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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment to Claim 1 addressing the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) in the reply—filed 19 December 2025—is acknowledged. This rejection has been overcome by the amendment of said claim, and the associated rejection is withdrawn.
Applicant’s traversal regarding the prior art rejections of Claims 1 – 5 on pages 5 – 6 of the reply—filed 19 December 2025—is acknowledged; however, said arguments are moot because they do not apply to the new grounds of rejection presented in this Office Action, necessitated by Applicant’s amendment.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 – 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by PARK (US 20110049685 A1).
Regarding Claim 1,
PARK discloses:
A quad flat no-leads (QFN) packaging structure (Fig. 3E – 4B: 500; Par. 74), comprising:
a package frame (Fig. 3E: 100’; Par. 59),
a chip (Fig. 4A/4B: 410; Par. 75) and
a plastic packaging layer (Fig. 4A: 430; Par. 6 – 7 & 75),
wherein the package frame comprises
at least one base island (Fig. 4A: 110’; Par. 66), and
leads (Fig. 4A/4B: 130’/120’; Par. 67) distributed on at least one side of the base island;
the chip is provided on the base island and electrically connected to the leads; and
(Fig. 4A/4B: 410 is provided on 110’ and electrically connected via 420s—Par. 67—to 130’ and 110’, which is electrically connected via 111’/121’ to 120’.)
the plastic packaging layer covers the package frame and the chip, and
(Fig. 4A/4B: 430 covers 110’ & 130’/120’—of which 100’ is comprised—and 410.)
side surfaces and a bottom surface of the lead are exposed to the plastic packaging layer (As seen in Fig. 4A/4B);
wherein the QFN packaging structure further comprises
an electromagnetic shielding layer (Fig. 4A/4B: 540; Par. 75) that covers side surfaces and a top surface of the plastic packaging layer;
the leads include a grounding lead (Fig. 3E/4B: 120’; Par. 72), and
the electromagnetic shielding layer and the leads are provided at intervals (Fig. 4A/4B: gaps between 540 and 130’/120’); and
the electromagnetic shielding layer is electrically connected to the grounding lead (Par. 71) via an electrical connector (Fig. 3E/4A: one of the plurality of 140’s; Par. 71); and
a lug boss (Fig. 3E/4A: another of the plurality of 140’s) that protrudes upwardly is provided on a side edge of the base island, and
an upper surface of the lug boss is above a lower surface of the electromagnetic shielding layer (As seen in Fig. 4A).
Regarding Claim 2,
PARK discloses:
The QFN packaging structure according to claim 1,
wherein a conductive coating layer (Fig. 4A: gold or silver plating of 112’; Par. 67) is provided between the grounding lead and the electromagnetic shielding layer, and
(112’—and thus its gold or silver plating—is provided on 110’ in Fig. 4A and, thus 110’ in Fig. 4B. As 110’ is between the 120’ on the right of Fig. 4B and the vertical sidewall of 540 on the left of Fig. 4B, the gold or silver plating of 112’ is provided between 120’ and 540.)
the electromagnetic shielding layer and the grounding lead are electrically connected by the conductive coating layer.
(Fig. 4A/4B: 540 and 120’ are electrically connected via 110’—Par. 71—which includes the silver or gold plating of 112’)
Regarding Claim 3,
PARK discloses:
The QFN packaging structure according to claim 2,
wherein the conductive coating layer is a conductive solder paste or a metal conductive layer (Par. 67).
Regarding Claim 4,
PARK discloses:
The QFN packaging structure according to claim 3,
wherein the electromagnetic shielding layer is a metal film material such as copper, stainless steel, or titanium sputtering sandwich metal, or a conductive composite material such as a conductive resin having high-density metal filler of silver/copper, or a combination of at least two of the materials (Par. 71).
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over PARK in view of WATANABE (US 20130105957 A1).
Regarding Claim 5,
PARK discloses:
The QFN packaging structure according to claim 1,
wherein an upper surface of the base island (Fig. 4A: the upper surface of yet another of the plurality of 140’s) is higher than an upper surface of the lead (As seen in Fig. 4A/4B), and
an interval between the lead and the electromagnetic shielding layer [is provided] (Fig. 4A/4B: gaps between 130’/120’ and 540).
PARK does not disclose:
an interval between the lead and the electromagnetic shielding layer ranges from 200 µm to 400 µm.
WATANABE discloses:
an interval (Fig. 5A: P2; Par. 37) between the leads (Fig. 5A: 12—signal—and 13—ground; Par. 37)…ranges from 200 µm to 400 µm (Par. 37).
Further, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of PARK with those of WATANABE to enable an interval between the leads and the electromagnetic shielding layer to range from 200 µm to 400 µm in PARK according to the teachings of WATANABE, as the such an interval between components electrically connected to ground—such as grounded grounding leads and grounded electromagnetic shielding layers—and components electrically connected to signal—such as the remaining leads—is common for such QFN package structures, as evidenced by WATANABE, Par. 37.
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 Kenneth S. Stephenson whose telephone number is (571)272-6686. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9 A.M. to 5 P.M. (EST)..
Examiner interviews are available via telephone and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview—preferably at 4 P.M. (EST)—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, Julio Maldonado can be reached at (571) 272-1864. 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.
/K.S.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2898
/JULIO J MALDONADO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2898