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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDSs) submitted on August 18, 2022 and August 18, 2023 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3-4 and 10-11 are objected to because of the following informalities: the language “first resin” and “second resin” is confusing. The invention appears to be directed toward a single resin that is both photocurable and thermocurable which is applied to both a surface acoustic wave (SAW) device and a semiconductor device. The resin is then photocured around the SAW device using a mask, so that the resin does not underfill the SAW device, and then thermocured around the semiconductor device so that it softens and underfills the other devices. This results in a two-step curing process but not two different resins. Examiner is interpreting this limitation as a single resin, in view of the above explanation, and suggests amending the language of these claims to recite a “first resin portion” or a “second resin portion.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: use of the term “room temperature” is ambiguous. Examiner is interpreting room temperature to be in the range of 20-23.5ºC. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4-7, 10 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2016/117196 A1 to Kitahara et al. (hereinafter “Kitahara”).
Regarding claim 1, Kitahara teaches a module, comprising:
a package substrate (Fig. 4, package substrate 20);
an elastic wave device (Fig. 4, SAW duplexer 40) mounted on the package substrate (Fig. 4, package substrate 20), the elastic wave device (Fig. 4, SAW duplexer 40) includes a first main surface (Fig. 4, surface 43) having a functional element (Fig. 4, comb electrode part 45), the first main surface faces the package substrate (Fig. 4, package substrate 20);
a semiconductor device (Fig. 4, power amplifier 30) mounted on the package substrate (Fig. 4, package substrate 20);
and a resin (Fig. 4, insulating resin 50) made from a single material ([0069], insulating resin 50 is an epoxy resin), the resin comprising a first resin and a second resin,
the first resin (Fig. 4, insulating resin 50) covers the elastic wave device (Fig. 4, SAW duplexer 40) while leaving an air gap (Fig. 4, cavity 46) between the package substrate (Fig. 4, package substrate 20) and the functional element (Fig. 4, comb electrode part 45),
and the second resin (Fig. 4, insulating resin 50) covers the semiconductor device (Fig. 4, power amplifier 30) while filling a space between the package substrate (Fig. 4, package substrate 20) and the semiconductor device (Fig. 4, power amplifier 30).
Regarding claim 4, Kitahara teaches the module according to claim 1, wherein the elastic wave device (Fig. 4, SAW duplexer 40) includes a second main surface (Fig. 4, surface 42) opposite to the first main surface (Fig. 4, surface 43), and at least a portion of the second main surface (Fig. 4, surface 42) is not covered with the first resin (Fig. 4, hole 91 formed above surface 42).
Regarding claim 5, Kitahara teaches the module according to claim 1, wherein the semiconductor device (Fig. 4, power amplifier 30) has a facing surface (Fig. 4, surface 33) and a non-facing surface (Fig. 4, surface 32); the facing surface (Fig. 4, surface 33) is a surface facing the package substrate (Fig. 4, package substrate 20); the non-facing surface (Fig. 4, surface 32) is a surface opposite to the facing surface (Fig. 4, surface 33); and at least a portion of the non-facing surface (Fig. 3, surface 32) is not covered with the resin (Fig. 4, hole 09 formed above surface 32).
Regarding claim 6, Kitahara teaches the module according to claim 1, wherein the elastic wave device includes any one of a surface acoustic wave filter, a filter comprising an acoustic thin film resonator, a duplexer, and a dual filter (Fig. 4, SAW duplexer 40).
Regarding claim 7, Kitahara teaches the module according to claim 1, wherein the semiconductor device includes any one of a power amplifier, a low noise amplifier, and a switch (Fig. 4, power amplifier 30).
Regarding claim 10, Kitahara teaches the module according to claim 4, comprising a metal layer (Fig. 4, conductive shield 60) covering the first resin (Fig. 4, insulating resin 50), the metal layer is in contact with the second main surface (Fig. 4, conductive shield 60 is in contact with SAW duplexer 40 at surface 42 through hole 91 formed in insulating resin 50).
Regarding claim 11, Kitahara teaches the module according to claim 5, comprising a metal layer (Fig. 4, conductive layer 60) covering the second resin (Fig. 4, insulating resin 50), the metal layer is in contact with the non-facing surface (Fig. 4, conductive layer 60 is in contact with power amplifier 30 at surface 32 through hole 90 formed in insulating resin 50).
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitahara as applied to claim 2 above and further in view of JPH0864728A to Kawade et al. (hereinafter “Kawade”).
Regarding claim 2, Kitahara does not teach the module according to claim 1, wherein the resin has a photocuring property and a thermo-curing property.
Kawade teaches the module according to claim 1, wherein the resin has a photocuring property and a thermo-curing property ([0005] a sealing resin comprising a mixture of a thermoplastic resin and a thermosetting resin in which a portion of the thermosetting groups have been substituted with a photosensitive group).
Kitahara teaches a semiconductor package including a resin for adhering the components to the packaging substrate. Kawade teaches a photosensitive, thermocurable resin for use in semiconductor devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claims were effectively filed to use the resin of Kawade in the semiconductor package of Kitahara in order to arrive at a more reliable device (Kawade [0003]).
Regarding claim 9, Kitahara as modified by Kawade teaches the module according to claim 2, wherein the thermo-curing property of the resin is one in which the resin is temporarily softened at a first temperature which is higher than room temperature (Kawade [0015] when imparting photosensitivity to a thermosetting resin, it is dried at a low temperature (30-60º C)) and is cured by continuing the first temperature or changing the first temperature to a second temperature higher than the first temperature (Kawade [0015] resin is then cured at 80-200º C).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitahara, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of US 2022/0045039 A1 to Tsukamoto et al. (hereinafter “Tsukamoto”).
Regarding claim 3, Kitahara does not teach the module according to claim 1, wherein the first resin covering the elastic wave device is photo-cured and heat-cured, and the second resin filled between the package substrate and the semiconductor devices is heat-cured.
Tsukamoto teaches the module according to claim 1, wherein the first resin covering the elastic wave device is photo-cured and heat-cured, and the second resin filled between the package substrate and the semiconductor devices is heat-cured ([0238] the thermosetting and ultraviolet curable resin is cured when heated after being pre-cured by ultraviolet light).
Kitahara and Tsukamoto both teach mounting a circuit element to a substrate using a resin. Kitahara teaches mounting a surface acoustic waveguide to a substrate using a resin that seals an air gap. Tsukamoto teaches using a resin that is both UV and heat curable to bond two substrates and encapsulate a light emitting device (782). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claims were effectively filed to combine the teachings of Kitahara with the UV and heat curable resin of Tsukamoto to arrive at a surface acoustic waveguide mounted to a substrate using a resin that could be both UV and heat cured to encapsulate circuit devices to a substrate.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitahara as applied to claim 1 above, in view of US 2020/0076402 A1 to Koo et al. (hereinafter “Koo”).
Regarding claim 8, Kitahara teaches the module according to claim 1, wherein the semiconductor device includes a power amplifier (Fig. 4, power amplified 30); at least a portion of an upper surface of the power amplifier is not covered with the resin (Fig. 4, hole 90 formed above power amplifier 30).
Kitahara does not teach the module according to claim 1, wherein the semiconductor device includes a switch; and an upper surface of the switch is covered with the resin.
Koo teaches the module according to claim 1, wherein the semiconductor device includes a switch (Fig. 9, other circuitry 1077 [0145] other circuitry 1077 can include a switch).
Kitahara teaches a package substrate including a SAW device and a power amplifier. Koo teaches a radio frequency module that includes a SAW component along with other circuitry that may include a power amplifier and a switch. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claims were effectively filed to include the switch of Koo with the power amplifier and SAW device of Kitahara to arrive at the claimed invention. Such a combination would result in a reduced height or size of the packaged SAW device (Koo, [0143]).
Neither Kitahara nor Koo explicitly teach an upper surface of the switch is covered with the resin. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claims were effectively filed to cover the switch with resin, as taught by Kitahara, in a similar manner as the other components of the radio frequency module, as taught by Koo.
Claim(s) 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitahara as applied to claim 10 above, in view of US 2011/0018389 A1 to Fukano et al. (hereinafter “Fukano”).
Regarding claim 12, Kitahara teaches the metal layer (Fig. 4, conductive shield 60) is in contact with a conductor pattern (Fig. 4, ground wiring 26) of the package substrate (Fig. 4, package substrate 20) by being formed in the opening.
Kitahara does not teach the module according to claim 10, wherein the resin has an opening directly above the package substrate.
Fukano teaches the module according to claim 10, wherein the resin (Fig. 5a, sealing resin 11) has an opening (Fig. 5a, through hole 21) directly above the package substrate (Fig. 5a, piezoelectric substrate 1); and the metal layer (Fig. 5a, plating base layer 5’, [0082] plating base layer 5’ is a metal layer) is in contact with a conductor pattern (Fig. 5a, plating base layer 5’ is in contact with conductor 3) of the package substrate by being formed in the opening ([0082]).
Kitahara and Fukano both teach SAW devices. Kitahara teaches mounting a SAW device to a substrate using a resin and connecting a metal layer with the ground wiring of the package substrate. Fukano teaches forming a SAW device, including forming an opening in a resin layer and forming a metal layer on the resin layer and within the opening, so that the metal layer is in contact with a conductor pattern. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claims were effectively filed to combine the opening in a resin layer of Fukano with the metal layer connection of Kitahara to arrive at the claimed device. Such a combination would provide a reduced size of the overall device (Fukano [0082]).
Regarding claim 13, Kitahara as modified by Fukano teaches the module according to claim 12, wherein electrical potential of the conductor pattern is a ground potential of the elastic wave device (Kitahara, Description of the Embodiments, paragraph 32 – the potential of the metal layer 47 of the SAW duplexer 40 is fixed to the ground level).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitahara as applied to claim 10 above, in view of US 2019/0131224 A1 to Choi et al. (hereinafter “Choi”).
Regarding claim 14, Kitahara does not teach the module according to claim 10, comprising an insulating layer on the metal layer, an upper surface of the insulating layer is substantially flat.
Choi teaches the module according to claim 10, comprising an insulating layer (Fig. 9, encapsulating layer 140) on the metal layer (Fig. 9, metal layer 131b), an upper surface of the insulating layer is substantially flat.
Kitahara and Choi both teach semiconductor packaging. Kitahara teaches packaging a SAW device and power amplifier using a resin. Choi teaches a fan-out semiconductor package using an encapsulation layer to encapsulate a metal layer connecting supporting members within the packaging. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the claims were effectively filed to employ the encapsulant of Choi over the metal layer of Kitahara in order to encapsulate the components of Kitahara (Choi, [0070]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Megan Parrish whose telephone number is (703)756-1983. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday ET.
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, Davienne Monbleau can be reached at (571)272-1945. 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.
MEGAN PARRISH
Examiner
Art Unit 2812
/Megan Parrish/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/DAVIENNE N MONBLEAU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights