DETAILED ACTION
Applicant’s arguments, see the claim amendments filed 12/5/25, with respect to the rejection(s) of the claim(s) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made below using different figures (namely figures 8-9) of the reference, Dalal et al. US 8,129,266, used in the nonfinal rejection.
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.
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) 1, 3, 6-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dalal et al. US 8,129,266.
Regarding claim 1, Dalal (figures 5, 8 and 9) teaches a chip structure, comprising:
a die 10, a first chip bond pad 23, and a second chip bond pad 24, wherein:
a first radio frequency circuit 13 (column 1, lines 10-31 teaches wireless communication and column 3, lines 6-9 teaches passive devices), a second radio frequency circuit 17 (column 1, lines 10-31 teaches wireless communication and column 3, lines 6-9 teaches passive devices), a first interconnect metal wire (left 18), and a second interconnect metal wire (right 18) are disposed in the die 10;
the first interconnect metal wire (left 18) is connected to the first radio frequency circuit 13, and the first interconnect metal wire (left 18) is configured to provide an alternating current ground (column 3, lines 28-35) for the first radio frequency circuit 13; the second interconnect metal wire (right 18) is connected to the second radio frequency circuit 17, and the second interconnect metal wire (right 18) is configured to provide an alternating current ground (column 3, lines 28-35) for the second radio frequency circuit 17; the first chip bond pad 23 and the second chip bond pad 24 are disposed on a surface of the die 10; and
the first chip bond pad 23 is connected to the first interconnect metal wire (left 18), the second chip bond pad 24 is connected to the second interconnect metal wire (right 18), and the first interconnect metal wire (left 18) and the second interconnect metal wire (right 18) are isolated from each other (figures 4-5 show they are isolated);
wherein the chip structure (figures 8-9) further comprises a first chip solder pad 62, a second chip solder pad 62, a first redistribution metal wire 61 connecting the first chip bond pad 23 and the first chip solder pad 62, and a second redistribution metal wire 61 connecting the second chip bond pad 23 and the second chip solder pad 62, and wherein each of the first chip solder pad 62 and the second chip solder pad 62 is configured to provide a respective solder point 72.
Though Dalal fails to specifically teach a radio frequency circuit, Dalal (column 1, lines 10-31 teaches wireless communication and column 3, lines 6-9 teaches passive devices) teaches devices that are conventionally known to use radio frequency circuits. Radio frequency circuits are types of passive devices used in wireless communication.
With respect to claim 3, Dalal (figure 5) teaches a redistribution layer 30/55, wherein:
the first chip solder pad 62 and the second chip solder pad 62 are disposed on an upper surface of the redistribution layer 55;
a first redistribution metal wire 61 and a second redistribution metal wire 61 are disposed in the redistribution layer 55
and the first redistribution metal wire 61 and the second redistribution metal wire 61 are isolated from each other (figure 9 shows they are isolated).
As to claims 6 and 7, though Dalal, which teaches wireless communication devices (column 1, lines 10-31) and passive devices (column 3, lines 6-9), fails to specifically teach the first radio frequency circuit comprises a first inductive device (claim 6); nor the second radio frequency circuit comprises a second inductive device (claim 7), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use first and second inductive devices in the invention of Dalal because inductive devices are conventionally known and used as The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
In re claim 8, though Dalal fails to teach a first radio frequency receive path and a second radio frequency receive path, wherein: the chip structure is configured to receive a downlink carrier aggregation signal; the downlink carrier aggregation signal comprises a first component carrier and a second component carrier; the first radio frequency receive path is configured to receive the first component carrier; the second radio frequency receive path is configured to receive the second component carrier; and the first radio frequency circuit is disposed in the first radio frequency receive path, and the second radio frequency circuit is disposed in the second radio frequency receive path, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use this configuration in the invention of Dalal because it is a conventionally known and used application of the device of Dalal. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Concerning claim 9, though Dalal fails to teach the first radio frequency circuit is a first local oscillator, and the first radio frequency circuit is configured to provide a local-frequency signal for the first radio frequency receive path, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use this configuration in the invention of Dalal because it is a conventionally known and used application of the device of Dalal. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Pertaining to claim 10, though Dalal fails to teach the second radio frequency circuit is a second local oscillator, and the second radio frequency circuit is configured to provide a local-frequency signal for the second radio frequency receive path, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use this configuration in the invention of Dalal because it is a conventionally known and used application of the device of Dalal. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
In claim 11, though Dalal fails to teach the second radio frequency circuit is a low noise amplifier, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use this configuration in the invention of Dalal because it is a conventionally known and used application of the device of Dalal. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
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 DAVID A ZARNEKE whose telephone number is (571)272-1937. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Matt Landau can be reached at 571-272-1731. 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.
/DAVID A ZARNEKE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2891 1/22/26