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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/07/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 09/10/2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1) rejection of Claims 1-3, 6-7, 10, and 12 has been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made and presented in detail below.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 09/10/2025. These drawings are accepted.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Reference character “103” has been used to identify both “cavity” and “through opening.”
Reference characters “103” and “109” have been used to identify “cavity.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-2, 6-7, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wu et al. (US 2019/0019718).
Wu discloses;
Claim 1. A tool (100) for the collective transfer of microchips (25) from a source substrate (20) to a destination substrate (target substrate), said tool comprising a plate (200) having first and second opposite faces (S1 and S2) and a plurality of microchip receiving areas (212) on the first face, the plate comprising a through opening (230) facing each receiving area wherein the plate comprises a boss (216C) on its first face, in each receiving area, at least partially surrounding the opening, wherein the boss forms a frame (illustrated in Fig. 6K) in each receiving area, completely surrounding the through opening and laterally delimiting a cavity (region within 216C) into which the through opening opens on the side of the first face of the plate, wherein the frame cavity has inner lateral dimensions greater than the lateral dimensions of the opening (illustrated in Fig. 6K), and wherein the lateral dimensions of the frame cavity are capable of being less than the lateral dimensions of the microchips to be handled (Par. 0008 and 0030-0041, and Fig. 1-5 and 6K).
The Examiner notes that Applicant’s claimed invention is drawn to a tool for transferring microchips and the scope of the claimed invention does not include the microchips themselves. Thus, the inclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims (see MPEP 2115).
Claim 2. The tool according to claim 1, wherein each through opening is adapted to channel a suction flow generated on the side of the second face of the plate, so as to keep a microchip packed against each receiving area (Par. 0035).
Claim 6. The tool according to claim 1, wherein the plate comprises a common cavity (C) on its second face, into which the through openings open (Par. 0031 and Fig. 4).
Claim 7. The tool according to claim 6, wherein the plate comprises one or more support pillars (220) on the side of its second face, extending into said common cavity (Par. 0031 and Fig. 4).
Claim 10. A device (50) for the collective transfer of microchips (25) from a source substrate (20) to a destination substrate (target substrate), comprising: a tool (100) for the collective transfer of microchips from a (interpreted as “the”) source substrate to a (interpreted as “the”) destination substrate, said tool comprising a plate (200) having first and second opposite faces (S1 and S2) and a plurality of microchip receiving areas (212) on the first face, the plate comprising a through opening (230) facing each receiving area wherein the plate comprises a boss (216C) on its first face, in each receiving area, at least partially surrounding the opening, a support (100) for holding the tool, the support being adapted to channel a suction flow through the through openings, wherein the boss forms a frame (illustrated in Fig. 6K) in each receiving area, completely surrounding the through opening and laterally delimiting a cavity (region within 216C) into which the through opening opens on the side of the first face of the plate, wherein the frame cavity has inner lateral dimensions greater than the lateral dimensions of the opening (illustrated in Fig. 6K), and wherein the lateral dimensions of the frame cavity are capable of being less than the lateral dimensions of the microchips to be handled (Par. 0008 and 0030-0041, and Fig. 1-5 and 6K).
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.
Claim 8. The tool according to claim 1, wherein the plate comprises a stack of a substrate of a semiconductor material, a dielectric layer and a semiconductor layer.
Claim 9. The tool according to claim 8, wherein each through opening comprises a first portion, extending through the substrate and the dielectric layer, and a second portion, extending through the semiconductor layer, the first portion having lateral dimensions greater than the lateral dimensions of the second portion.
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Leedy (US 2003/0223535).
Wu further discloses;
Claim 8. The plate comprises a stack of a substrate having three layers (202, 280_1, and 280_2) (Par. 0062 and Fig. 17).
Claim 9. Each through opening comprises a first portion (portion with dimension “D”) and a second portion (portion with dimension “A2”), the first portion having lateral dimensions greater than the lateral dimensions of the second portion (Par. 0033 and Fig. 5).
Wu is silent to;
Claim 8. The layers being a semiconductor material, a dielectric layer and a semiconductor layer.
However, Leedy discloses the use of semiconductor and dielectric layers (189 and 193) when forming different layers, the dielectric layer preferable when forming openings less than 100 nm (Par. 0183 and Fig. 9f).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wu’s plate layers to include a semiconductor material and a dielectric layer with a reasonable expectation of success when forming openings less than 100 nm.
The Examiner also notes that semiconductor and dielectric materials are well known to one of ordinary skill in the art, and it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
The Examiner further notes that Applicant has not disclosed criticality for forming the plate with the specific materials as claimed.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Watanabe et al. (US 2001/0049160).
Wu does not recite;
Claim 11. The device according to claim 10, wherein the transfer tool is kept attached to the support by suction.
However, Watanabe discloses a transfer tool (22) for holding semiconductor chips (20) by a suction source (center opening of 12, as shown in Fig. 2) and a support (12) for holding the tool, and further teaches the transfer tool is kept attached to the support by suction (Par. 0060-0063 and Fig. 2).
Therefore, in view of Watanabe’s teaching, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Wu’s disclosure to include holding the transfer tool to the support by suction with a reasonable expectation of success so that the transfer tool could be releasably attached and detached by means of applying and removing a vacuum pressure.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONALD P JARRETT whose telephone number is (571)272-8311. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00 am - 6:00 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, Saul Rodriguez can be reached at (571) 272-7097. 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.
/RONALD P JARRETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3652