CTFR 17/919,730 CTFR 74738 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the thickness of the spacer is greater than a height of the stack of one or more dies must (Re claim 21) be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. 06-22 Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-01 AIA 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. 07-31-01 Claims 21-29 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. Re claim 21, the phrase “wherein a thickness of the spacer is greater than a height of the stack of one or more dies” was not described in the original specification. 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 21-29 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. Re claim 21, the phrase “a stack of one or more dies” is unclear and indefinite (e.g., a stack of something inherently implies more than one , can’t have a single object in a stack, must be at least two or more items etc.). Re claim 25, the phrase “the EMC spacer” lacks antecedent basis. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 21-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DO, US Pub. No. 2020/0091112 A1 in view of Swee Seng, US Pub. No. 2006/0022323 A1 . Re claim 21, DO discloses an apparatus, comprising: a semiconductor substrate 100 (e.g., fig. 2 and/or 10 etc.); a silicon die 230 or 230/410 (e.g., fig. 2 or 10); a stack of one or more dies 210/220 (fig. 2 or 10) disposed on the semiconductor substrate 100; and a spacer 500 (fig. 2) or 501 (fig. 10) disposed between the silicon die 230 and the semiconductor substrate 100 (e.g., fig. 2 or 10), wherein the spacer 500/501 comprises a polymer layer, a solder resist layer etc. (e.g., paragraph 62), and inherently shows that the spacer (e.g., polymer material etc.) is provided to reduce a coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) mismatch between the semiconductor substrate 100 and the silicon die 230, wherein a thickness of the spacer 500/501 is greater than a height of the stack of one or more dies (e.g., one die, 210), and the spacer 500/501 (e.g. fig. 2 or 10) elevates the silicon die 230, and wherein a peripheral portion of the silicon die 230 is extended on or above the stack of one or more dies 210/220 (e.g., fig. 2 or 10). Furthermore, it should be noted that a recitation of the intended use and/or function of the claimed invention (e.g., -- wherein the spacer is provided to reduce a coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) mismatch between the semiconductor substrate and the silicon die -- ) must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use and/or function, then it meets the claim. Although the exact recitation “ the spacer comprises an organic compound ” of the instant claim is not explicitly stated by DO in the related text, it appears that the polymer and/or solder resist would include all organic and/or inorganic polymer/material. Therefore, the instant claim appears to be Prima Facie obvious over DO. In addition, using the organic compound for the spacer has been well-known in the semiconductor art. The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co., Inc. v. Interchemical Corp. , 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). "Reading a list and selecting a known compound to meet known requirements is no more ingenious than selecting the last piece to put in the last opening in a jig - saw puzzle." 65 USPQ at 301.). For example, Swee Seng teaches a similar device, which comprises a spacer 126, 150, 250 (e.g., figs. 3D-5 and paragraphs 47, 62, 64, 76, 83) having an organic compound (e.g., polyimide, resin, epoxy, paragraphs 47, 62, 64, 76, 83 etc.). Therefore, the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made to use organic compound for spacer as taught by Swee Seng in the device of DO in order to provide a stacked multi-chip module etc. Re claim 23. The apparatus of claim 21, wherein the silicon die includes a film layer 430 (e.g., fig. 2) or a lower portion of 230 (e.g., fig. 10), and wherein the film layer is in contact with the spacer 500 (e.g., fig. 2) or 501 (e.g., fig. 10). Re claim 24. The apparatus of claim 21, wherein the silicon die 230 is a first silicon die (e.g., fig. 2 or 10), and the stack of one or more dies further comprises a second silicon die 210/410 in contact with the semiconductor substrate 100 (e.g., fig. 2 or 10). Re claim 25. The apparatus of claim 24, wherein the second silicon die 210/410 is free from contact with the first silicon die 230 (e.g., fig. 2 or 10) or the EMC spacer. Re claim 26. The apparatus of claim 24, wherein the stack of one or more dies further comprises a third silicon die 220 disposed between first silicon die 230 and the second silicon die 210 (e.g., fig. 2 or 10). Re claim 27. The apparatus of claim 24, wherein each respective silicon die includes a respective film layer (e.g., a bottom portion). Re claim 28. The apparatus of claim 21, wherein the silicon die is a first silicon die 230 (fig. 10) or 230/430 (e.g., fig. 2), wherein a first side of the first silicon die 230 or 230/430 is in contact with the spacer 501 or 500 (e.g., fig. 2 or 10), and wherein a second side of the first silicon die is in contact with a second silicon die 240/460 (e.g., fig. 2 or 10). Re claim 29. The apparatus of claim 28, wherein the first silicon die includes a first film layer 430 (or a bottom portion of 230) on its first side contacting the spacer (e.g., fig. 2 or 10), and wherein the second silicon die 240 includes a second film layer 460 (e.g., fig. 2 or 10)in contact with second side of the first silicon die . Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed 5/8/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for reasons herein above . Conclusion 07-40 AIA 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 JACK CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1689. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8am to 4pm. 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, Yara J. Green can be reached at (571)270-3035. 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. /JACK S CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893 Application/Control Number: 17/919,730 Page 2 Art Unit: 2893 Application/Control Number: 17/919,730 Page 3 Art Unit: 2893 Application/Control Number: 17/919,730 Page 4 Art Unit: 2893 Application/Control Number: 17/919,730 Page 5 Art Unit: 2893 Application/Control Number: 17/919,730 Page 6 Art Unit: 2893 Application/Control Number: 17/919,730 Page 7 Art Unit: 2893
Prosecution Insights