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 IDS filed on 09/09/2022, 02/13/023, 08/20/2023, and 10/31/2025 have been considered.
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(s) 1-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueshima et al. (U.S. Pub. 2020/0284282).
In re claim 1, Ueshima discloses a solder alloy comprising: 0.6% by mass or more and 2% by mass or less of Cu (see paragraphs [0028], [0067], [0068] and Table 1); 9% by mass or more and 12% by mass or less of Sb (see paragraphs [0028], [0069], [0070] and Table 1); 0.005% by mass or more and 1% by mass or less of Ni (see paragraphs [0028], [0071], [0072] and Table 1); 0.2% by mass or less of Co (see paragraphs [0030], [0073] and Table 1); and a balance being Sn (see paragraphs [0028], [0075] and Table 1).
Ueshima is silent to wherein the solder alloy comprising 1.1% by mass or more and 8% by mass or less of Cu; 6% by mass or more and 20% by mass or less of Sb; 0.01% by mass or more and 0.5% by mass or less of Ni; 0.001% by mass or more and 1% by mass or less of Co; and an amount of Cu (% by mass) and an amount of Ni (% by mass) satisfying following formula: the amount of Ni/(the amount of Cu+the amount of Ni) < 0.10.
However, as disclosed by Ueshima above, the ranges of percentage by mass of Cu, Ni, and Co of the solder alloy are overlapping to that of Applicant’s ranges and the range of percentage by mass of Sb is within Applicant’s range.
Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teaching of Ueshima to optimize the percentage by mass of Cu, Sb, Ni, and Co during routine experimentation so that the solder alloy comprising 1.1% by mass or more and 8% by mass or less of Cu; 6% by mass or more and 20% by mass or less of Sb; 0.01% by mass or more and 0.5% by mass or less of Ni; 0.001% by mass or more and 1% by mass or less of Co; and an amount of Cu (% by mass) and an amount of Ni (% by mass) satisfying following formula: the amount of Ni/(the amount of Cu+the amount of Ni) < 0.10 can be obtain since it is respectfully submitted that there is no evidence indicating that the percentage by mass ranges of Cu, Sb, Ni, and Co in the solder alloy is critical and it has been held that it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable within given prior art conditions by routine experimentation. See MPEP § 2144.05. See In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In re claim 2, as applied to claim 1 above, Ueshima discloses wherein the solder alloy further comprising: 2% by mass or more and less than 4% by mass of Ag (see paragraphs [0028], [0065], [0066] and Table 1).
Ueshima is silent to wherein 0.1% by mass or more and less than 3% by mass of Ag.
However, as disclosed by Ueshima above, the ranges of percentage by mass of Ag of the solder alloy is overlapping to that of Applicant’s ranges.
Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teaching of Ueshima to optimize the percentage by mass of Ag of the solder alloy during routine experimentation so that a 0.1% by mass or more and less than 3% by mass of Ag can be obtain since it is respectfully submitted that there is no evidence indicating that the percentage by mass ranges of Ag in the solder alloy is critical and it has been held that it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable within given prior art conditions by routine experimentation. See MPEP § 2144.05. See In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In re claim 3, as applied to claim 2 above, Ueshima discloses wherein the solder alloy further comprising: at least one of Al, Ti, Si, Fe, and Ge in a total amount of 0.003% by mass or more and 0.5% by mass or less (see paragraphs [0030], [0073], [0074] and Table 1, note that, Ueshima discloses that the solder alloy further comprises 0.1% or less by mass of Fe).
In re claim 4, Ueshima discloses a solder bonding material comprising a solder alloy comprising: 0.6% by mass or more and 2% by mass or less of Cu (see paragraphs [0028], [0067], [0068] and Table 1); 9% by mass or more and 12% by mass or less of Sb (see paragraphs [0028], [0069], [0070] and Table 1); 0.005% by mass or more and 1% by mass or less of Ni (see paragraphs [0028], [0071], [0072] and Table 1); 0.2% by mass or less of Co (see paragraphs [0030], [0073] and Table 1); and a balance being Sn (see paragraphs [0028], [0075] and Table 1).
Ueshima is silent to wherein the solder alloy comprising 1.1% by mass or more and 8% by mass or less of Cu; 6% by mass or more and 20% by mass or less of Sb; 0.01% by mass or more and 0.5% by mass or less of Ni; 0.001% by mass or more and 1% by mass or less of Co; and an amount of Cu (% by mass) and an amount of Ni (% by mass) satisfying following formula: the amount of Ni/(the amount of Cu+the amount of Ni) < 0.10.
However, as disclosed by Ueshima above, the ranges of percentage by mass of Cu, Ni, and Co of the solder alloy are overlapping to that of Applicant’s ranges and the range of percentage by mass of Sb is within Applicant’s range.
Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teaching of Ueshima to optimize the percentage by mass of Cu, Sb, Ni, and Co during routine experimentation so that the solder alloy comprising 1.1% by mass or more and 8% by mass or less of Cu; 6% by mass or more and 20% by mass or less of Sb; 0.01% by mass or more and 0.5% by mass or less of Ni; 0.001% by mass or more and 1% by mass or less of Co; and an amount of Cu (% by mass) and an amount of Ni (% by mass) satisfying following formula: the amount of Ni/(the amount of Cu+the amount of Ni) < 0.10 can be obtain since it is respectfully submitted that there is no evidence indicating that the percentage by mass ranges of Cu, Sb, Ni, and Co in the solder alloy is critical and it has been held that it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable within given prior art conditions by routine experimentation. See MPEP § 2144.05. See In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In re claim 5, as applied to claim 4 above, Ueshima discloses wherein the solder alloy further comprising: 2% by mass or more and less than 4% by mass of Ag (see paragraphs [0028], [0065], [0066] and Table 1).
Ueshima is silent to wherein 0.1% by mass or more and less than 3% by mass of Ag.
However, as disclosed by Ueshima above, the ranges of percentage by mass of Ag of the solder alloy is overlapping to that of Applicant’s ranges.
Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teaching of Ueshima to optimize the percentage by mass of Ag during routine experimentation so that a 0.1% by mass or more and less than 3% by mass of Ag can be obtain since it is respectfully submitted that there is no evidence indicating that the percentage by mass ranges of Ag in the solder alloy is critical and it has been held that it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable within given prior art conditions by routine experimentation. See MPEP § 2144.05. See In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In re claim 6, as applied to claim 5 above, Ueshima discloses wherein the solder alloy further comprising: at least one of Al, Ti, Si, Fe, and Ge in a total amount of 0.003% by mass or more and 0.5% by mass or less (see paragraphs [0030], [0074] and Table 1, note that, Ueshima discloses that the solder alloy further comprises 0.1% or less by mass of Fe).
In re claim 7, Ueshima discloses a solder paste comprising a flux (see paragraphs [0098], [0099]); and a powder comprising a solder alloy comprising: 0.6% by mass or more and 2% by mass or less of Cu (see paragraphs [0028], [0067], [0068] and Table 1); 9% by mass or more and 12% by mass or less of Sb (see paragraphs [0028], 0069], [0070] and Table 1); 0.005% by mass or more and 1% by mass or less of Ni (see paragraphs [0028], [0071], [0072]); 0.2% by mass or less of Co (see paragraphs [0030], [0073] and Table 1); and a balance being Sn (see paragraphs [0028], [0075] and Table 1).
Ueshima is silent to wherein the solder alloy comprising 1.1% by mass or more and 8% by mass or less of Cu; 6% by mass or more and 20% by mass or less of Sb; 0.01% by mass or more and 0.5% by mass or less of Ni; 0.001% by mass or more and 1% by mass or less of Co; and an amount of Cu (% by mass) and an amount of Ni (% by mass) satisfying following formula: the amount of Ni/(the amount of Cu+the amount of Ni) < 0.10.
However, as disclosed by Ueshima above, the ranges of percentage by mass of Cu, Ni, and Co of the solder alloy are overlapping to that of Applicant’s ranges and the range of percentage by mass of Sb is within Applicant’s range.
Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teaching of Ueshima to optimize the percentage by mass of Cu, Sb, Ni, and Co during routine experimentation so that the solder alloy comprising 1.1% by mass or more and 8% by mass or less of Cu; 6% by mass or more and 20% by mass or less of Sb; 0.01% by mass or more and 0.5% by mass or less of Ni; 0.001% by mass or more and 1% by mass or less of Co; and an amount of Cu (% by mass) and an amount of Ni (% by mass) satisfying following formula: the amount of Ni/(the amount of Cu+the amount of Ni) < 0.10 can be obtain since it is respectfully submitted that there is no evidence indicating that the percentage by mass ranges of Cu, Sb, Ni, and Co in the solder alloy is critical and it has been held that it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable within given prior art conditions by routine experimentation. See MPEP § 2144.05. See In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In re claim 8, as applied to claim 7 above, Ueshima discloses wherein the solder alloy further comprising: 2% by mass or more and less than 4% by mass of Ag (see paragraphs [0028], [0068], [0069] and Table 1).
Ueshima is silent to wherein 0.1% by mass or more and less than 3% by mass of Ag.
However, as disclosed by Ueshima above, the ranges of percentage by mass of Ag of the solder alloy is overlapping to that of Applicant’s ranges.
Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teaching of Ueshima to optimize the percentage by mass of Ag during routine experimentation so that a 0.1% by mass or more and less than 3% by mass of Ag can be obtain since it is respectfully submitted that there is no evidence indicating that the percentage by mass ranges of Ag in the solder alloy is critical and it has been held that it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable within given prior art conditions by routine experimentation. See MPEP § 2144.05. See In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In re claim 9, as applied to claim 8 above, Ueshima discloses wherein the solder alloy further comprising: at least one of Al, Ti, Si, Fe, and Ge in a total amount of 0.003% by mass or more and 0.5% by mass or less (see paragraphs [0030], [0074] and Table 1, note that, Ueshima discloses that the solder alloy further comprises 0.1% or less by mass of Fe).
In re claim 10, Ueshima discloses a solder bonding portion comprising: the solder alloy according to claim 1 (see paragraphs [0028], [0065]-[0075], and Table 1).
In re claim 11, as applied to claim 10 above, Ueshima discloses wherein the solder alloy further comprising: 2% by mass or more and less than 4% by mass of Ag (see paragraphs [0028], [0065], [0066] and Table 1).
Ueshima is silent to wherein 0.1% by mass or more and less than 3% by mass of Ag.
However, as disclosed by Ueshima above, the ranges of percentage by mass of Ag of the solder alloy is overlapping to that of Applicant’s ranges.
Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teaching of Ueshima to optimize the percentage by mass of Ag during routine experimentation so that a 0.1% by mass or more and less than 3% by mass of Ag can be obtain since it is respectfully submitted that there is no evidence indicating that the percentage by mass ranges of Ag in the solder alloy is critical and it has been held that it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable within given prior art conditions by routine experimentation. See MPEP § 2144.05. See In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In re claim 12, as applied to claim 11 above, Ueshima discloses wherein the solder alloy further comprising: at least one of Al, Ti, Si, Fe, and Ge in a total amount of 0.003% by mass or more and 0.5% by mass or less (see paragraphs [0030], [0074] and Table 1, note that, Ueshima discloses that the solder alloy further comprises 0.1% or less by mass of Fe).
In re claim 13 above, Ueshima discloses an electronic circuit board comprising: a substrate (12,22,32,42); a solder bonding portion (14,24,34,44) comprising the solder alloy according to claim 1; and an electronic component (11,21,31,41) bonded on the substrate (12,22,32,42) via the solder bonding portion (14,24,34,44) (see paragraphs [0151], [0152], [0153] and figs. 1A-D).
In re claim 14, as applied to claim 13 above, Ueshima discloses wherein the solder alloy further comprising: 2% by mass or more and less than 4% by mass of Ag (see paragraphs [0028], [0065], [0066] and Table 1).
Ueshima is silent to wherein 0.1% by mass or more and less than 3% by mass of Ag.
However, as disclosed by Ueshima above, the ranges of percentage by mass of Ag of the solder alloy is overlapping to that of Applicant’s ranges.
Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teaching of Ueshima to optimize the percentage by mass of Ag during routine experimentation so that a 0.1% by mass or more and less than 3% by mass of Ag can be obtain since it is respectfully submitted that there is no evidence indicating that the percentage by mass ranges of Ag in the solder alloy is critical and it has been held that it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable within given prior art conditions by routine experimentation. See MPEP § 2144.05. See In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In re claim 15, as applied to claim 14 above, Ueshima discloses wherein the solder alloy further comprising: at least one of Al, Ti, Si, Fe, and Ge in a total amount of 0.003% by mass or more and 0.5% by mass or less (see paragraphs [0030], [0074] and Table 1, note that, Ueshima discloses that the solder alloy further comprises 0.1% or less by mass of Fe).
In re claim 16 above, Ueshima discloses a semiconductor package comprising: a substrate (12,22,32,42); a bonding portion (14,24,34,44) comprising the solder alloy according to claim 1; and a semiconductor element (11,21,31,41) bonded on the substrate (12,22,32,42) via the bonding portion (14,24,34,44) (see paragraphs [0151], [0152], [0153] and figs. 1A-D).
In re claim 17, as applied to claim 16 above, Ueshima discloses wherein the solder alloy further comprising: 2% by mass or more and less than 4% by mass of Ag (see paragraphs [0028], [0065], [0066] and Table 1).
Ueshima is silent to wherein 0.1% by mass or more and less than 3% by mass of Ag.
However, as disclosed by Ueshima above, the ranges of percentage by mass of Ag of the solder alloy is overlapping to that of Applicant’s ranges.
Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teaching of Ueshima to optimize the percentage by mass of Ag during routine experimentation so that a 0.1% by mass or more and less than 3% by mass of Ag can be obtain since it is respectfully submitted that there is no evidence indicating that the percentage by mass ranges of Ag in the solder alloy is critical and it has been held that it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable within given prior art conditions by routine experimentation. See MPEP § 2144.05. See In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In re claim 18, as applied to claim 17 above, Ueshima discloses wherein the solder alloy further comprising: at least one of Al, Ti, Si, Fe, and Ge in a total amount of 0.003% by mass or more and 0.5% by mass or less (see paragraphs [0030], [0074] and Table 1, note that, Ueshima discloses that the solder alloy further comprises 0.1% or less by mass of Fe).
Claim(s) 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueshima et al. (U.S. Pub. 2020/0284282), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of JP-6773143-B, cited in the IDS filed on 09/09/2022.
In re claim 19, Ueshima discloses a semiconductor package comprising: a substrate (12,22,32,42); a bonding portion (14,24,34,44); a semiconductor element (11,21,31,41) bonded on the substrate (12,22,32,42) via the bonding portion (14,24,34,44) (see paragraphs [0151], [0152], [0153] and figs. 1A-D); a bonding solder portion comprising the solder alloy according to claim 1 (see paragraph [0028] and Table 1) but is silent to wherein a heat dissipation substrate bonded to the substrate via the bonding solder portion.
However, JP-677143-B discloses in a same field of endeavor, a semiconductor package 100 comprising: a substrate 12; a bonding portion (upper 10); a semiconductor element 11 bonded on the substrate 12 via the bonding portion; a bonding solder portion (lower 10) comprising solder alloy; and a heat dissipation substrate 13 bonded on the substrate 12 via the bonding solder portion (see paragraph [0047] of machine translation and fig. 1).
Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to be motivated to incorporate the technique as taught by JP-677143-B into the semiconductor package of Ueshima in order to enable wherein a heat dissipation substrate bonded to the substrate via the bonding solder portion in Ueshima to be formed in order to obtain an excellent heat dissipation property and an effect of improve the thermal fatigue life of the semiconductor package (see paragraph [0020], machine translation, of JP-677143-b). Furthermore, it would have been obvious because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398 (2007). “If a technique has been used to improve one device, and a person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that it would improve similar devices in the same way, using the technique is obvious unless its actual application is beyond that person’s skill.” Id.
In re claim 20, as applied to claim 19 above, Ueshima discloses wherein the solder alloy further comprising: 2% by mass or more and less than 4% by mass of Ag (see paragraph [0028] and Table 1).
Ueshima is silent to wherein 0.1% by mass or more and less than 3% by mass of Ag.
However, as disclosed by Ueshima above, the ranges of percentage by mass of Ag of the solder alloy is overlapping to that of Applicant’s ranges.
Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art based on the teaching of Ueshima to optimize the percentage by mass of Ag during routine experimentation so that a 0.1% by mass or more and less than 3% by mass of Ag can be obtain since it is respectfully submitted that there is no evidence indicating that the percentage by mass ranges of Ag in the solder alloy is critical and it has been held that it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges of a result-effective variable within given prior art conditions by routine experimentation. See MPEP § 2144.05. See In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1936 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
In re claim 21, as applied to claim 20 above, Ueshima discloses wherein the solder alloy further comprising: at least one of Al, Ti, Si, Fe, and Ge in a total amount of 0.003% by mass or more and 0.5% by mass or less (see paragraph [0030] and Table 1, note that, Ueshima discloses that the solder alloy further comprises 0.1% or less by mass of Fe).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yoon et al. (U.S. Pub. 2015/0115452) discloses a semiconductor package comprising: a substrate 100 (see paragraph [0111] and fig. 15); a bonding portion B11 (see paragraph [0114] and fig. 15); a semiconductor element SC11 bonded on the substrate 100 via the bonding portion B11 (see paragraphs [0120], [0121] and fig. 15); a bonding solder portion B100 comprising the solder alloy (see paragraph [0116] and fig. 15); and a heat dissipation substrate BP100 bonded on the substrate 100 via the bonding solder portion B100 (see paragraph [0116] and fig. 15).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHIEM D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1865. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 AM - 6:00 PM.
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, N. Drew Richards can be reached at (571) 272-1736. 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.
/KHIEM D NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892