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 Status
Claim 1 has been amended. Claim 2 is withdrawn. Claims 15-21 are new claims.
Response to Amendment
Amendments to claim 1 filed on 06/23/2025 is acknowledged.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Applicant’s amendment to Claim 1 to add the limitation “the inner peripheral surface of the flow prevention frame has a rectangular shape with a corner portion, and the corner portion connects two sides of the rectangular shape and is rounded as viewed in a plan view of the adhesive sheet,” isn’t considered by the examiner to carry any patentable weight as internal rounded corners are known in the art to be inherent in machined structures, the radius of which, is known to be dependent on the milling tool radius and line path of the milling tool (see Protocase).
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.
Claims 1, 5, 15-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Besshi et al (US 9236324 B2, hereinafter referred to as Besshi in further view of Okamoto (JP 2015115417 A), hereinafter referred to as Okamoto, and in further view of Protocase (“How Corner Radius Affect CNC Machining” 2020), hereinafter referred to as Protocase.
With regards to the independent claim 1:
Besshi teaches a power semiconductor device comprising: a power module unit (Besshi, Col. 4 Line 20, “The electric power semiconductor device 101 includes a power module 7”);
an adhesive sheet bonded to the power module unit, a support member connected to the power module unit with the adhesive sheet interposed between the power module unit and the support member Besshi Fig. 1, Col. 4 Line 21 ”a heat-conductive insulating resin sheet 9 provided between the power module 7 and the heat dissipating member” (the heat dissipating member being a support member));
and a flow prevention frame sandwiched between the power module unit and the support member and placed around the adhesive sheet (Besshi Fig. 1, Col. 4 Line 47, “the molded resin part 6 has a protruding part 11 along a whole circumference of a peripheral part 6a of the molded resin part 6.” Where the examiner notes that the protruding part 11 serves as the flow prevention frame and is depicted in fig. 1 to be sandwiched in between the power module 7 and heat dissipating member 8 (support member).),
Besshi fails to disclose a power device wherein wherein the flow prevention frame is made of a porous body, the adhesive sheet has an outer peripheral surface adjoining an inner peripheral surface of the flow prevention frame, the inner peripheral surface of the flow prevention frame has a rectangular shape with a corner portion, and the corner portion connects two sides of the rectangular shape and is rounded as viewed in a plan view of the adhesive sheet.
However, Okamoto in a related field of endeavor, discloses a semiconductor device with semiconductor modules mounted on heat sinks (Okamoto Fig. 1, 2, 3, [0014]). From Fig. 2 of Okamoto, the heat dissipating grease (40, 41, 42) is shown to be sandwiched in between the semiconductor modules (30, 31, 32) and the heat sink (20) and is surrounded by a seal member (50, 51, 52) which acts as a flow prevention frame (Okamoto Fig. 2 (b)).
Okamoto further discloses a power device wherein the flow prevention frame is made of a porous body (Okamoto Fig. 5, [0031] “the seal members 50, 51, 52 have vent holes 55 (see FIG. 5 (c))”)
and the adhesive sheet has an outer peripheral surface adjoining an inner peripheral surface of the flow prevention frame (Okamoto Fig. 5(a) – 5(c) where the process of attaching the module to the heat sink is shown to eventually adjoin the outer peripheral surface of the heat dissipating grease with the inner wall of the seal members. See ¶[0037-0039]).
Okamoto further discloses the inner peripheral surface of the flow prevention frame has a rectangular shape with a corner portion, and the corner portion connects two sides of the rectangular shape and is rounded as viewed in a plan view of the adhesive sheet (Okamoto [0029] “As shown in FIGS. 2 and 3, the seal member 50 has a square ring shape, has elasticity and air permeability, and is disposed between the semiconductor module 30 and the heat sink 20 so as to surround the filling portion of the heat dissipation grease 40“. Where the examiner notes that the square is a type of rectangle and having corners that connects the two sides is inherent in the structure of a rectangle.)
Okamoto fails to teach the power device wherein the corner portion connecting the two sides of the rectangular shape is rounded as viewed in a plan view of the adhesive sheet.
However, the examiner considers the internal corners of any machined structures to be inherently rounded as is commonly known in the art (Protocase pg. 1 “When it comes to metal manufacturing, every type of machinery will have some limitations on the size, angles, curves and contours that can be achieved… Beyond the size constraints of what CNC machinery can accommodate, another important consideration is corner radius. With CNC machining corner radius, it is generally not possible to achieve a perfectly sharp angle on internal corners.”). Therefore, even for stamped, extruded, or die casted sealing members, it is reasonable to expect rounded internal corners as the molds or dies used for these manufacturing processes still require machining with milling tools that have cylindrical bodies and tend to produce rounded internal corners (Protocase pg. 1 “…milling tools have a cylindrical shape and will create a radius when cutting an internal pocket. The radius of the tooling employed during the CNC machining process will determine what corner radii are possible.”.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having an ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the porous sealing membrane of Okamoto to the semiconductor power device of Besshi in order to completely fill the contact surfaces with adhesive and eliminate air-pockets, with the obvious result of reducing pressure induced strain, improving heat transfer, which in turn improves device reliability (Okamoto [0004], [0042]).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a person having an ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the teachings of Protocase to the combined disclosure of Besshi and Okamoto in order to understand that the internal corners of any fabricated parts will have rounded corners as these structure is inherent on the geometry of the milling tool used. Therefore, the presence of rounded internal corners is considered obvious and an inherent characteristic of the process of fabrication.
With regards to claim 5: The combined disclosure of Besshi, Okamoto, and Protocase discloses the semiconductor device of claim 1.
Besshi further discloses the power semiconductor device wherein the flow prevention frame includes a single layer (Besshi Fig. 1 Col 4 Line 48 “the molded resin part 6 has a protruding part 11
along a whole circumference of a peripheral part 6a of the molded resin part 6.” Where the examiner notes that the protruding part constitutes at least a single layer.).
With regards to claim 15: The combined disclosure of Besshi, Okamoto, and Protocase discloses the semiconductor device of claim 1.
Besshi fails to teach the power device wherein a value obtained by dividing a maximum value of an internal pressure on the outer peripheral surface of the adhesive sheet by a minimum value of the internal pressure is more than or equal to 1 and less than or equal to 10.
However, in a related field of endeavor, Okamoto teaches a porous seal member wherein a value obtained by dividing a maximum value of an internal pressure on the outer peripheral surface by a minimum value of the internal pressure is more than or equal to 1 and less than or equal to 10 (Okamoto [0040] “ The air (voids) trapped between 41 and 42 and the seal members 50, 51 and 52 can be evacuated through the seal members 50, 51 and 52. Therefore, the thermal radiation grease 40, 41, 42 can be filled without air (void)”). The examiner notes that this particular limitation is known to be satisfied when a mechanism for pressure release is implemented. In this case, the porous sealing member allows for the evacuation of air, thereby maintaining an even internal pressure between the grease and the sealing member.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having an ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the porous sealing membrane of Okamoto to the semiconductor power device of Besshi in order to completely fill the contact surfaces with adhesive and eliminate air-pockets, with the obvious result of reducing pressure induced strain, improving heat transfer, which in turn improves device reliability (Okamoto [0004], [0042]).
With regards to claim 16: The combined disclosure of Besshi, Okamoto, and Protocase discloses the semiconductor device of claim 1.
Besshi fails to teach the power device wherein the porous body of the flow prevention frame is configured to allow the adhesive sheet to enter the inside of the flow prevention frame.
However, in a related field of endeavor, Okamoto teaches a porous seal member wherein the porous body of the flow prevention frame is configured to allow the adhesive sheet to enter the inside of the flow prevention frame (Okamoto [0050] “the porous body of the flow prevention frame is configured to allow the adhesive sheet to enter the inside of the flow prevention frame“.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having an ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the porous sealing membrane of Okamoto to the semiconductor power device of Besshi in order to completely fill the contact surfaces with adhesive and eliminate air-pockets, with the obvious result of reducing pressure induced strain, improving heat transfer, which in turn improves device reliability (Okamoto [0004], [0042]).
With regards to claim 17: The combined disclosure of Besshi, Okamoto, and Protocase discloses the semiconductor device of claim 1.
Besshi further teaches the power semiconductor wherein the adhesive sheet comprises a mixture of ceramic and a thermosetting resin (Besshi Col. 5 Line 5 “The heat-conductive insulating resin sheet 9 may be made to contain a thermosetting resin component 9b such as epoxy resin, silicon resin, or polyimide resin. Furthermore, when the resin component 9b is impregnated with a filler 9a in the heat-conductive insulating resin sheet 9, heat conductivity thereof can be considerably improved… the filler 9a, a material such as aluminum, boron nitride, silicon nitride, or aluminum nitride can be used.” Where the examiner notes that the nitride compounds (boron nitride, silicon nitride, and aluminum nitride) are known ceramics in the art.).
With regards to claim 18: The combined disclosure of Besshi, Okamoto, and Protocase discloses the semiconductor device of claim 1.
Besshi fails to teach the power semiconductor device wherein the corner portion has a radius of curvature that is greater than or equal to 1/30 of a length of a long side of the rectangular shape.
However, the examiner considers the internal corners of any machined structures to be inherently rounded as is commonly known in the art (Protocase pg. 1 “When it comes to metal manufacturing, every type of machinery will have some limitations on the size, angles, curves and contours that can be achieved… Beyond the size constraints of what CNC machinery can accommodate, another important consideration is corner radius. With CNC machining corner radius, it is generally not possible to achieve a perfectly sharp angle on internal corners.”).
Therefore, even for stamped, extruded, or die casted sealing members, it is reasonable to expect rounded internal corners as the molds or dies used for these manufacturing processes still require machining with milling tools that have cylindrical bodies that tend to produce rounded internal corners (Protocase pg. 1 “…milling tools have a cylindrical shape and will create a radius when cutting an internal pocket. The radius of the tooling employed during the CNC machining process will determine what corner radii are possible.”.).
Furthermore, the radius of the corners can be adjusted and optimized by using the appropriate milling tool and line path. Hence, the radius of curvature for any corner is considered by the examiner to be part of a routine optimization that aims to balance design features with fabrication quality and cost (Protocase pg. 2, “Larger tooling produces larger corner radii, but runs faster, which decreases the time it takes for the part to be machined. Therefore, smaller tools will lead to increased costs. Smaller tools are also more limited in the feature depth (pocket depth) they can achieve. This creates an inverse relationship between corner radii and feature depth”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the teachings of Protocase to the combined disclosure of Besshi and Okamoto in order to realize that the internal angles of the flow prevention structure would have rounded corners that can be adjusted and optimized accordingly using known methods in the art, in order to meet design standards and/or reduce cost (Protocase pg. 2).
With regards to claim 19: The combined disclosure of Besshi, Okamoto, and Protocase discloses the semiconductor device of claim 1.
Besshi fails to teach the power semiconductor device, wherein the corner portion has a radius of curvature that is greater than or equal to 1/20 of a length of a long side of the rectangular shape.
Similar to the rejection of claim 18, the examiner considers the internal corners of any machined structures to be inherently rounded as is commonly known in the art (Protocase pg. 1).
Therefore, even for stamped, extruded, or die casted sealing members, it is reasonable to expect rounded internal corners as the molds or dies used for these manufacturing processes still require machining with milling tools that have cylindrical bodies that tend to produce rounded internal corners (Protocase pg. 1).
Furthermore, the radius of the corners can be adjusted and optimized by using the appropriate milling tool and line path. Hence, the radius of curvature for any corner is considered by the examiner to be part of a routine optimization that aims to balance design features with fabrication quality and cost (Protocase pg. 2, “Larger tooling produces larger corner radii, but runs faster, which decreases the time it takes for the part to be machined. Therefore, smaller tools will lead to increased costs. Smaller tools are also more limited in the feature depth (pocket depth) they can achieve. This creates an inverse relationship between corner radii and feature depth”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the teachings of Protocase to the combined disclosure of Besshi and Okamoto in order to realize that the internal angles of the flow prevention structure would have rounded corners that can be adjusted and optimized accordingly using known methods in the art, in order to meet design standards and/or reduce cost (Protocase pg. 2).
With regards to claim 20: The combined disclosure of Besshi, Okamoto, and Protocase discloses the semiconductor device of claim 1.
Besshi fails to teach the power semiconductor device, wherein the corner portion has a radius of curvature that is greater than or equal to 1/10 of a length of a long side of the rectangular shape.
Similar to the rejection of claim 18 and 19, the examiner considers the internal corners of any machined structures to be inherently rounded as is commonly known in the art (Protocase pg. 1).
Therefore, even for stamped, extruded, or die casted sealing members, it is reasonable to expect rounded internal corners as the molds or dies used for these manufacturing processes still require machining with milling tools that have cylindrical bodies that tend to produce rounded internal corners (Protocase pg. 1).
Furthermore, the radius of the corners can be adjusted and optimized by using the appropriate milling tool and line path. Hence, the radius of curvature for any corner is considered by the examiner to be part of a routine optimization that aims to balance design features with fabrication quality and cost (Protocase pg. 2, “Larger tooling produces larger corner radii, but runs faster, which decreases the time it takes for the part to be machined. Therefore, smaller tools will lead to increased costs. Smaller tools are also more limited in the feature depth (pocket depth) they can achieve. This creates an inverse relationship between corner radii and feature depth”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the teachings of Protocase to the combined disclosure of Besshi and Okamoto in order to realize that the internal angles of the flow prevention structure would have rounded corners that can be adjusted and optimized accordingly using known methods in the art, in order to meet design standards and/or reduce cost (Protocase pg. 2).
With regards to claim 21: The combined disclosure of Besshi, Okamoto, and Protocase discloses the semiconductor device of claim 1.
Besshi teaches the power device further comprising: a mold resin portion (Besshi Fig. 1, mold resin 6);
and a power semiconductor element sealed by the mold resin portion (Besshi Fig. 1, power semiconductor element 1);,
Besshi fails to teach the power device wherein the flow prevention frame is separate from the mold resin portion.
However, Okamoto in a related field of endeavor, discloses a flow prevention frame that is separate from the mold resin portion. (Okamoto Fig. 1, 2, 3, [0018]). From Fig. 2 resin-molded semiconductor modules (30, 31, 32) with separate seal members (50, 51, 52) which acts as a flow prevention frame (Okamoto Fig. 2 (b)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having an ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to integrate the porous sealing membrane of Okamoto to the semiconductor power device of Besshi in order to completely fill the contact surfaces with adhesive and eliminate air-pockets, with the obvious result of reducing pressure induced strain, improving heat transfer, which in turn improves device reliability (Okamoto [0004], [0042]).
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 EMILIO ARDEO whose telephone number is (703)756-1235. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 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, Brent Fairbanks can be reached at 408-918-7532. 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.
/EMILIO ARDEO/Examiner, Art Unit 2899
/Brent A. Fairbanks/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights