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 Amendments and Additions
Examiner acknowledges claims 1, 8-10, and 15 have been amended, and claims 21-22 have been added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-11, filed February 20, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claims 1 and 10 under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Marjanovic et al. US 9850160 B2.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-7, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bui US 2019/0062196 A1 in view of Wieland et al. US 20170008122 A1, Kiontke et al. US 9,625,623 B2, and Marjanovic et al. US 9850160 B2.
Regarding claim 1, Bui discloses a method (Para. 5) comprising: focusing a pulsed laser beam (Para. 6) into a laser beam focal line oriented along a laser beam propagation direction (Para. 6) via an optical assembly positioned in a beam path of the pulsed laser on a beam emergence side of the optical assembly (Fig. 3B), the optical assembly including: an axicon lens (Fig. 3B, Ref. 310) to create a focal line (Para. 86), an optical element set spaced part from the axicon lens (Fig. 3B, Ref. 312), and a focusing optical element spaced apart from the optical element set (Fig. 3A, Ref. 314), and wherein the focusing optical element is in a fixed position along the laser beam propagation direction (Para. 60); directing the laser beam focal line into a glass material having a thickness of less than 5 mm (Para. 40), the laser beam focal line generating an induced absorption within the glass material (Para. 85), the induced absorption producing a perforation along the laser beam focal line within the glass material (Para. 5 “defect” and Para. 39 wherein the defect is defined as perforation); translating the glass material and the pulsed laser beam relative to each other (Para. 6), thereby laser drilling a plurality of perforations along a first plane within the glass material (Para. 89).
Bui does not specifically disclose wherein a spherical aberration generates the laser beam focal line, and the axion lens and the optical element set are translatable relative to each other along the laser beam propagation direction and adjusting the distance between the axicon lens and the optical element to adjust the depth of the laser beam focal line within the material; and thinning the glass material to expose a first end of the plurality of perforations to at least one surface, and wherein an upper tip of the plurality of perforations is positioned a first depth from a first surface of the glass material, a lower tip of the plurality of perforations is positioned a second depth from a second surface of the glass material, the first depth from the first surface of the glass material is greater than the second depth from the second surface of the glass material wherein the first depth of the plurality of perforation is less than half of the thickness of the glass material.
However in the same field of endeavor, Kiotke teaches wherein the axicon lens and the optical element set are translatable relative to each other along the laser beam propagation direction (Col. 3, Lines 42-44), and adjusting the distance between the axicon lens and the optical element to adjust the depth of the laser beam focal line within the material (Col. 3, Lines 42-48 “irradiance distribution”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the optical elements of Bui with the translatable optical elements of Kiontke to adjust the focal plane and/or irradiance distribution.
In the same field of endeavor, Wieland teaches using a spherical aberration to generate the laser beam focal line (Para. 89) thinning the glass material to expose a first end of the plurality of perforations to at least one surface (Para. 141).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the substrate processing method of Bui by adding to the axicon lens the process of thinning the substrate by using a lens with a spherical aberration of Wieland to have a manufacturing process with precision hole placement (Para. 8).
In the same field of endeavor, Marjanovic teaches wherein the first depth of the plurality of perforation is less than half of the thickness of the glass material (Fig. 3B-2, Ref. 2b); an upper tip of the plurality of perforations is positioned a first depth from a first surface of the glass material (Fig. 3B-3, Ref. 2b), a lower tip of the plurality of perforations is positioned a second depth from a second surface of the glass material (Fig. 3B-2, Ref. 2b), the first depth from the first surface of the glass material is greater than the second depth (Col. 6, Lines 32-35 wherein additional pulses increase the depth of the perforation) from the second surface of the glass material (Col. 12, Lines 14-21 provide various depths of the focal line and it would be obvious to try a perforation depth that is less deep than the perforation depth of the other side to optimize the depth of each line as needed for their application through routine testing to perforate the substrate an minimize alation, feathering and particulation at the surface of the material (Col. 12, Lines 46-48)).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the perforations of Bui with those of Marjanovic to prevent unwanted modification like feathering or ablation (Marjanovic Col. 12, Lines 43-48).
Regarding claim 2, Bui does not specifically disclose expanding the plurality of perforations through the thickness.
However in the same field of endeavor, Wieland teaches expanding the plurality of perforations through the thickness (Para. 95).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the substrate processing method of Bui by adding the expanding the perforations through the thickness of the substrate of Wieland to allow the holes to expand radially allowing the etching to penetrate the tracks (Para. 95) while minimizing microcracks (Para. 105).
Regarding claim 3, Bui discloses the first distance between the axicon lens and the optical element set is from 85 mm to 110 mm (Para. 61 wherein the position of the optical element is adjustable to adjust the inner and outer diameters of the beam spot. A person of ordinary skill would move the lenses to the desired position for their use case).
Regarding claim 4, Bui discloses a second distance between the optical element set and the focusing optical element is from 30 mm to 90 mm (Para. 61 wherein the position of the optical element is adjustable to adjust the inner and outer diameters of the beam spot. A person of ordinary skill would move the lenses to the desired position for their use case).
Regarding claim 5, Bui discloses the depth of the laser beam focal line within the glass material is from 0.32 mm to about 0.98 mm (Para. 86 wherein the focal line depth within the material varies).
Regarding claim 6, Bui discloses the optical element set comprises two lenses spaced a third distance apart (Fig. 3C, Ref. 340; Para. 64).
Regarding claim 7, Bui discloses wherein the third distance is from 1 mm to 50 mm (Para. 61 wherein the position of the optical element is adjustable to adjust the inner and outer diameters of the beam spot. A person of ordinary skill would move the lenses to the desired position for their use case).
Regarding claim 21, Bui does not specifically disclose wherein a first depth of the plurality of perforations is less than a third of the thickness of the glass material.
However in the same field of endeavor, Marjanovic teaches wherein a first depth of the plurality of perforations is less than a third of the thickness of the glass material (Col. 12, Lines 14-21 provide various depths of the focal line and it would be obvious to try a perforation depth that is less deep than the perforation depth of the other side to optimize the depth of each line as needed for their application through routine testing to perforate the substrate).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the perforations of Bui with those of Marjanovic to prevent unwanted modification like feathering or ablation (Marjanovic Col. 12, Lines 43-48).
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bui US 2019/0062196 A1 in view of Wieland et al. US 20170008122 A1, Kiontke et al. US 9,625,623 B2, and Marjanovic et al. US 9850160 B2 and in further view of Gollier et al. US 2017/0189991 A1.
Regarding claim 8, Bui does not specifically disclose forming a semiconductor device on the second surface of a glass material after drilling the plurality of perforations along the first plane within the material.
However in the same field of endeavor, Gollier teaches forming a semiconductor device on a surface of the glass material after drilling the plurality of perforations along the first plane within the material (Para. 29).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the substrate of Bui with the semiconductor modification of Gollier as a use case for the invention wherein individual components can be separated from one another.
Regarding claim 9, Bui does not specifically disclose thinning the glass material after forming the semiconductor device on the second surface of the glass material to simultaneously expose an opening of the plurality of perforations.
However in the same field of endeavor, Wieland teaches thinning the glass material after forming the semiconductor device on the second surface of the glass material to simultaneously expose an opening of the plurality of perforations (Para. 141).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the substrate processing method of Bui by adding the process of thinning the substrate of Wieland to have a manufacturing process with precision hole placement (Para. 8).
14. Claims 10, 12-14, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bui US 2019/0062196 A1 in view of Wieland et al. US 20170008122 A1 and Marjanovic et al. US 9850160 B2.
Regarding claim 10, Bui discloses a method (Para. 5) comprising: focusing a pulsed laser beam (Para. 6) into a laser beam focal line oriented along a laser beam propagation direction (Para. 6) via an optical assembly positioned in a beam path of a pulsed laser beam on a beam emergence side of the optical assembly (Fig. 3C), the optical assembly including: a first optical element set comprising an axicon lens (Fig. 3C, Ref. 310), a collimation lens (Fig. 3C, Ref. 312), and a focusing lens (Fig. 3C, Ref. 314), wherein the axicon lens, the collimation lens, and the focusing lens are in a fixed position (Para. 60), a second optical element set comprising three aspherical lens (Fig. 3C, Ref. 340), wherein a first aspherical lens and a second aspherical lens are translatable relative to each other along the laser beam propagation direction (Figs. 4A-4C) and wherein a third aspherical lens is in a fixed position along the laser beam propagation direction (Fig. 4A-4C); directing the laser beam focal line into a glass material having a thickness of less than 5 mm (Para. 40), the laser beam focal line generating an induced absorption within the glass material (Para. 85), the induced absorption producing a perforation along the laser beam focal line within the glass material (Para. 5 “defect” and Para. 39 wherein the defect is defined as perforation); adjusting a first distance between the first aspherical lens and the second aspherical lens to adjust a depth of the laser beam focal line within the glass material (Figs. 7A and 7B show how the change in beam diameter resulting from the adjustments in Fig. 4A-4C alter the power of the beam which a person of ordinary skill would make the observation that could penetrate deeper into the material); translating the glass material and the pulsed laser beam relative to each other (Para. 6), thereby laser drilling a plurality of perforations along a first plane within the glass material (Para. 89); wherein the depth of the plurality of perforation is less than half of the thickness of the glass material (Para. 104 wherein the defect does not extend through the depth of the workpiece, and a person of ordinary skill would use a laser to extend the defect as deep as needed).
Bui does not specifically disclose thinning the glass material to expose a first end of the plurality of perforations to at least one surface, and expanding the plurality of perforations through the thickness, and wherein an upper tip of the plurality of perforations is positioned a first depth from a first surface of the glass material, a lower tip of the plurality of perforations is positioned a second depth from a second surface of the glass material, the first depth from the first surface of the glass material is greater than the second depth from the second surface of the glass material.
In the same field of endeavor, Wieland teaches thinning the glass material to expose a first end of the plurality of perforations to at least one surface (Para. 141), and expanding the plurality of perforations through the thickness (Para. 93).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the substrate processing method of Bui by adding the process of thinning the substrate of Wieland to have a manufacturing process with precision hole placement (Para. 8).
In the same field of endeavor, Marjanovic teaches an upper tip of the plurality of perforations is positioned a first depth from a first surface of the glass material (Fig. 3B-3, Ref. 2b), a lower tip of the plurality of perforations is positioned a second depth from a second surface of the glass material (Fig. 3B-2, Ref. 2b), the first depth from the first surface of the glass material is greater than the second depth from the second surface of the glass material (Col. 12, Lines 14-21 provide various depths of the focal line and it would be obvious to try a perforation depth that is less deep than the perforation depth of the other side to optimize the depth of each line as needed for their application through routine testing to perforate the substrate).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the perforations of Bui with those of Marjanovic to prevent unwanted modification like feathering or ablation (Marjanovic Col. 12, Lines 43-48).
Regarding claim 12, Bui discloses wherein the first distance between the first aspherical lens and the second aspherical lens is from 50 mm to 71 mm (Para. 61 wherein the position of the optical element is adjustable to adjust the inner and outer diameters of the beam spot. A person of ordinary skill would move the lenses to the desired position for their use case).
Regarding claim 13, Bui discloses wherein a second distance between the second aspherical lens and the third aspherical lens is 31 mm to 48 mm (Para. 61 wherein the position of the optical element is adjustable to adjust the inner and outer diameters of the beam spot. A person of ordinary skill would move the lenses to the desired position for their use case).
Regarding claim 14, Bui discloses wherein a depth of the laser beam focal line within the material is from 0.43 mm to 0.66 mm (Para. 86 wherein the focal line depth within the material varies).
Regarding claim 22, Bui does not specifically disclose wherein a first depth of the plurality of perforations is less than a third of the thickness of the glass material.
However in the same field of endeavor, Marjanovic teaches wherein a first depth of the plurality of perforations is less than a third of the thickness of the glass material (Col. 12, Lines 14-21 provide various depths of the focal line and it would be obvious to try a perforation depth that is less deep than the perforation depth of the other side to optimize the depth of each line as needed for their application through routine testing to perforate the substrate).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the perforations of Bui with those of Marjanovic to prevent unwanted modification like feathering or ablation (Marjanovic Col. 12, Lines 43-48).
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bui US 2019/0062196 A1 in view of Wieland et al. US 20170008122 A1, Marjanovic et al. US 9850160 B2, and Gollier et al. US 2017/0189991 A1.
Regarding claim 15, Bui does not specifically disclose forming a semiconductor device on the second surface of the glass material after drilling the plurality of perforations along the first plane within the glass material.
However in the same field of endeavor, Gollier teaches forming a semiconductor device on the surface of the glass material after drilling the plurality of perforations along the first plane within the glass material (Para. 29).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the substrate of Bui with the semiconductor modification of Gollier as a use case for the invention wherein individual components can be separated from one another.
Regarding claim 16, Bui does not specifically disclose thinning the glass material after forming the semiconductor device on the second surface of the glass material to expose an opening of the plurality of perforations.
However in the same field of endeavor, Wieland teaches thinning the glass material after forming the semiconductor device on the surface of the glass material to expose an opening of the plurality of perforations (Para. 141).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the substrate processing of Bui with the process of thinning the substrate of Wieland to have a manufacturing process with precision hole placement.
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 KRISTINA B BURNS whose telephone number is (571)272-8973. The examiner can normally be reached Monday and Wednesday 6:00 am-12:00 pm and Tuesday 6:00 am-2:30 pm.
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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at (571) 270-5569. 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.
/K.B.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3761 /JUSTIN C DODSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights