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 Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation “that that”, second line from the last line needs to be changed to “that”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-5, 7-8 and 21 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.
● Independent claim 1 (and dependent claims 2-5, 7-8 and 21 dependent therefrom) recites “a planarization layer comprising a second top portion” in line 13. The claim is unclear because the terms “a second top portion” of a planarization layer implies the existence of a first top portion of a planarization layer in the device, although no first top portion of a planarization layer has been claimed.
● Independent claim 1 (and dependent claims 2-5, 7-8 and 21 dependent therefrom) recites “a third top surface of the planarization layer” in last line. The claim is unclear because the terms “a third top surface” of a planarization layer implies the existence of a first top surface and a second top surface of a planarization layer in the device, although no first top surface and second top surface of a planarization layer have been claimed.
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.
Claims 9 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al (US 2011/0101520) in view of Fan et al (US 6,586,323).
Regarding claim 9, Liu (Fig. 6) discloses a device comprising: a first passivation layer 201 ([0026]); a redistribution line 601 comprising: a via portion extending into the first passivation layer 201; and a trace portion 603 over and contacting the via portion, wherein the trace portion 603 is over the first passivation layer; a second passivation layer 301 ([0029]) comprising a first top portion over and contacting the redistribution line 601, wherein the first top portion of the second passivation layer 301 has a first opening, with sidewalls of the second passivation layer 301 facing the first opening; a planarization layer 304 comprising a polymer ([0031]), wherein a portion of the planarization layer 304 extends into the first opening to contact the sidewalls of the second passivation layer 301; and an Under-Bump Metallurgy (UBM) 302 ([0029]) extending into the planarization layer, wherein the UBM 302 forms a straight interface with the planarization layer 304, and wherein the straight interface extends from the redistribution line 603 to a top surface of the planarization layer 304.
Liu does not disclose the second passivation layer 301 comprises a step.
However, Fan (Fig. 2) teaches a device comprising: a passivation layer (14, 15) (column 6, lines 16-19) including: sidewall portions extending on a first conductive feature 12, and a first top portion over and contacting the first conductive feature, and an edge portion of the passivation layer (i.e., edge portion of layer 15) comprises a first top surface, and a second top surface lower than the first top surface to form a step; and a planarization layer 16 comprising a polymer (column 6, lines 50-51), wherein a portion of the planarization layer 16 extends into the first opening to contact the sidewalls of the passivation layer (14, 15). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Liu by forming the second passivation layer comprising a step because the forming of such step would prevent the corrosion occurring in the surface of the metal contact pad to which the solder bump is connected, as taught by Fan (column 3, lines 60-64).
Regarding claims 11-12, Fan (Fig. 2) further discloses the step is spaced apart from the UBM 18 by the planarization layer 16; and the portion of the planarization layer 16 has a slanted sidewall.
Regarding claims 13-14, Liu (Fig. 6) further discloses: the portion of the planarization layer 304 has a vertical sidewall; and the UBM 302 is separated from the second passivation layer 301 by a portion of the planarization layer 304.
Claims 1-5, 7-9, 11, 13-16, 19-20 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al (US 2011/0101520) in view of Wang et al (US 2011/0186987).
Regarding claim 1, Liu (Fig. 6) discloses a device comprising: a first dielectric layer 201 ([0026]); a redistribution line 601 comprising: a metal seed layer (not shown, see [0041], “a seed layer (not shown)…that are located where the PPI 601 is desired to be located”); a first conductive feature 603 over and contacting the metal seed layer ([ 0042]); a passivation layer 301 ([0029]) comprising: sidewall portions extending on sidewalls of the metal seed layer and the first conductive feature 603; and a first top portion over and contacting the first conductive feature 603; a planarization layer 304 comprising a second top portion over the first conductive feature 603, wherein the second top portion extends into the first top portion to contact the first conductive feature 603, and wherein the planarization layer 304 physically contacts an edge portion of the passivation layer 301; and a second conductive feature 302 ([0032]) extending into both of the first top portion and the second top portion to contact the redistribution line 601, wherein the second conductive feature 302 comprises a straight edge contacting the planarization layer 304, and wherein the straight edge extends from the redistribution line 603 to a third top surface of the planarization layer 304.
Liu does not disclose the edge portion of the passivation layer 301 comprises a first top surface, and a second top surface lower than the first top surface to form a step, and the first top portion physically contacts the step.
However, Wang (Figs. 4G-4H) teaches a device comprising: a passivation layer 410 ([0032]) including: sidewall portions extending on a first conductive feature 408, and a first top portion over and contacting the first conductive feature; and an edge portion of the passivation layer 410 comprises a first top surface, and a second top surface lower than the first top surface to form a step, and the first top portion physically contacts the step. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Liu by forming the edge portion of the passivation layer comprising a first top surface, and a second top surface lower than the first top surface to form a step because the forming of such step would reduce the stress and result in a more uniform distribution of stress on the underlying layers, as taught by Wang ([0020]).
Regarding claims 2-5, Liu (Fig. 6) further discloses: the planarization layer 304 comprises a polymer ([0031]), and the passivation layer 301 comprises an inorganic dielectric material ([0029] and [0023]); the second conductive feature 302 comprises an under bump metallurgy ([0029]), and the device further comprises a solder region 400 (i.e., silver, gold, tin, [0037], also see [0045]) over and contacting the second conductive feature 302; the redistribution line 601 comprises a via portion and a trace portion over and contacting the via portion; and the first conductive feature 603 comprises copper, and is free from aluminum ([0042]).
Regarding claim 7, Wang (Fig. 4H) discloses the step, but does not disclose a ratio of a height of the step to a thickness of the passivation layer is in a range between about 1/4 and about 3/4.
However, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). It is noted that the ratio range would have been obvious to an ordinary artisan practicing the invention because, absent evidence of disclosure of criticality for the range giving unexpected results, it is not inventive to discover optimal or workable ranges by routine experimentation. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form a ratio of a height of the step to a thickness of the passivation layer being in a range as claimed because such ratio could be optimized during routine experimentation depending upon the desired material of the passivation layer and the process conditions which are desired for etching the passivation layer to form the step.
Regarding claim 8, Wang’s Fig. 4H further teaches the planarization layer 412 contacts both of the first top surface and the second top surface of the edge portion of the passivation layer 410.
Regarding claim 9, Liu (Fig. 6) discloses a device comprising: a first passivation layer 201 ([0026]); a redistribution line 601 comprising: a via portion extending into the first passivation layer 201; and a trace portion 603 over and contacting the via portion, wherein the trace portion 603 is over the first passivation layer; a second passivation layer 301 ([0029]) comprising a first top portion over and contacting the redistribution line 601, wherein the first top portion of the second passivation layer 301 has a first opening, with sidewalls of the second passivation layer 301 facing the first opening; a planarization layer 304 comprising a polymer ([0031]), wherein a portion of the planarization layer 304 extends into the first opening to contact the sidewalls of the second passivation layer 301; and an Under-Bump Metallurgy (UBM) 302 ([0029]) extending into the planarization layer, wherein the UBM 302 forms a straight interface with the planarization layer 304, and wherein the straight interface extends from the redistribution line 603 to a top surface of the planarization layer 304.
Liu does not disclose the second passivation layer 301 comprises a step.
However, Wang (Figs. 4G-4H) teaches a device comprising: a passivation layer 410 ([0032]) including: sidewall portions extending on a first conductive feature 408, and a first top portion over and contacting the first conductive feature; and an edge portion of the passivation layer 410 comprises a first top surface, and a second top surface lower than the first top surface to form a step. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Liu by forming the second passivation layer comprising a step because the forming of such step would reduce the stress and result in a more uniform distribution of stress on the underlying layers, as taught by Wang ([0020]).
Regarding claim 11, Wang’s Fig. 4H further teaches the step is spaced apart from the UBM 414 by the planarization layer412.
Regarding claims 13-15, Liu (Fig. 6) further discloses: the portion of the planarization layer 304 has a vertical sidewall; the UBM 302 is separated from the second passivation layer 301 by a portion of the planarization layer 304; and each of the UBM 302, the planarization layer 304, and the second passivation layer 301 contacts a top surface of the trace portion 603 of the redistribution line 601.
Regarding claim 16, Liu (Fig. 6) discloses a device comprising: a semiconductor substrate 101 ([0020]); an integrated circuit (not shown, see [0020]) at a surface of the semiconductor substrate; a conductive feature 601 ([0040]) over and electrically coupling to the integrated circuit ([0040] and [0027]); a passivation layer 301 ([0029]) comprising: a sidewall portion contacting a sidewall of the conductive feature 601; and a top portion over and contacting a top surface of the conductive feature 601; a polymer layer 304 ([0031]) comprising: a first portion overlapping the conductive feature 601; and a second portion vertically offset from the conductive feature, wherein the first portion is continuously joined to the second portion, and wherein top surfaces of the first portion and the second portion are coplanar; a conductive via 302 extending into the polymer layer 304 to contact the conductive feature 601, wherein the conductive via 302/400 is separated from the passivation layer 301 by a ring portion of the polymer layer 304 (i.e., a portion of 304 surrounding via 302 within the opening forming a ring), and wherein the ring portion of the polymer layer 304 comprises a bottom surface contacting the top surface of the conductive feature and the top surface of the passivation layer 301, and wherein the conductive via 302 contacts the ring portion of the polymer layer 304 to form a straight interface that that extends from the conductive feature 603 to the top surface of the first portion of the polymer layer.
Liu does not disclose the bottom surface of the polymer layer 304 comprising: a first bottom surface, a second bottom surface higher than the first bottom surface, a first sidewall forms a first step with the first bottom surface and the second bottom surface; and a third bottom surface, and the second sidewall forms a second step with the second bottom surface and the third bottom surface.
However, Wang (Figs. 4G-4H) teaches a device comprising: a polymer layer 412 ([0026], corresponding to material of polymer layer 212 in Fig. 2B) formed over a passivation layer 410, the polymer layer 412 comprises: a first bottom surface contacting the top surface of the conductive feature 408, a second bottom surface higher than the first bottom surface, a first sidewall between and joined to the first bottom surface and the second bottom surface, wherein the first sidewall forms a first step with the first bottom surface and the second bottom surface, a third bottom surface higher than the second bottom surface, wherein the second bottom surface and the third bottom surface are in contact with the passivation layer 410, and a second sidewall between and joined to the second bottom surface and the third bottom surface, the second sidewall forms a second step with the second bottom surface and the third bottom surface. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Liu by forming the bottom surface of the polymer layer 304 comprising: a first bottom surface, a second bottom surface higher than the first bottom surface, a first sidewall forming a first step with the first bottom surface and the second bottom surface, and a third bottom surface, and the second sidewall forming a second step with the second bottom surface and the third bottom surface because the forming of such steps would reduce the stress and result in a more uniform distribution of stress on the underlying layers, as taught by Wang ([0020]).
Regarding claims 19-20, Liu (Fig. 6) further discloses: an underfill 302 contacting the polymer layer 304; and a bond pad (corresponding to a pad portion of 603 in contact with the bottom surface of conductive layer 302) continuously connected to the conductive via 304, and a solder region 400 (i.e., silver, gold, tin, [0037], also see [0045]) over and contacting the bond pad, wherein the solder region 400 contacts the underfill 302.
Regarding claim 24, Wang’s Fig. 4H further teaches the polymer layer 412 contacts an entirety of the first step and entirely of the second step.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al and Wang et al as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Yu et al (US 2018/0040585).
Liu does not disclose the portion of the planarization layer has a slanted sidewall.
However, Yu (Fig. 10B) teaches a device comprising a portion of the planarization layer 174 extends into the first opening to contact the sidewalls of the second passivation layer 171, and the portion of the planarization layer has a slanted sidewall. Furthermore, Applicant has not disclosed that the change in shape is for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected result, or are otherwise critical, and it appears prima facie that the device would possess utility using another shape. Indeed, it has been held that mere change in shape limitation is prima facie obvious absent a disclosure that the limitation is for a particular unobvious purpose, produce an unexpected result, or are otherwise critical. See, for example, In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to change the sidewall shape of the planarization layer of Liu from a vertical sidewall to a slanted sidewall because as is well known, such slanted sidewall would improve the flowing of the conductive material filled in the contact opening of the planarization layer.
Claims 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al and Wang et al as applied to claim 1, 9 or 16 above, and further in view of Chen et al (US 2013/0207258).
Neither Liu nor Wang disclose the planarization layer or the polymer layer comprises a portion lower than a top surface of the redistribution line or the conductive feature as recited in claims 21-23.
However, Chen (Fig. 6) teaches a device comprising a passivation layer 34 extending on a redistribution line 28, a planarization layer or polymer layer 30 ([0018]) extending over the redistribution line or the conductive feature 28 and the passivation layer 34, and the planarization layer 30 comprises a portion lower than a top surface of the redistribution line 28. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the device of Liu by forming the planarization layer comprising a portion lower than a top surface of the redistribution line because a depth of the planarization layer could be adjusted to be higher than or lower than a top surface of the redistribution line depending upon the thickness which is desired for the underlying passivation layer. It appears that these changes produce no functional differences of protecting the redistribution line from the outside environments and therefore would have been obvious.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/14/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Independent Claim 1 rejection
Applicant argues that it would not be obvious to combine Liu with Wang because Wang’s Fig. 4H discloses the UBM 414 conforms in shape to the stepwise sidewall of planarization 412 and therefore, Wang does not disclose “wherein the second conductive feature comprises a straight edge contacting the planarization layer, and wherein the straight edge extends from the redistribution line to a third top surface of the planarization layer” as recited in claim 1.
It should be noted that claims in a pending application should be given their broadest reasonable interpretation. In re Pearson, 494F. 2d 1399, 181 USPQ 641 (CCPA 1974). In this case, it seems that Applicant argues that the UBM 414 (corresponding to “the second conductive layer”) does not have the straight edge extending at the redistribution line to a top surface of the planarization layer 412. However, the limitation on which Applicant relies (i.e., at the redistribution line) does not require by the claim language. Therefore, as broadly interpreted, the second conductive feature comprises the straight edge extending “from” the redistribution line to a top surface of the planarization layer as claimed does not exclude the second conductive feature 414 comprises the straight edge extending “from” a location near the redistribution line 408 (see annotations in Fig. 4H reproduced below). Therefore, Fig. 4H of Wang does suggest “the straight edge extends from the redistribution line to a third top surface of the planarization layer” as claimed.
[AltContent: textbox (“a straight edge extends from the redistribution line” 408)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: oval]
PNG
media_image1.png
437
441
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Independent Claim 9 rejection
Applicant argues that it would not be obvious to combine Liu with Wang because Wang’s Fig. 4H discloses the UBM 414 conforms in shape to the stepwise sidewall of planarization 412 and therefore, Wang does not disclose “wherein the UBM forms a straight interface with the planarization layer, and wherein the straight interface extends from the redistribution line to a top surface of the planarization layer” as recited in claim 9.
This argument is not persuasive because of the similar reasons as discussed in claim 1 rejection above. Specifically, as broadly interpreted, the UBM comprises a straight interface with the planarization and the straight interface extending “from” the redistribution line to a top surface of the planarization layer as claimed does not exclude the UBM 414 comprises the straight interface with the planarization 412 and the straight interface extending “from” a location near the redistribution line 408 (see annotations in Fig. 4H reproduced above). Therefore, Fig. 4H of Wang does suggest “the straight interface extends from the redistribution line to a top surface of the planarization layer” as claimed.
Independent Claim 16 rejection
Applicant argues that it would not be obvious to combine Liu with Wang because Wang’s Fig. 4H discloses the conductive via 414 conforms in shape to the stepwise sidewall of the polymer layer 412 and therefore, Wang does not disclose “wherein the conductive via contacts the ring portion of the polymer layer to form a straight interface that extends from the conductive feature to the top surface of the first portion of the polymer layer” as recited in claim 16.
This argument is not persuasive because of the similar reasons as discussed in claim 1 rejection above. Specifically, as broadly interpreted, the conductive via contacts the ring portion of the polymer layer to form a straight interface that extends from the conductive feature to the top surface of the first portion of the polymer layer as claimed does not exclude the conductive via 414 contacts the ring portion of the polymer layer 412 to form a straight interface that extends “from” a location near the conductive feature 408 to the top surface of the first portion of the polymer layer 412 (see annotations in Fig. 4H reproduced above). Therefore, Fig. 4H of Wang does suggest the above quoted limitations as claimed.
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 PHAT X CAO whose telephone number is (571)272-1703. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:00 am - 4:30 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, MARLON FLETCHER can be reached at 571-272-2063. 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.
/PHAT X CAO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817