The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA
DETAILED ACTION
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 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 of this title, 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 1-3 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (2020/0152563) in view of Wigginton (5,225,633) and Hembree (6,211,960).
Regarding claim 1, Chen et al. teach in figures 8A-8F and related text a method comprising:
mounting a first device die 703 to the carrier 510, the first device die 703 comprising a first semiconductor substrate 509 (see e.g. abstract) and a first backside via 505 extending into the first semiconductor substrate;
mounting a second device die 703 to the carrier 510, the second device die comprising a second semiconductor substrate (another 509) and a second backside via (another 505) extending into the second semiconductor substrate;
surrounding the first device die and the second device die with a first encapsulant 518;
thinning the first encapsulant, first substrate of the first device die, and the second substrate of the second device die to expose a first backside via 505 (see figure 8C) of the first device die and expose the second backside via of the second device die (see figure 8C);
forming a first bond pad 808 (see figure 8D) over the first backside via and a second bond pad (another 808) over the second backside via.
Chen et al. do not teach directly bonding a first metal pad of a bridge die to the first bond pad and a second metal pad of the bridge die to the second bond pad, wherein the bridge die comprises a bridge substrate and an interconnect structure, wherein the bridge die is free of active devices and electrically couples the first bond pad to the second bond pad solely through the interconnect structure of the bridge die, wherein the interconnect structure is between the bridge substrate and the first device die along a line perpendicular to a major surface of the first device die.
Wigginton teaches in figure 2 and related text directly bonding a first metal pad 208 of a bridge die 200 to the first bond pad 204 and a second metal pad 203 of the bridge die to the second bond pad 207, wherein the bridge die comprises a bridge substrate 100 and an interconnect structure (the entire top part), wherein the bridge die is free of active devices and electrically couples the first bond pad to the second bond pad solely through the interconnect structure of the bridge die, and wherein the interconnect structure is between the bridge substrate and the first device die along a line perpendicular to a major surface of the first device die.
Wigginton and Chen et al. are analogous art because they are directed to packaging devices and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Chen et al. because they are from the same field of endeavor.It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to directly bond a first metal pad of a bridge die to the first bond pad and a second metal pad of the bridge die to the second bond pad, wherein the bridge die comprises a bridge substrate and an interconnect structure, wherein the bridge die is free of active devices and electrically couples the first bond pad to the second bond pad solely through the interconnect structure of the bridge die and wherein the interconnect structure is between the bridge substrate and the first device die along a line perpendicular to a major surface of the first device die, as taught by Wigginton, in Chen et al.’s device, in order to improve the device characteristics by providing direct connection between the two dies without compromising the device characteristics by having electrical interference between the dies.
Regarding the claimed limitation of “a width of the interconnect structure is equal to a width of the bridge substrate”, Wigginton teaches in figure 2 and related text said limitation because both the bridge substrate 100 and the interconnect structure have the same dimensions.
In the alternative, Hembree teaches in figure 1 and related text that die substrate 4 is the interconnect structure.
Hembree, Wigginton and Chen et al. are analogous art because they are directed to packaging devices and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Chen et al. because they are from the same field of endeavor.It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to form a width of the interconnect structure equal to a width of the bridge substrate, as taught by Hembree, in Chen et al.’s device, in order to reduce the size of the device and in order simplify the processing steps of making the device.
Regarding claim 2, in the combined device, the directly bonding the first metal pad to the first bond pad comprises placing the bridge die on the first device die and the second device die; pressing the first metal pad against the first bond pad, but does not teach annealing the combination of the bridge die, the first device die, and the second device die to interdiffuse a metallic material of the first metal pad with a metallic material of the first bond pad.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to anneal the combination of the bridge die, the first device die, and the second device die to interdiffuse a metallic material of the first metal pad with a metallic material of the first bond pad in prior art’s device in order to improve the structural integrity of the device.
Regarding claim 3, Chen et al. teach in figure 8 and related text forming a third bond pad interposed between the first bond pad and the second bond pad, the third bond pad aligned to be over the first encapsulant between the first device die and the second device die. Chen et al. do not teach that the third bond pad being a dummy bond pad.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to use the third bond pad as a dummy bond pad in prior art’s device in order to simplify the processing steps of making the device by using symmetrical layout.
Regarding claim 5, Chen et al. teach in figure 8 and related text directly bonding a first metal pad of a device die to a third bond pad formed over the first device die.
Regarding claim 6, Chen et al. teach in figure 8F and related text that the bridge die is a first bridge die 504, further comprising: directly bonding a third metal pad of a second bridge die 506 to a third bond pad formed over the first device die; and directly bonding a fourth metal pad of the second bridge die to a fourth bond pad formed over a third device die.
Regarding claim 7, Chen et al. teach in figure 8F and related text a second encapsulant 864 over and surrounding the bridge die. Chen et al. do not teach planarizing the second encapsulant and the bridge die.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to planarize the second encapsulant and the bridge die in prior art’s device in order to reduce the size of the device by removing excess material.
Claims 21-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (2020/0152563) in view of Wigginton (5,225,633).
Regarding claim 21, Chen et al. teaches in figure 4 and related text a method comprising:
attaching a first side of a first die 201 and a first side of a second die 301 to a carrier substrate 101;
encapsulating the first die and the second die by a first encapsulant 401;
exposing (thinning) a first metal feature 111 (see numeral in figure 3) in the first die (applicants call, un-conventionally, the entire structure of ic die122, including the interconnect structures and the passivation layers as “first die”. In the same token, figure 20 of Chen et al. can also be called as “first die” wherein a first metal feature 111 in the first die. Alternatively, Chen et al. teach in figure 3 a first metal feature 309 in the second die 301.
and a second metal feature in the second die;
forming a bonding structure 601 over the first die, the second die, and the first encapsulant, the bonding structure comprising a bonding layer with a first bond pad 601 and a second bond pad (another 601) therein, the first bond pad being over and in contact with the first metal feature and the second bond pad being over and in contact with the second metal feature.
Chen et al. do not teach bonding a bridge die to both the first die and the second die, the bridge die including a third bond pad directly bonded to the first bond pad and a fourth bond pad directly bonded to the second bond pad, the bridge die including a silicon substrate and an interconnect structure on the silicon substrate, the bridge die electrically coupling the first bond pad to the second bond pad solely through the interconnect structure of the bridge die; the interconnect structure being between the silicon substrate and the first die along a first line perpendicular to a major surface of the first die and between the silicon substrate and the second die along a second line perpendicular to a major surface of the second die and encapsulating the bridge die by a second encapsulant.
Wigginton teaches in figure 2 and related text bonding a bridge die 270 to both the first die 220 and the second die 230, the bridge die 270 including a third bond pad (see figure 3) directly bonded to the first bond pad and a fourth bond pad directly bonded to the second bond pad, the bridge die including a silicon substrate and an interconnect structure on the silicon substrate 100, the bridge die electrically coupling the first bond pad to the second bond pad solely through the interconnect structure of the bridge die, the interconnect structure being between the silicon substrate and the first die and between the silicon substrate and the second die.It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to bond a bridge die to both the first die and the second die, the bridge die including a third bond pad directly bonded to the first bond pad and a fourth bond pad directly bonded to the second bond pad, the bridge die electrically coupling the first bond pad to the second bond pad solely through the interconnect structure of the bridge die, the interconnect structure being between the silicon substrate and the first die and between the silicon substrate and the second die, as taught by Wigginton, and to encapsulate the bridge die by a second encapsulant, in Chen et al.’s device, in order to improve the device characteristics by providing direct connection between the two dies without compromising the device characteristics by having electrical interference between the dies.
Regarding claim 22, Chen et al. teaches in figure 4 and related text that the first side of the first die is a front side of the first die.
Regarding claim 23, Chen et al. teaches in figure 7 and related text the bonding layer 601 is directly bonded to a dielectric layer 509 of the bridge die.
Regarding claim 24, Chen et al. teaches in figure 4 and related text the bonding structure further comprises a fifth bond pad (another 601) in the bonding layer, the fifth bond pad is aligned with a portion of the first encapsulant 401 disposed between the first die and the second die, further comprising bonding a sixth bond pad of the bridge die to the fifth bond pad.
Regarding claim 25, in the combined device the bridge die overlaps the first die and the second die.
Regarding claim 26, Wigginton teaches in figure 2 that the bridge die 270 includes an integrated passive device.
Regarding claim 27, Wigginton teaches in figure 2 that after encapsulating the bridge di by the second encapsulant, exposing a third metal feature and a fourth metal feature (the long features) on a back side of the bridge die.
Chen et al. teaches in figure 4 and related text aligning a third device die 222 (on the left) over a third bond pad; aligning a fourth device die 222 (on the right) over a fourth bond pad; and directly bonding the third device die to the third bond pad and the fourth device die to the fourth bond pad, an interface of the third bond pad and the third device die being free from a solder material (since no solder material is recited), the bridge die electrically coupling the third device die to the fourth device die.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to use Wigginton’s bridge to bond the third device die and the fourth device die to the entire structure of Chen et al., in order to provide more capabilities to the device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 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.
Claims 9-13 and 15 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because of the new the new ground of rejection.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ORI NADAV whose telephone number is 571-272-1660. The examiner can normally be reached between the hours of 7 AM to 4 PM (Eastern Standard Time) Monday through Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Lynne Gurley can be reached on 571-272-1670. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
O.N. /ORI NADAV/
3/21/2026 PRIMARY EXAMINER
TECHNOLOGY CENTER 2800
Prosecution Insights