in a group connected to the same pad on the substrate – input signal bump group, output signal bump group). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Peng’s device by having Mubarakami’s disclosure in order to miniaturize the device.
With respect to claim 16, Peng does not explicitly disclose wherein said electrical connecting members are disposed on a board member.
In an analogous art, Mubarakami dislcoses wherein said electrical connecting members are disposed on a board member (Para 0013; 0039-0040). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Peng’s device by having Mubarakami’s disclosure in order to miniaturize the device
Claims 17, 18 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho.
With respect to claim 17, Cho dislcoses a flow guiding structure of chip (Para 0006), comprising:
a plurality of connecting bumps (plurality of bumps 54 of Fig. 3), disposed on a surface of a chip (Para 0019-0020);and
a plurality of flow guiding members (58’s), disposed on said surface of said chip (Para 0058-0059), said flow guiding members including a plurality of flow guiding bumps (Fig. 3 – 58’s are bumps), said flow guiding bumps adjacent to said connecting bumps (Fig. 3), said multiple flow guiding bumps having gaps therebetween (there are gaps between 58’s have gaps in between);
wherein said flow guiding members block a flow of a conductive medium including a plurality of conductive particles to retard said flow of said conductive medium (Para 0060- The chip is bonded to the substrate using ACF 44 -since the organic insulating layer 58 having a thickness less than that of the bump 54 occupies the space between the bumps 54, a difference of pressures under the bump 54 of the driving chip 60 and in the space between the bumps, or under the organic insulating layer 58, may be decreased. Commensurate with the decrease in pressure difference, a flow of the conductive particles 42 decreases along with a flow of the ACF resin 44 and the number of the conductive particles 42 escaping into the space between the bumps 54 from under the bump 54 of the driving chip 60 may be reduced) and force said conductive particles locate on surfaces of said connecting bumps (Para 0067; and 007-0074).
In the same embodiment Cho does not explicitly disclose that multiple flow guiding bumps of said flow guiding bumps adjacent to three sides of at least one connecting bump of said connecting bumps.
In another embodiment Cho discloses that multiple flow guiding bumps of said flow guiding bumps adjacent to three sides of at least one connecting bump of said connecting bumps (Fig. 10 – there are three 58’s adjacent to both sides and bottom of 54).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cho’s first embodiment by by having disclosure from second embodiment in order to achieve the optimal flow.
With respect to claim 18, Cho discloses wherein a height of said flow guiding members is smaller than or equal to a height of said connecting bumps (height of 58’s are smaller than height of 54’s).
With respect to claim 22, Cho discloses wherein said flow guiding bumps are conductors or non-conductors ((Para 0058 – organic insulators 58).
Claims 19 -21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho in view of Daubenspeck et al. (US 2010/0038780, hereinafter Daubenspeck).
With respect to claim 19, Cho discloses wherein at least one side of said at least one flow guiding member of said flow guiding members is adjacent to at least one connecting bump of said connecting bumps (Fig. 3).
Cho does not explicitly disclose said at least one side of said at least one flow guiding member is a sloped surface.
In an analogous art, Daubenspeck discloses said at least one side of said at least one flow guiding member is a sloped surface (Para 0025). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cho’s method by having Daubenspeck’s disclosure in order to accommodate different components to improve the flow control.
With respect to claim 20, Cho does not explicitly disclose wherein a first side of said flow guiding bumps corresponds to a second side of said connecting bumps; and an area of said first side is greater than an area of said second side.
In an analogous art, Daubenspeck discloses wherein a first side of said flow guiding bumps corresponds to a second side of said connecting bumps (Fig. 2A and 5); and an area of said first side is greater than an area of said second side (Para 0024-0035; Fig. 2A and 5). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cho’s method by having Daubenspeck’s disclosure in order to accommodate different components to improve the flow control.
With respect to claim 21, Cho discloses wherein at least one side of said at least one flow guiding bumps of said flow guiding bumps corresponding to said connection bumps is adjacent to at least one connecting bump of said connecting bumps (Fig. 3).
Cho does not explicitly disclose said at least one side of said flow guiding bumps is a sloped surface.
In an analogous art, Daubenspeck discloses said at least one side of said flow guiding bumps is a sloped surface (Para 0025). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cho’s method by having Daubenspeck’s disclosure in order to accommodate different components to improve the flow control.
Response to Arguments
Based on new ground of rejection, applicant's arguments filed 12/18/2025 are moot.
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 MOHAMMAD M CHOUDHRY whose telephone number is (571)270-5716. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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, Fairbanks Brent can be reached at 408-918-7532. 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.
/MOHAMMAD M CHOUDHRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights