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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 5/21/2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgement is made of Applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) form PTO-1449. The IDS has been considered.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 5-6 are 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.
(Re Claim 1) “the first section” lacks antecedence.
During examination, “the first section” was read as “the first portion”.
Claims 2-3 and 5-6 inherit this rejection for lack of antecedence.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Rejection 1/2
Claims 1 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (US 2013/0187269), Fu et al. (US 2016/0148864), and Wang et al. (US 2013/0168856), all of record.
(Re Claim 1) Lin teaches a semiconductor device assembly comprising: a first substrate (102; Fig. 5) having a first side (top seen in Fig. 5) and a second side (bottom seen in Fig. 5) opposite the first side; a first contact pad (104; Fig. 5) formed at the first side of the first substrate; an under bump metallization (UBM) structure (114; Fig. 5) disposed laterally offset from the first contact pad (Fig. 5), the UBM structure having a shaped indentation on a top portion (top surface of 114 as seen in Fig. 5) thereof; a redistribution layer (110A; Fig. 5) electrically coupling the first contact pad and the UBM structure; and a molding compound (116; Fig. 5) disposed over the redistribution structure; and
a second substrate (200; Fig. 7) over (from the bottom to the top of Fig. 7) and facing the first side, the second substrate having a second contact pad (202; Fig. 7).
Lin does not explicitly teach a semiconductor device assembly comprising:
a copper ball electrically coupled to the UBM structure by a solder material, the copper ball having a rounded bottom portion that is different from the shaped indentation,
wherein the solder material includes (1) a first portion directly contacting the UBM structure and (2) a second portion integral with the first section; and a molding compound disposed over the redistribution structure and at least partially surrounding the copper ball,
wherein the first portion of the solder material is embedded in and directly contacts the molding compound, the first portion having a first lateral dimension measured at and parallel to an external lateral surface of the molding compound,
wherein the second portion of the solder material extends past the molding compound;
and the contact pad of the second substrate is electrically coupled to the copper ball and directly contacts the second portion of the solder material.
wherein the second contact pad directly contacts the second portion of the solder material that is at least partially disposed between the copper ball and the second pad with the copper ball separated from the second contact pad a long a vertical direction,
wherein the second portion of the solder material is located between the external lateral surface of the molding compound and the second substrate and has second lateral dimensions, measured parallel to the external lateral surface, that are greater than the first later dimension of the first portion.
Fu teaches that solder joints (e.g., 150, 152, etc.; Fig. 1) and copper core solder balls (e.g., 250+260, 252+262, etc.; Fig. 2) are alternative connectors (¶¶9-10).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would use a copper core solder ball style connector (Fu: 250+262; Fig. 2) instead of a solder joint connector (Lin: 118; Fig. 5) of Lin as taught by Fu to take advantage of reduced shorting frequency (Fu: ¶10).
Wang teaches forming a no-flow underfill (NUF) with epoxy and solder paste (“solder paste”, ¶52; “…functions as a flux…functions as an underfill…”, ¶53).
A PHOSITA would find it obvious to form the NUF layer 206 of Lin (Lin: Fig. 7, ¶26) with solder paste as taught by Wang, to provide reduced resistance in the connection between the first and second substrate by providing a conductive material in the composition of Lin’s layer 206. See also Ruiz v. A.B. Chance Co., 357 F.3d 1270, 69 USPQ2d 1686 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
This results in modified Lin teaching a semiconductor device assembly comprising:
a copper ball (Fu: 250, 252, 254, or 256; Fig. 2) electrically coupled to the UBM structure by a solder material (The combination of one of Fu’s 260, 262, 264, or 266 as seen in Fig. 2 and Lin’s 206 modified in view of Wang above), the copper ball having a rounded bottom portion (Fu: Fig. 2) that is different from the shaped indentation (Lin: the shaped indentation is the dip in 110A overlapping the contact pad 104; Fig. 5),
wherein the solder material includes (1) a first portion (every part of the solder material below Lin’s surface 116A as seen in Fig. 5) directly contacting the UBM structure (as a consequence of seating the copper ball and solder material taught by Fu on the contact pad of Lin; Fu: Fig. 1 and 2, ¶10; Lin: ¶22) and (2) a second portion (the remaining solder material that is not the first portion) integral with the first section (Lin: Fig. 7);
a molding compound disposed over the redistribution structure and at least partially surrounding the copper ball (molding compound height is set such that H1, which is different from and larger than the thickness of 116, is at least ½ of H2, the total height of the solder connector, and so after the copper core solder ball replaces the solder joint, the copper ball 250 of Fu will be at least partially surrounded by the molding compound 116 of Lin; Lin: ¶23),
wherein the first portion of the solder material is embedded in and directly contacts the molding compound (116 is applied as a liquid and forms against the side of the solder material; Lin: Fig. 5, ¶23), the first portion having a first lateral dimension (taken from left to right along the surface 116A of Lin) measured at and parallel to an external lateral surface (116A; Fig. 5) of the molding compound,
wherein the second portion of the solder material extends past the molding compound (the molding compound is shorter than the copper ball and solder material; see above and Lin’s ¶23); and
a second substrate (200; Fig. 7) over (from the bottom to the top of Fig. 7) and facing the first side (Fig. 7), the second substrate having a second contact pad (202; Fig. 7) electrically coupled to the copper ball (the solder material contacts the contact pad 202 and is electrically conductive; Fu: ¶10), wherein the second contact pad directly contacts the second portion of the solder material (Fig. 7) that is at least partially disposed between the copper ball and the second contact pad (due to the spherical shape of the copper ball) with the copper ball separated from the second contact pad along a vertical direction (the vertical direction is from top to bottom as seen in Lin’s Fig. 7; even with the copper ball pressed against the second contact pad, due to its spherical shape, there will be regions where the copper ball is separated from the second contact pad along a vertical direction; see the separation on either the left or right parts of an upper or lower contact pad as seen in Fu’s Fig. 2; “separated from the second contact pad along a vertical direction” only requires that there is separation somewhere along a vertical direction and does not preclude contact at some point),
wherein the second portion of the solder material is located between the external lateral surface of the molding compound and the second substrate (the second portion of the solder material is the remaining solder material that is not the first portion) and has lateral dimensions (such as measured from right to left above the leader for mask 204 in Lin’s Fig. 7), measured parallel to the external lateral surface, that are greater than the first lateral dimension of the first portion (Lin: Fig. 7).
(Re Claim 5) Modified Lin teaches the semiconductor device assembly of claim 1, wherein the UBM structure is formed above the redistribution layer (Fig. 5).
(Re Claim 6) Modified Lin teaches the semiconductor device assembly of claim 1, wherein the UBM structure does not vertically overlap the first contact pad (Fig. 5).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (US 2013/0187269), Fu et al. (US 2016/0148864), and Wang et al. (US 2013/0168856), all of record, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Minda (US 2005/0258539), of record.
(Re Claim 2) Modified Lin teaches the semiconductor device assembly of claim 1, wherein the solder material completely encapsulates the copper ball (Fu: Fig. 2).
Modified Lin has yet to be shown to teach the semiconductor device assembly wherein the solder material completely encapsulates at least an upper surface of the UBM structure.
Minda teaches an under bump metallization structure (107+106+110; Fig. 16) having solder (108; Fig. 16) that completely encapsulates a top surface of the UBM structure, and a UBM structures (Fig. 21) that is an alternative configuration where the solder does not completely encapsulate a top surface of the UBM structure (¶90).
As person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to form the UBM structure of modified Lin as taught by Minda (Fig. 21), as Minda’s UBM structures allows for good wetting with a solder layer and reduces diffusion of solder (¶¶45-46).
Additionally, a PHOSITA would find it obvious to form the solder (Fu: 262; Fig. 2) of modified Lin such that it completely encapsulates a top surface of the UBM structure (Minda: Fig. 16) of modified Lin, as this is an alternative method of spreading solder on a UBM structure. See Ruiz v. A.B. Chance Co., 357 F.3d 1270, 69 USPQ2d 1686 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (US 2013/0187269), Fu et al. (US 2016/0148864), and Wang et al. (US 2013/0168856), all of record, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shiraki (US 2015/0228571) and Lu et al. (US 2015/0014851), both of record.
(Re Claim 3) Modified Lin teaches the semiconductor device assembly of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach the semiconductor device assembly wherein a thickness of the molding compound is greater than or equal to a radius of the copper ball.
Shiraki teaches a radius of a copper ball (44A; Fig. 4) is 50 µm (¶62).
Lu teaches forming a molding compound (172; Fig. 12) having a thickness of 100 µm (¶55).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to utilize the dimensions of Shiraki and Lu above for the corresponding elements of modified Lin as they are known to produce working semiconductor device assemblies. Furthermore, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976).
Rejection 2/2
Claims 1 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (US 2013/0187269), Fu et al. (US 2016/0148864), and Patwardhan et al. (US 7,423,337), all of record, and Lu et al. (US 2021/0082798) and Gallagher et al. (US 2015/0064851), both newly cited.
(Re Claim 1) Lin teaches a semiconductor device assembly comprising: a first substrate (102; Fig. 5) having a first side (top seen in Fig. 5) and a second side (bottom seen in Fig. 5) opposite the first side; a first contact pad (104; Fig. 5) formed at the first side of the first substrate; an under bump metallization (UBM) structure (114; Fig. 5) disposed laterally offset from the first contact pad (Fig. 5), the UBM structure having a shaped indentation on a top portion (top surface of 114 as seen in Fig. 5) thereof; a redistribution layer (110A; Fig. 5) electrically coupling the first contact pad and the UBM structure;
a solder material (118; Fig. 7); and
a molding compound (116; Fig. 5) disposed over the redistribution structure; and
a second substrate (200; Fig. 7) over (from the bottom to the top of Fig. 7) and facing the first side, the second substrate having a second contact pad (202; Fig. 7).
Lin does not explicitly teach a semiconductor device assembly comprising:
a copper ball electrically coupled to the UBM structure by a solder material, the copper ball having a rounded bottom portion that is different from the shaped indentation,
wherein the solder material includes (1) a first portion directly contacting the UBM structure and (2) a second portion integral with the first section; and a molding compound disposed over the redistribution structure and at least partially surrounding the copper ball,
wherein the first portion of the solder material is embedded in and directly contacts the molding compound, the first portion having a first lateral dimension measured at and parallel to an external lateral surface of the molding compound,
wherein the second portion of the solder material extends past the molding compound;
and the contact pad of the second substrate is electrically coupled to the copper ball and directly contacts the second portion of the solder material.
wherein the second contact pad directly contacts the second portion of the solder material that is at least partially disposed between the copper ball and the second pad with the copper ball separated from the second contact pad a long a vertical direction,
wherein the second portion of the solder material is located between the external lateral surface of the molding compound and the second substrate and has second lateral dimensions, measured parallel to the external lateral surface, that are greater than the first later dimension of the first portion.
Fu teaches that solder joints (e.g., 150, 152, etc.; Fig. 1) and copper core solder balls (e.g., 250+260, 252+262, etc.; Fig. 2) are alternative connectors (¶¶9-10).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would use a copper core solder ball style connector (Fu: 250+262; Fig. 2) instead of a solder joint connector (Lin: 118; Fig. 5) of Lin as taught by Fu to take advantage of reduced shorting frequency (Fu: ¶10).
Lu teaches utilizing a second substrate (205; Fig. 2B) over (from the bottom to the top of Fig. 2B) and facing a first side (bottom as seen in Fig. 2B) of a first substrate (215; Fig. 2B), the second substrate having a second contact pad (207; Fig. 2B) with solder material (208; Fig. 2B) already placed on the second contact pad (Fig. 2B). The solder material 208 is ultimately joined (¶35) with solder material surrounding a copper ball (233; ¶30).
A PHOSITA would find it obvious to utilize the arrangement of the second contact pad with some solder material as a connection to the second substrate of modified Lin, as shown by Lu (Fig. 2B), to facilitate bonding between the first and second substrate through the solder material by prepositioning solder material on the second contact pad. See also Ruiz v. A.B. Chance Co., 357 F.3d 1270, 69 USPQ2d 1686 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
Gallagher teaches no-flow underfill and capillary action are known alternative methods for dispensing underfill (¶¶3-4).
A PHOSITA would find it obvious to utilize capillary action rather than a no-flow underfill process as these methods are art recognized alternatives, and no-flow underfill results in entrapment of filler particles between solderable features, resulting in interconnect failures (Gallagher: ¶4). See also Ruiz v. A.B. Chance Co., 357 F.3d 1270, 69 USPQ2d 1686 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
This results in a PHOSITA omitting Lin’s 206 during device fabrication.
Furthermore, Lu teaches bonding the solder material having a copper ball within by a solder reflow operation (¶35).
A PHOSITA would find it obvious to attach the first substrate of modified Lin to the second substrate using a reflow operation as taught by Lu to allow for the solder material present in modified Lin to self-align with the first and second contacts as a result of bonding using solder reflow rather than thermal-compression bonding.
Modified Lin then teaches a copper ball (Fu: 250, 252, 254, or 256; Fig. 2) electrically coupled to the UBM structure by a solder material (The combination of one of Fu’s 260, 262, 264, or 266 as seen in Fig. 2 and the solder material 208 from Lu; Lu: ¶35), the copper ball having a rounded bottom portion (Fu: Fig. 2) that is different from the shaped indentation (Lin: the shaped indentation is the dip in 110A overlapping the contact pad 104; Fig. 5),
wherein the solder material includes (1) a first portion (every part of the solder material below Lin’s surface 116A as seen in Fig. 5) directly contacting the UBM structure (as a consequence of seating the copper ball and solder material taught by Fu on the contact pad of Lin; Fu: Fig. 1 and 2, ¶10; Lin: ¶22) and (2) a second portion (the remaining solder material that is not the first portion) integral with the first section (Lin: Fig. 7);
a molding compound disposed over the redistribution structure and at least partially surrounding the copper ball (molding compound height is set such that H1, which is different from and larger than the thickness of 116, is at least ½ of H2, the total height of the solder connector, and so after the copper core solder ball replaces the solder joint, the copper ball 250 of Fu will be at least partially surrounded by the molding compound 116 of Lin; Lin: ¶23),
wherein the first portion of the solder material is embedded in and directly contacts the molding compound (116 is applied as a liquid and forms against the side of the solder material; Lin: Fig. 5, ¶23), the first portion having a first lateral dimension (taken from left to right along the surface 116A of Lin) measured at and parallel to an external lateral surface (116A; Fig. 5) of the molding compound,
wherein the second portion of the solder material extends past the molding compound (the molding compound is shorter than the copper ball and solder material; see above and Lin’s ¶23); and
a second substrate (200; Fig. 7) over (from the bottom to the top of Fig. 7) and facing the first side (Fig. 7), the second substrate having a second contact pad (Lu: 207; Fig. 2B) electrically coupled to the copper ball (the solder material contacts Lu’s contact pad 207 that is now a part of the second substrate, and the solder material is electrically conductive; Fu: ¶10), wherein the second contact pad directly contacts the second portion of the solder material (Lu: Fig. 2C, ¶35) that is at least partially disposed between the copper ball and the second contact pad (Lu: Fig. 2C) with the copper ball separated from the second contact pad along a vertical direction (the vertical direction is from top to bottom as seen in Lin’s Fig. 7; as a consequence of performing a reflow operation to join the first and second contacts, the copper ball will be separated from the second contact pad as seen in Lu’s Fig. 2C),
wherein the second portion of the solder material is located between the external lateral surface of the molding compound and the second substrate (the second portion of the solder material is the remaining solder material that is not the first portion).
Modified Lin has not been shown to explicitly teach that the second portion of the solder material and has lateral dimensions, measured parallel to the external lateral surface, that are greater than the first lateral dimension of the first portion.
Patwardhan teaches that a molding compound (160; Fig. 6) with solder material (130; Fig. 6) embedded within (Fig. 6) will cause the solder material to pinch in where the molding compound interface meets the solder material (Fig. 6, 7A, and 7B). The solder material has a first portion (above the molding compound as seen in Fig. 6) and a second portion (the remaining solder material) located between an external surface of the molding compound and a second substrate (120; Fig. 6) with second lateral dimensions (Fig. 6), measured horizontally (as seen in Fig. 6), that are greater than a first dimension (taken horizontally where the molding compound pinches the solder material at 135; Fig. 6) of the first portion.
A PHOSITA would find it obvious that the solder material will pinch at the external lateral surface of the molding compound, as taught by Patwardhan, as a consequence of the behavior of solder material during and after a reflow operation. This results in the second portion of the solder material of modified Lin having lateral dimensions, measured parallel to the external lateral surface, that are greater than the first lateral dimension of the first portion (anywhere from just beyond the pinch at the external lateral surface of the molding compound all the way to the maximum width of the second portion; see Patwardhan’s Fig. 6, 7A, and 7B).
(Re Claim 5) Modified Lin teaches the semiconductor device assembly of claim 1, wherein the UBM structure is formed above the redistribution layer (Fig. 5).
(Re Claim 6) Modified Lin teaches the semiconductor device assembly of claim 1, wherein the UBM structure does not vertically overlap the first contact pad (Fig. 5).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (US 2013/0187269), Fu et al. (US 2016/0148864), and Patwardhan et al. (US 7,423,337), all of record, and Lu et al. (US 2021/0082798) and Gallagher et al. (US 2015/0064851), both newly cited, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Minda (US 2005/0258539), of record.
(Re Claim 2) Modified Lin teaches the semiconductor device assembly of claim 1, wherein the solder material completely encapsulates the copper ball (Fu: Fig. 2).
Modified Lin has yet to be shown to teach the semiconductor device assembly wherein the solder material completely encapsulates at least an upper surface of the UBM structure.
Minda teaches an under bump metallization structure (107+106+110; Fig. 16) having solder (108; Fig. 16) that completely encapsulates a top surface of the UBM structure, and a UBM structures (Fig. 21) that is an alternative configuration where the solder does not completely encapsulate a top surface of the UBM structure (¶90).
As person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to form the UBM structure of modified Lin as taught by Minda (Fig. 21), as Minda’s UBM structures allows for good wetting with a solder layer and reduces diffusion of solder (¶¶45-46).
Additionally, a PHOSITA would find it obvious to form the solder (Fu: 262; Fig. 2) of modified Lin such that it completely encapsulates a top surface of the UBM structure (Minda: Fig. 16) of modified Lin, as this is an alternative method of spreading solder on a UBM structure. See Ruiz v. A.B. Chance Co., 357 F.3d 1270, 69 USPQ2d 1686 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Lin et al. (US 2013/0187269), Fu et al. (US 2016/0148864), and Patwardhan et al. (US 7,423,337), all of record, and Lu et al. (US 2021/0082798) and Gallagher et al. (US 2015/0064851), both newly cited, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shiraki (US 2015/0228571) and Lu et al. (US 2015/0014851) referred to as Lu851, both of record.
(Re Claim 3) Modified Lin teaches the semiconductor device assembly of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach the semiconductor device assembly wherein a thickness of the molding compound is greater than or equal to a radius of the copper ball.
Shiraki teaches a radius of a copper ball (44A; Fig. 4) is 50 µm (¶62).
Lu851 teaches forming a molding compound (172; Fig. 12) having a thickness of 100 µm (¶55).
A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would find it obvious to utilize the dimensions of Shiraki and Lu851 above for the corresponding elements of modified Lin as they are known to produce working semiconductor device assemblies. Furthermore, in the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant appears to argue a narrower interpretation of the amended claim language than is warranted by the specification or claims. Under a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. “the copper ball separated from the second contact pad along a vertical distance” does not require that the copper ball is everywhere separated from the contact pad. It is enough for the copper ball to be separated from the contact pad at some point, so long as that separation occurs along a vertical direction. See the rejection above.
The remainder of Applicant’s arguments are moot.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yeh et al. (US 2020/0312733) teaches solder material pinching (Fig. 7).
Fang et al. (US 2020/0027804) teaches copper balls within solder material (Fig. 15, ¶¶94, 98, 152).
Lee et al. (US 2010/0096754) teaches copper within solder material (Fig. 36).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christopher A Schodde whose telephone number is (571)270-1974. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 1000-1800 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, Jessica Manno can be reached at (571)272-2339. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER A. SCHODDE/Examiner, Art Unit 2898
/JESSICA S MANNO/SPE, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights