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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on 12/26/2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 2, 4-11 and 15-20 remain pending in the application. Claims 3, 12-14 have been cancelled.
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.
Claim 11 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 11 recites the limitation: “wherein the second layer is on the first layer of the second microelectronic assembly”. It is not clear if the second layer is the second layer of the first microelectronic assembly or the second layer of the second microelectronic assembly. For the purpose of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as :wherein the second layer of the second microelectronic assembly is on the first layer of the second microelectronic assembly”.
Claims 15, 16 and 17 are also rejected as being dependent of claim 11.
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 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi Li et al., (United States Patent Application Publication Number, US 2020/0105719 A1) hereinafter referenced as Li, in view of Kim et al, (United States Patent Application Publication Number, US 2020/0243422 A1) hereinafter referenced as Kim, in view of Ki Jun Sung et al., (United States Patent Application Publication Number, US 2020/0075490 A1) hereinafter referenced as Sung and in view of Joshua Rubin et al., (United States Patent Number, US 10,535,608 B1) hereinafter referenced as Rubin.
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches a microelectronic assembly, comprising: a microelectronic subassembly (Fig.2B, element #201, paragraph [0055], row 2), comprising: a first die in a first layer (Fig.2B, element #210, the same as element #110 in Fig.1B, paragraph [0044], row 5-6, first layer is the layer between surface element #220b and surface element #202a) wherein the first die includes a first surface and an opposing second surface (Fig.2B, first surface is the bottom surface of element #210, and second surface is the top surface of element #210); a first bridge component in the first layer (Fig.2B, element #240, the same as element #140 in Fig.1B, paragraph [0046], rows 3-5), wherein the first bridge component includes a first surface and an opposing second surface (Fig.2B, bottom surface of element #240 is the first surface, and top surface of element #240 is the second surface) and a plurality of conductive contacts on each of the first and second surfaces of the first bridge component (Fig.2B, element #270 same as element #170 in Fig.1B, paragraph [0046], rows 6-7, note that the bridge must have contacts located on top and bottom surfaces to electrically connect to devices); and a second die in a second layer (Fig.2B, element #211 same as element #111, paragraph [0044], rows 5-6, second layer is between surface element #211c and element #211b) wherein the second layer is on the first layer (Fig.2B, second layer is on top of the first layer), and wherein a surface of the second die (Fig.2B, surface element #211c) is electrically coupled to the second surfaces of the first bridge component (Fig.2B, RDL layer element #220, same as layer element #120 in Fig.1B, and elements #235 electrically connects the bottom surface of element #211 to conductive the vias element #260, which are same as elements #160 in Fig.1B, paragraph [0045], rows 7-11, and elements #260 are implemented inside the bridge component, element #240, which replaces the vias, paragraph [0046], rows 9-10).
Li does not teach wherein a surface of the second die is electrically coupled to the second surface of the first die. Kim teaches wherein a surface of the second die (Fig.1, bottom surface of middle die, element #301) is electrically coupled to the second surface of the first die (Fig.1, bottom surface of middle die, element #301 is electrically coupled with top surface of bottom die, element #301, paragraph [0044], rows 1-13). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Kim and disclose a surface of the second die is electrically coupled to the second surfaces of the first die. This electrical connection helps reduce the length of the electrical paths and increases data transmission speeds.
Li further teaches wherein the second die is coupled to the second surface of the first bridge component by a plurality of the contacts on the second surface of the first bridge component (Fig.2B, second die, element #211, is coupled to the top surface of first bridge, element #240 through contacts, element #270 on the top surface of element #240), and contacts on the surface of the second die (Fig.2B, the bottom surface of element #211 is electrically connected, so the die must have contacts at the bottom surface, paragraph [0045], rows 5-8).
Li teaches the contacts on the surface of the second die having a minimum pitch between 36um and 55um (Fig.2B, each element #235, same as element #135 in Fig.1B, corresponds to a die contact for electrical connection, and the minimum interconnect pitch in the I/0 region is approximately 36um to 55um, paragraph [0047], rows 15-17). Thus, the pitch range disclosed by Li touches or overlaps the claimed range, between 10 microns and 50 microns, and therefore a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05). Li further teaches the first bridge may provide the electrical routing for the I/0 region (paragraph [0071], rows 12-14, element #540 is equivalent to element #240), and the minimum contact pitch in the I/0 region is approximately 36um to 55um (paragraph [0047], rows 15-17). Therefore, Li teaches the plurality of the contacts on the second surface of the first bridge component have a pitch equal or less than the minimum I/0 region pitch which is approximately 36um to 55um. Thus, the pitch range disclosed by Li touches or overlaps the claimed range, between 10 microns and 50 microns, and therefore a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
Li further teaches a package substrate having a first surface and an opposing second surface (Fig.2B, element #202, paragraph [0051], rows 3-5, the top surface is the second surface and the bottom surface is the first surface); a second bridge component embedded in the package substrate between the first and second surfaces of the package substrate, (Fig.2B, element #280, paragraph [0051], row 6) wherein the second bridge component comprises a plurality of conductive contacts at a surface of the second bridge component (Fig.2B, second bridge, element #280 includes conductive traces that electrically couple to elements #235 and vias #260 or element #240, therefore contacts must exist at the top surface of the bridge, (paragraph [0053], rows 1-11).
Li further teaches the second bridge component is electrically coupled to the first surface of the first bridge component by one or more of the plurality of conductive contacts at the surface of the second bridge component (Fig.2B, paragraph [0053], rows 1-11), and by contacts on the first surface of the first bridge component (Fig.2B, elements #270 on the bottom surface of element #240).
The combination of Li and Kim does not teach the plurality of conductive contacts of the second bridge component have a pitch between 40 microns and 130 microns. Sung teaches a second bridge component (Fig.1, element #120L) electrically coupled to the first surface of the first bridge component (Fig.1, bottom surface of element #220L) by one or more of the plurality of conductive contacts at the surface of the second bridge component (Fig.1, the contacts on the top surface of element #120L are electrically coupled with the contacts on the bottom surface of the first bridge component, element #220L), and the contacts on the top surface of the second bridge component have the same pitch as the contacts on the bottom of the first bridge component (See Fig.1). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Sung and disclose wherein the contacts on the top surface of the second bridge component have the same pitch as the contacts on the bottom of the first bridge component. This makes the connections between the bridges easier by eliminating the need for redistribution layers to transition between the contacts having different pitches. Rubin teaches the contacts on the first surface of the first bridge component (Fig.1, bottom surface of element #12) has a pitch of less than 75 microns (Fig.1, column 6, rows 31-34). Since, as noted above, Sung teaches that the pitch of the contacts on the first surface of the first bridge component is equal with the pitch of the plurality of conductive contacts of the second bridge component, the combination of Sung and Rubin teaches the plurality of conductive contacts of the second bridge component have a pitch of less than 75 microns. The claimed range, between 40 microns and 130 microns, overlaps the range disclosed by Rubin and therefore a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
The combination of Li, Kim and Sung does not teach the contacts on the first surface of the first bridge component having a pitch greater than the pitch of the contacts on the second surface of the first bridge component and between 40 microns and 130 microns. Rubin teaches the contacts on the first surface of the first bridge component having a pitch greater than the pitch of the contacts on the second surface of the first bridge component and between 40 microns and 130 microns (Fig.1, bottom surface contacts, element #180, have a pitch larger than 75 microns, column 6 rows 31-34, which is greater than the pitch of the contact on the top surface, elements #170, which have a pitch less than 55 microns, column 6, rows 18-23). The claimed range, between 40 microns and 130 microns, overlaps the range disclosed by Rubin and therefore a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Rubin and disclose on the first surface of the first bridge component having a pitch greater than the pitch of the contacts on the second surface of the first bridge component. Such a bridge allows the integration of more heterogenous chips with smaller and different contact pitches on the same substrate having a uniform and larger contact pitch, which helps reduce the overall package footprint and provides design flexibility.
Li further teaches a microelectronic component (Fig.2B, element #213, paragraph [0051], row 5) on the second surface of the package substrate (Fig.2B, element #213 is disposed on the top surface of element #202) and electrically coupled to the second bridge component by one or more of the plurality of contacts at the surface of the second bridge component (Fig.2B, bridge element #280 includes conductive traces that electrically couple element #213 to elements #270, therefore contacts must exist at the top surface of the bridge, (paragraph [0053], rows 1-11) having a pitch between 40 microns and 130 microns (see the rejection arguments above regarding the contacts pitch at the top surface of the second bridge), wherein the microelectronic component is electrically coupled to the second die via the first and second bridge components (Fig.2B, as noted above, second die, element #211 is electrically coupled to the first bridge element #240, which is coupled to second bridge, element #280. Furthermore, second bridge, element #280 electrically couples the microelectronic component, element #213 to memory elements #250, same as element #200, paragraph [0053], rows 1-2).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Li, Kim, Sung and Rubin teaches the microelectronic assembly of claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Li does not teach, wherein the microelectronic component includes a third bridge component, wherein the third bridge component is embedded in the microelectronic component and electrically coupled to the second bridge component, and wherein the microelectronic component is electrically coupled to the second die via the first, second, and third bridge components. Kim teaches, wherein the microelectronic component (Fig.1, element #200, paragraph [0025], row 3) includes a third bridge component (Fig.1, element #220 is a connecting element between element #200 and element #720 and therefore a bridge, paragraph [0045], rows 3-10) wherein the third bridge component is embedded in the microelectronic component (Fig.1, element #220 is embedded in element #200) and electrically coupled to the second bridge component (Fig.1, element #220 is electrically coupled to element #720 which is a connecting element between element #700 and element #220 and therefore a bridge, paragraph [0043], rows 3-4, and paragraph [0045], rows 3-12 and paragraph [0046], rows 1-3). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Kim and disclose a third bridge component wherein the third bridge component is embedded in the microelectronic component and electrically coupled to the second bridge component. As Kim discloses, the third bridge can include active components that may help regulate communications between dies (paragraph [0047], rows 4-8).
Li teaches wherein the microelectronic component is electrically coupled to the second die via the first and second bridge components (Fig.2B, as noted above, second die, element #211 is electrically coupled to the first bridge element #240, which is coupled to second bridge, element #280. Furthermore, second bridge, element #280 electrically couples the microelectronic component, element #213 to memory element #250, same as element #200, paragraph [0053], rows 1-2) where left side of the second bridge component couples the second bridge to the microelectronic component (Fig.2B, the 3 leftmost elements #235 under element #213 connect elements #213 to element #280, equivalent to elements #910 in Fig.2 of Kim placed in the same region). Therefore, the combination of Li and Kim teaches wherein the microelectronic component is electrically coupled to the second die via and the first, second, and third bridge components. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Kim and disclose wherein the microelectronic component is electrically coupled to the second die via the first, second and third bridges. As Kim discloses, this may help decrease the length of the electrical paths and increases data transmission speeds between dies (paragraph [0047], rows 4-8).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Li, Kim, Sung and Rubin teaches the microelectronic assembly of claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Li further teaches wherein the first bridge component is one of a plurality of first bridge components (Fig. 6A, mold interconnects, elements #660, same as elements #160 in Fig.1A, located on the left side of the Fig.6A can be implemented in a passive interposer like element #140 in Fig.1B, and elements #660, located on the right side of the Fig.6A can be implemented in another passive interposer like element #140, paragraph [0046] rows 4-5).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Li, Kim, Sung and Rubin teaches the microelectronic assembly of claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Li further teaches the microelectronic assembly of claim 1, wherein the second bridge component is one of a plurality of second bridge components (Fig.6A, elements #280 and #281 are bridges).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Li, Kim, Sung and Rubin teaches the microelectronic assembly of claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Li further teaches the microelectronic assembly of claim 1, wherein the microelectronic component is a monolithic die, high bandwidth memory, or a stacked die (element #213 is a monolithic die, paragraph [0051], row 5).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Li, Kim, Sung and Rubin teaches the microelectronic assembly of claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Li further teaches the wherein the second die a memory device (paragraph [0044], rows 5-6) and the microelectronic assembly is a server processor (paragraph [0051], rows 14-15). A person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized that the second die and the processor of the microelectronics component can be switched, without the loss the functionality of the microelectronic assembly. Furthermore, a person skilled in the art would have been able to carry out the substitution. Finally, the substitution achieves the predictable result of maintaining the functionality of the microelectronic assembly.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Li, Kim, Sung and Rubin teaches the microelectronic assembly of claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Li further teaches wherein the first layer and the second layer include one or more insulating materials (elements #210 and #211 are memory dies, paragraph [0044], row 5-6). Memory dies contain insulating materials (dielectrics, oxides) is well known in the art, and therefore a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.03). As a result, Li teaches the first layer and the second layer include one or more insulating materials.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Li, Kim, Sung and Rubin teaches the microelectronic assembly of claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Li further teaches the microelectronic assembly of claim 1, further comprising: a conductive pillar in the first layer (Fig.2A, elements #260, same as elements #160 in Fig.1A, paragraph [0053], row 5), wherein a first end (Fig.1A, bottom end of element #260) of the conductive pillars electrically coupled to the package substrate and an opposing second end (Fig.1A, top end of element #260) of the conductive pillar is electrically coupled to the surface of the second die (paragraph [0045], rows 5-11).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Kim, Sung, Rubin, and in view of Cheng-Yuan Kung et al, (United States Patent Application Publication Number, US 2021/0202392 A1) hereinafter referenced as Kung.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Li, Kim, Sung and Rubin teaches the microelectronic assembly of claim 1, as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Li further teaches the wherein the second die a memory device (paragraph [0044], rows 5-6) and the microelectronic assembly is a processor (paragraph [0051], rows 14-15). A person skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized that the second die and the processor of the microelectronics component can be switched, without loss of functionality of the microelectronic assembly. Furthermore, a person skilled in the art would have been able to carry out the substitution. Finally, the substitution achieves the predictable result of maintaining the functionality of the microelectronic assembly.
The combination of Li, Kim, Sung and Rubin does not teach wherein the processor is a graphics processor. Kung teaches wherein the second die (Fig.1, element #23) is a graphics processor (paragraph [0022], rows 1-2 and paragraph [0021], rows 8-11) and the microelectronic assembly is a memory device (Fig.1, element #3, paragraph [0025], row 11-13). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Kung and disclose the processor is a graphics processor. Graphic processors have the ability to process large amount of data in parallel (parallel processing) and have improved graphic rendering as compared to other type of processors.
Claims 11, 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liang Wang et al., (United States Patent Application Publication Number, US 2016/0071818 A1) hereinafter referenced as Wang, in view of Li, Kim, Sung and Rubin.
Regarding claim 11, Wang teaches a microelectronic assembly, comprising: a first microelectronic subassembly (Fig.6A, formed by top elements #110F.1, #110N and the encapsulated upper left elements #350), comprising: a first die in a first layer (Fig.6A, top element #110N above element #120, paragraph [0041], row 3, in the layer between the top surface of element #120 and the bottom surface of element #110F.1), wherein the first die includes a first surface and an opposing second surface (Fig.6A, bottom surface of top element #110N is the first surface and top surface of top element #110N is the second surface); a first bridge component in the first layer (Fig.6A, formed by encapsulated upper left four wires, elements #350, paragraph [0074], row 6) wherein the first bridge component includes a first surface and an opposing second surface (Fig.6A, bottom surface of top encapsulant, element #360 is the first surface and top surface of top encapsulant, element #360 is the second surface).
Wang teaches a plurality of conductive contacts on each of the first and second surfaces of the first bridge component (elements #350 electrically connect die top element #110F-1 with element #120 and therefore contacts must exist at both ends). Furthermore, Li teaches conductive vias (Fig.1A, elements #160, paragraph [0045], rows 10-11, similar to elements #350 of Wang) that are integrated in a bridge component (Fig.1B, element #140, paragraph [0046], rows 3-6) and a plurality of conductive contacts on each of the first and second surfaces of the first bridge component (Fig.1B, elements #170, rows 7-9). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Li and implement the wires in a bridge component with a plurality of conductive contacts on each of the first and second surfaces of the first bridge component. As disclosed by Li, this allows for finer pitch of the interconnects (paragraph [0046], rows 9-10).
Wang further teaches a second die in a second layer (Fig.6A, top element #110F.1, paragraph [0041], rows 1-3, second layer between the top and bottom surface of top element #110F.1), wherein the second layer is on the first layer (Fig.6A, second layer is on top of first layer), and wherein a surface of the second die (Fig.6A, bottom surface of top element #110F.1) is electrically coupled to the second surfaces of the first die and the first bridge component (Fig.6A, I/O elements #210B and #210A, paragraph [0041], rows 9-10, electrically connect the bottom surface of top element #110F.1 with the top surfaces of the first die and the first bridge), and wherein the second die is coupled to the second surface of the first bridge component by a plurality of the contacts on the second surface of the first bridge component (Fig.6A, first bridge formed by the encapsulated upper left four wires, elements #350 electrically connect second die, top element #110F-1, with element #120 and therefore contacts must exist), and contacts on the surface of the second die (since the bottom surface of die #110F-1 is electrically coupled, contacts on the surface must exists).
Wang does not teach the contacts having a pitch between 10 microns and 50 microns. Li teaches wherein the second die is coupled to the second surface of the first bridge component by a plurality of the contacts on the second surface of the first bridge component (Fig.2B, second die, element #211, is coupled to the top surface of first bridge, element #240 through contacts, element #270 on the top surface of element #240), and contacts on the surface of the second die (Fig.2B, the bottom surface of element #211 is connected through interconnects #235, so the die must have contacts at the surface, paragraph [0045], rows 5-8). Li further teaches the contacts on the surface of the second die have a minimum pitch between 36um and 55um (Fig.2B, each interconnect, element #235 corresponds to a die contact for electrical connection and the minimum pitch in the 1/0 region is approximately 36um to 55um, paragraph [0047], rows 15-17). Thus, the pitch range disclosed by Li touches or overlaps the claimed range, between 10 microns and 50 microns, and therefore a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05). Li further teaches the first bridge may provide the electrical routing for the 1/0 region (paragraph [0071], rows 12-14, element #540 is equivalent to element #240), and the minimum contact pitch in the 1/0 region is approximately 36um to 55um (paragraph [0047], rows 15-17). Therefore, Li teaches the plurality of the contacts on the second surface of the first bridge component have a pitch equal or less than the minimum 1/0 region pitch which is approximately 36um to 55um. Thus, the pitch range disclosed by Li touches or overlaps the claimed range, between 10 microns and 50 microns, and therefore a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
Wang further teaches a second microelectronic subassembly (Fig.6A, formed by bottom elements #110F.1, #110N and the encapsulated lower left elements #350), comprising: a third die in a first layer (Fig.6A, bottom element #110N below element #120, paragraph [0041], row 3, layer between the bottom surface of element #120 and top surface of bottom element #110F.1), wherein the third die includes a first surface and an opposing second surface (Fig.6A, bottom surface of bottom element #110N is the second surface and top surface of bottom element #110N is the first surface); a third bridge component in the first layer of the second microelectronic assembly (Fig.6A, formed by the encapsulated lower left four wires, elements #350, paragraph [0074], row 6), wherein the third bridge component includes a first surface and an opposing second surface (Fig.6A, bottom surface of bottom encapsulant, element #360 is the second surface and top surface of bottom encapsulant, element #360 is the first surface) and a plurality of conductive contacts on each of the first and second surfaces of the third bridge component (as noted above, Li teaches integration of the wires in a bridge component with contacts on the first and second surface); and a fourth die in a second layer (Fig.6A, bottom element #110F.1), wherein the second layer (Fig.6A, between the top and bottom surfaces of bottom element #110F.1) is on the first layer of the second microelectronic assembly (Fig.6A, second layer is on the bottom of the first layer of the second semiconductor assembly), and wherein a surface of the fourth die is electrically coupled to the second surfaces of the third die and the third bridge component (Fig.6A, I/O elements #210B and #210A, paragraph [0041], rows 9-10, connect the top surface of bottom element #110F.1 with the bottom surfaces of the third die and third bridge); a package substrate (Fig.6A, element #120, paragraph [0099], rows 2-3 and paragraph [0100], rows 10-14) having a first surface and an opposing second surface (Fig.6A, top surface of elements #120 is the first surface and bottom surface of element #120 is the second surface);
Wang further teaches via, not integrated in a second bridge, embedded in the package substrate between the first and second surfaces of the package substrate (Fig.6A, elements #510, paragraph [0100], rows 5) and comprising a plurality of conductive contacts on each of first and second opposing surfaces (Fig.6A, contact pads #elements #340’ and #340” are on opposing surfaces of the vias, paragraph [0100], rows 7-8), wherein the vias are electrically coupled to the first surface of the first bridge component and to the first surface of the third bridge component (Fig. 6A, contact pads #elements 340” connect the vias to the bottom surface of the first bridge and the top surface of the third bridge) by contacts on the first surface of the vias (Fig.6A, elements #340" on the top surface) and first surfaces of the first bridge component (Fig.6A, contact on the bottom surface of first bridge component formed by encapsulated upper left four wires, elements #350) and third bridge component (Fig.6A, contacts on the top surface of third bridge formed by encapsulated lower left four wires, elements #350).
Wang does not teach the vias are integrated in a second bridge. Li teaches conductive vias (Fig.1A, elements #160, paragraph [0045], rows 10-11) that are integrated in a bridge component (Fig.1B, element #140, paragraph [0046], rows 3-6) and a plurality of conductive contacts on each of the first and second surfaces of the first bridge component (Fig.1B, elements #170, rows 7-9). Furthermore, Kim also teaches vias integrated in a bridge (Fig.2, elements #520 of Kim are TSV, paragraph [0031], rows 4-5, as are elements #510 of Wang and element #510 of Kim may comprise of silicon material, paragraph [0031], row 3 same as element #120 of Wang, paragraph [0100], rows 10-14). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings Li and Kim and disclose the vias are integrated in a bridge while maintaining the electrical connections with the first and third bridges. As disclosed by Li, this allows the adjustment of the bridge contacts pitch to create a finer pitch (paragraph [0046], rows 9-10) that matches the contact pitch of attached devices.
The combination of Wang, Li and Kim does not teach contacts on the first surface of the second bridge component and first surfaces of the first bridge component and third bridge component having a pitch greater than the pitch of the contacts on the second surface of the first bridge component and between 40 microns and 130 microns. Sung teaches a second bridge component (Fig.1, element #220L) electrically coupled to the first surface of the first bridge component (Fig.6, bottom surface of element #320L) and to the first surface of the third bridge component (Fig.6, top surface of element #120L) by one or more of the plurality of conductive contacts at the surfaces of the second bridge component (Fig.1, shows contacts on each bridge component), and the contacts of the top surface of second bridge component have the same pitch as the contacts on the bottom of the first bridge component and the contacts on the top of the third bridge component. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Sung and disclose wherein the contacts on the top surface of the second bridge component have the same pitch as the contacts on the bottom of the first bridge component and the contacts on the top of the third bridge component. This makes the connections between the bridges easier by eliminating the need for redistribution layers to transition between the contact having different pitches.
Rubin teaches the contacts on the first surface of the first bridge component has a pitch of less than 75 microns (Fig.1, bottom surface of element #122, column 6, rows 31-34). Since, as noted above, Sung teaches that the pitch of the contacts on the first surface of the first bridge component is equal with the pitch of the plurality of conductive contacts of the second bridge component and pitch of the contacts the first surface of the third bridge component, the combination of Sung and Rubin teaches the plurality of conductive contacts of the second bridge component have a pitch of less than 75 microns. The claimed range, between 40 microns and 130 microns, overlaps the range disclosed by Rubin and therefore a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
Furthermore, Rubin teaches the contacts on the first surface of the first bridge component having a pitch greater than the pitch of the contacts on the second surface of the first bridge component and between 40 microns and 130 microns (Fig.1, bottom surface contacts, element #180, have a pitch larger than 75 microns, column 6 rows 31-34, which is greater than the pitch of the contact on the top surface, elements #170, which have a pitch less than 55 microns, column 6, rows 18-23). The claimed range, between 40 microns and 130 microns, overlaps the range disclosed by Rubin and therefore a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Rubin and disclose on the first surface of the first bridge component having a pitch greater than the pitch of the contacts on the second surface of the first bridge component. Such a bridge allows the integration of more heterogenous chips with smaller and different contact pitches on the same substrate having a uniform and larger contact pitch, which helps reduce the overall package footprint and provides increased design flexibility.
Wang further teaches wherein the fourth die is electrically coupled to the second die via the first, second, and third bridge components (paragraph [0100], rows 5-9).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Wang, Li, Kim, Sung and Rubin teaches the microelectronic assembly of claim 11 as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Wang further teaches wherein the first bridge component is a passive component (Fig. 6A elements #350 are wires). Li further teaches the first bridge component is a passive component (element #140 is passive, paragraph [0046], rows 4-5).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Wang, Li, Kim, Sung and Rubin teaches the microelectronic assembly of claim 11 as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Wang further teaches wherein the second bridge component is a passive component (elements #510 are through substrate vias, paragraph [0100], row 5).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Li, Kim, Sung, Rubin and in view of Mahajan et al. (United States Patent Number US 9,275,955 B2) hereinafter referenced as Mahajan.
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Wang, Li, Kim, Sung and Rubin teaches the microelectronic assembly of claim 11 as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Wang teaches the first bridge component is a passive component (Fig. 6A elements #350 are wires). Li further teaches the first bridge component is a passive component (element #140 is a passive component, paragraph [0046], rows 4-5). The combination of Wang, Li, Kim, Sung and Rubin does not teach the first bridge component is an active component. Mahajan teaches a bridge component which is an active component (Fig.6, element #614, column 7, row 46). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Mahajan and disclose the first bridge component is an active component. As disclosed by Mahajan, an active bridge may operate as a memory controller or other like controller (column 7, rows 54-55) which brings increased functionality and flexibility in operating the microelectronic assembly.
Claims 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Sung and in view of Rubin.
Regarding claim 18, Li teaches a method of manufacturing a microelectronic assembly, comprising: forming a microelectronic subassembly (Fig.2B, element #201, paragraph [0055], row 2) wherein forming the microelectronic subassembly includes: placing a first bridge component (Fig.2B, element #240 the same as element #140 in Fig.1B, paragraph [0046], rows 3-5) in a first layer (Fig.3B, first layer is between the top and bottom surfaces of the bridge), wherein the first bridge component includes a first surface and an opposing second surface (Fig.3B, element #240 has a first surface, bottom surface and a second surface opposing the first surface, top surface) and a plurality of conductive contacts on each of the first and second surfaces of the first bridge component (Fig.2B, top surface of element #240, same as element #140 in Fig.1B, is connected to element #211, same as element #111 in Fig.1B, paragraph [0045], rows 7-11 and paragraph [0046], rows 9-10, and bottom surface of element #240 is electrically connected with element #280, paragraph [0053], rows 1-11, through interconnects element #270, and therefore contacts corresponding to these interconnects must exist at both surfaces).
Li further teaches placing a die in a second layer (Fig.2B, element #211 same as element #111 in Fig.1B, paragraph [0044], rows 5-6, second layer is between surface element #211c and element #211b) wherein the second layer is on the first layer (Fig.2B, second layer as mapped above is on top of the first layer); and electrically coupling the die to the second surface of the first bridge component (Fig.2B RDL layer element #220, same as layer element #120 in Fig.1B, electrically connects the interconnects element #235 at the bottom of element #211, same element #111 in Fig.1B, to conductive vias element #260, same as elements #160 in Fig.1B, paragraph [0045], rows 7-11, and the conductive vias are replaced with the bridge component element #240, same as element #140, paragraph [0046], rows 9-10), by a plurality of the contacts on the second surface of the first bridge component (Fig.2B, second die, element #211, is coupled to the top surface of first bridge, element #240, through interconnects element #270, so contacts corresponding to these interconnects must exist on the top surface of the bridge), and contacts on the surface of the second die (Fig.2B, the bottom surface of element #211 is connected through interconnects #235, so the die must have contacts corresponding to these interconnects at the bottom surface, paragraph [0045], rows 5-8).
Li teaches the contacts on the surface of the second die have a pitch between approximately 36um to 55um (Fig.2B, each interconnect, element #235 corresponds to a die contact for electrical connection and the minimum pitch in the I/0 region is approximately 36um to 55um, paragraph [0047], rows 15-17). Thus, the pitch range disclosed by Li touches or overlaps the claimed range, between 10 microns and 50 microns, and therefore a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05). Li further teaches the first bridge component may provide the electrical routing for the 1/0 region (paragraph [0071], rows 12-14, element #540 is equivalent to element #240), and the minimum contact pitch in the 1/0 region is approximately 36um to 55um (paragraph [0047], rows 15-17). Therefore, Li teaches the plurality of the contacts on the second surface of the first bridge component, have a pitch equal or less than the minimum I/0 region pitch which is approximately 36um to 55um. Thus, the pitch range disclosed by Li touches or overlaps the claimed range, between 10 microns and 50 microns, and therefore a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
Li further teaches forming a package substrate (Fig.2B, element #202, paragraph [0051], rows 3-5) with a second bridge component (Fig.2B, element #280, paragraph [0051], row 6), wherein the second bridge component is embedded in the package substrate (Fig.2B, second bridge, element #280 is embedded in the substrate, element #202) and comprises a plurality of conductive contacts at a surface of the second bridge component (Fig.2B, top surface of bridge element #280 includes conductive traces that electrically couple to elements #235 and vias #260 or elements #270, paragraph [0053], rows 1-11, therefore it must have contacts at the top surface of the bridge).
Li does not teach the plurality of conductive contacts of the second bridge component have a pitch between 40 microns and 130 microns. Sung teaches a second bridge component (Fig.1, element #120L) electrically coupled to the first surface of the first bridge component (Fig.6, bottom surface of element #220L) by one or more of the plurality of conductive contacts at the surface of the second bridge component (Fig.1, the contacts on the top surface of element #120L are electrically coupled with the contacts on the bottom surface of the first bridge component, element #220L), and the contacts on the top surface of the second bridge component have the same pitch as the contacts on the bottom of the first bridge component. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Sung and disclose wherein the contacts on the top surface of the second bridge component have the same pitch as the contacts on the bottom of the first bridge component. This makes the connections between the bridges easier by eliminating the need for redistribution layers to transition between the contacts having different pitches.
Rubin teaches the contacts on the first surface of the first bridge component has a pitch of less than 75 microns (Fig.1, bottom surface of element #122, column 6, rows 31-34). Since, as noted above, Sung teaches that the pitch of the contacts on the first surface of the first bridge component is equal with the pitch of the plurality of conductive contacts of the second bridge component, the combination of Sung and Rubin teaches the plurality of conductive contacts of the second bridge component have a pitch of less than 75 microns. The claimed range, between 40 microns and 130 microns, overlaps the range disclosed by Rubin and therefore a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
Li teaches forming first interconnects between the first bridge component in the microelectronic subassembly and the conductive contacts at the surface of the second bridge component in the package substrate (Fig.2B, bottom elements #270 same as bottom elements #170 in Fig.1B, paragraph [0046], rows 6-7).
The combination of Li and Sung does not teaches the first interconnects having a pitch greater that the pitch of the contacts on the second surface of the first bridge component and between 40 microns and 130 microns. Rubin teaches the interconnects formed on the first surface of the first bridge component having a pitch greater than the pitch of the contacts on the second surface of the first bridge component and between 40 microns and 130 microns (Fig.1, bottom surface interconnects, element #180, of the first bridge, element #122, have a pitch larger than 75 microns, column 6 rows 31-34, which is greater than the pitch of the contact on the top surface, elements #170, which have a pitch less than 55 microns, column 6, rows 18-23). The claimed range, between 40 microns and 130 microns, overlaps the range disclosed by Rubin and therefore a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Rubin and disclose on the first surface of the first bridge component having a pitch greater than the pitch of the contacts on the second surface of the first bridge component. Such a bridge allows the integration of more heterogenous chips with smaller and different contact pitches on the same substrate having a uniform and larger contact pitch, which helps reduce the overall package footprint and provides increased design flexibility.
Li teaches forming second interconnects (Fig.2B, leftmost 3 interconnects elements #235 below element #213, paragraph [0053], rows 3-6), between a microelectronic component (Fig.2B, element #213, paragraph [0051], row 5) and the conductive contacts at the surface of the second bridge component in the package substrate, wherein the microelectronic component is electrically coupled to the die via the first and second bridge components (as noted above, die, element #211, is electrically coupled to the first bridge element #240, and the second bridge, element #280, electrically couples the microelectronic component, element #213 to die element #211 (part of element #250 which is same as element #200), paragraph [0053], rows 1-2).
Li teaches the routing of the second bridge component includes fine line/pitch in order to accommodate the reduced pitch of the I/0 regions (paragraph [0053], rows 7-11), where the minimum pitch in the I/0 region is approximately 36um to 55um (paragraph [0047], rows 15-17). These connections must to have equivalent connections between the second bridge component and the microelectronic component. This suggests that the interconnects between the second bridge component and the microelectronic component have a minimum pitch of approximately 36um to 55um. Thus, the pitch range disclosed by Li touches or overlaps the claimed range, between 40 microns and 130 microns, and therefore a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05). Furthermore, Rubin teaches a bridge component comprising a plurality of interconnects, on the top surface for I/0 signal communication having a pitch of about 55um or less (Fig.1, element #170, column 6, rows 20-22) and the pitch of the interconnects is the same between the right and left sides of the bridge. Thus, the interconnects pitch range disclosed by Rubin touches or overlaps the claimed range, between 40 microns and 130 microns, and therefore a prima facie case of obviousness exists (MPEP 2144.05).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Li, Sung and Rubin teaches the method of claim 18 as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Li further teaches the method of claim 18, wherein the microelectronic subassembly further includes a conductive pillar (Fig.2A, element #260, same as elements #160 in Fig.1A) in the first layer, and the conductive pillar is electrically coupled to the die (paragraph [0045], rows 5-11).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Sung, Rubin and in view of Wang.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Li, Sung and Rubin teaches the method of claim 18 as set forth in the obviousness rejection. The combination of Li, Sung and Rubin does not teach the method of claim 18, wherein the microelectronic component further includes a third bridge component, and wherein forming second interconnects further includes electrically coupling the third bridge component to the second bridge component. Wang teaches a first bridge component (Fig.3A-2, formed by encapsulated elements #350 on the left side of the figure, paragraph [0074], row 6) a second bridge component (Fig.3A-2, formed by element #344 located under element #110, paragraph [0074], rows 1-2) a die (Fig.3A-2, element #110F.1, paragraph [0041], rows 1-3) and a microelectronic components (Fig.3A-2, element #110F.2, paragraph [0041], rows 1-3) wherein the microelectronic component further includes a third bridge component (Fig.3A-2, formed by encapsulated elements #350 on the right side of the figure, paragraph [0074], row 6), and wherein forming second interconnects further includes electrically coupling the third bridge component to the second bridge component (Fig.3A-2, leftmost element #350 on the right side of the figure, belonging to the third bridge, is attached to element #344 of the second bridge through elements #340 and through solder balls, element #364, not shown, paragraph [0082], rows 1-5). We note that, Li teaches conductive vias (Fig.1A, elements #160, paragraph [0045], rows 10-11, similar to elements #350 of Wang) that are integrated in a bridge component (Fig.1B, element #140, paragraph [0046], rows 3-6). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Wang and disclose wherein the microelectronic component further includes a third bridge component, and wherein forming second interconnects further includes electrically coupling the third bridge component to the second bridge component. As disclosed by Wang, the third bridge can provide electrical connections of the microelectronic component to other elements of the circuit (Fig.3A-2).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 12/26/2025 have been fully considered but they
are not persuasive. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference as applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 CRISTIAN A TIVARUS whose telephone number is (703)756-4688. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00AM -5:00 PM EST.
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, Dale Page can be reached at (571)270-7877. 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.
/CRISTIAN A TIVARUS/Examiner, Art Unit 2899 /DALE E PAGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899