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 .
Remarks
The 04/10/2026 amendments of claim 1 has been noted and entered.
The 04/10/2026 cancellation of claims 7 has been noted and entered.
The 04/10/2026 addition of claim 26 has been noted and entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks pages 6-7, filed 04/10/2026, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-8 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of record have been withdrawn.
However, the previous indication of claim 21 containing allowable subject matter detailed in the Non-Final Rejection mailed on 12/10/2025 has been withdrawn. Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as will be detailed below.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
The specification is missing support for the language used in claim 21 reciting the following limitations: “…, wherein no portion of the first closed loop overlaps the first die, and wherein no portion of the second closed loop overlaps the second die;…” (emphasis added).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 21 and all claims dependent on it (claims 22-25) are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 21; claim 21 recites the following limitations: “…, wherein no portion of the first closed loop overlaps the first die, and wherein no portion of the second closed loop overlaps the second die;…” (emphasis added). By inspecting the specification it appears that such language is absent. Additionally, by inspecting Fig (17A) of the instant application (an annotated copy of which is shared below to facilitate explaining the examiner’s view) reveals that there is an overlap in the +Z-direction (as indicated on annotated Fig (17A)) between a portion of the first closed loop (Instant application: Fig (17A): 162; 126; [0061] “…For example, as illustrated in FIG. 17B, the permalloy core 126 may comprise a first closed loop 156 and a second closed loop 158 that are adjacent to each other…”) which is a portion of (126) and the first die (50). Thus, it is clear that the indicated limitations in claim 21 are absent from the entire disclosure of the instant application. For purposes of expediting the prosecution of this application, the examiner would like to add that if the applicant intended by the amendments made to claim 21 filed on 10/13/2025 to overcome the limitations indicated in Noma, US 20150069545 A1, (Noma) of the closed loops (Noma: Fig (36): 11B) overlapping the top of the dies (10), such limitations are obvious and indicated in prior art references such as Hsu et al, US 12002770 B2 (Hsu) where it can be seen that the closed loops (Hsu: Fig (1Q): 800) do not overlap the top of the die (300).
PNG
media_image1.png
891
1228
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6, 8-15 and 26 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Prior art does not disclose, alone or in combination along with, the following highlighted limitations of the independent claims 1 and 9.
Regarding claim 1; Hsu in view of Patten in further view of Sturcken in further view of Liao teaches A package comprising: a first redistribution structure; a first die and a second die disposed over the first redistribution structure; a molding material surrounding the first die and the second die; a second redistribution structure over the first die, the second die, and the molding material; and an inductor comprising a permalloy core, wherein the permalloy core is embedded in the molding material, and wherein the permalloy core comprises a plurality of vertically stacked alternating layers, wherein the permalloy core has the form of a first closed loop and a second closed loop adjacent the first closed loop, the first closed loop having a rectangular shape in a top-down view, wherein the first closed loop encircles an entire perimeter of the first die, the second closed loop encircles an entire perimeter of the second die, wherein a topmost surface of the first closed loop is below a top surface of the first die, wherein a topmost surface of the second closed loop is below a top surface of the second die, the vertically stacked alternating layers comprising: a plurality of epoxy layers; and a plurality of permalloy layers, wherein each of the plurality of permalloy layers is disposed between two epoxy layers of the plurality of epoxy layers.
Hsu alone or in combination with any other available art does not disclose wherein a topmost surface of the first closed loop is below a top surface of the first die, wherein a topmost surface of the second closed loop is below a top surface of the second die in a manner that can be reasonably combined with the rest of the limitations of the claim.
Claims 2-6, 8 and 26 are allowable for their dependence on an allowable claim.
Regarding claim 9; Hsu in view of Patten in further view of Sturcken in further view of Liao teaches A package comprising: a first redistribution structure; a molding material over the first redistribution structure; a first die and a second die embedded in the molding material; a second redistribution structure over the first die, the second die, and the molding material; and an inductor comprising: a first metallization pattern in the first redistribution structure; conductive vias extending through the molding material; a second metallization pattern in the second redistribution structure; and a magnetic bar comprising a first closed loop and a second closed loop adjacent to the first closed loop, wherein in a top-down view, the first closed loop of the magnetic bar encircles an entire perimeter of the first die, the second closed loop of the magnetic bar encircles an entire perimeter of the second die.
Hsu alone or in combination with any other available art does not disclose wherein a topmost surface of the first closed loop is below a top surface of the first die, wherein a topmost surface of the second closed loop is below a top surface of the second die, and wherein the magnetic bar is embedded in the molding material in a manner that can be reasonably combined with the rest of the limitations listed above in claim 9.
Claims 10-15 are allowable for their dependence on an allowable claim.
Claims 21-25 are objected to for containing unsupported limitations but would be allowable if re-written in a manner that overcomes the 35 U.S.C. 112(a) detailed above.
Regarding claim 21; Hsu in view of Patten in further view of Sturcken in further view of Liao teaches a package comprising: a first redistribution structure; a first die and a second die disposed over the first redistribution structure; a magnetic bar disposed over the first redistribution structure, wherein the magnetic bar comprises a first closed loop and a second closed loop adjacent to the first closed loop, wherein in a top-down view the first closed loop encircles an entire perimeter of the first die, the second closed loop encircles an entire perimeter of the second die, a first portion of the first closed loop and a first portion of the second closed loop are disposed between the first die and the second die, wherein no portion of the first closed loop overlaps the first die, and wherein no portion of the second closed loop overlaps the second die; a molding material surrounding the first die, the second die, and the magnetic bar; and a second redistribution structure over the first die, the second die, the magnetic bar, and the molding material.
Hsu alone or in combination with any other available art does not teach wherein no portion of the first closed loop overlaps the first die, and wherein no portion of the second closed loop overlaps the second die in a manner that can be reasonably combined with the rest of the limitations listed above in claim 21.
Claims 22-25 are objected to but otherwise allowable for their dependence on objected to but otherwise allowable base claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record but not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure. The following is a discussion of the closest relevant prior art.
Hsu et al, US 12002770 B2 (Hsu) discloses a redistribution structure, a die, molding material and a permalloy core.
Patten et al, US 20220376035 A1 (Patten) discloses a permalloy core and a closed loop.
Sturcken et al, US 20180182841 A1 (Sturcken) discloses a closed loop with inner corners of the closed loop are rounded.
Liao et al, US 20180315706 A1 (Liao) discloses the permalloy loop has the form of one continuous closed loop.
Noma, US 20150069545 A1 (Noma) discloses a second die, a magnetic bar shaped as a loop.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Moataz Khalifa whose telephone number is (703)756-1770. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (8:30 am - 5:00).
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, Kretelia Graham can be reached at (571) 272-5055. 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.
/M.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2817
/Kretelia Graham/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Prosecution Insights