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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species IV, FIGs. 1 and 3C1-3C3, and claims 1-11, 15 and 17-24 in the reply filed on 11/17/2025 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/17/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings received on 09/29/2022 are acceptable.
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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zeng et al. (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2017/0229963 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Zeng et al., hereinafter referred to as “Zeng,” teaches a package structure (annotated Fig. 10 below), comprising:
an electronic component 10 comprising a conductive wire 13 or 1302 and a magnetic layer 11 and 12 encapsulating the conductive wire; and
a connection element 131 penetrating and contacting the magnetic layer and the conductive wire (paras. [0070] and [0091]).
PNG
media_image1.png
224
535
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 2, Zeng teaches the package structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein the magnetic layer has a first surface 11a and a second surface 12b opposite to the first surface, and the connection element comprises a first contact 131a exposed by the first surface of the magnetic layer and a second contact 131b exposed by the second surface of the magnetic layer (para. [0091]).
With respect to claim 3, Zeng teaches the package structure as claimed in claim 2, wherein the first contact and the second contact overlap in a direction (vertical direction) substantially perpendicular to the first surface of the magnetic layer (para. [0091]).
With respect to claim 4, Zeng teaches the package structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein the connection element comprises an electrical connection portion 131c and a support portion 131d at substantially the same potential (para. [0091]).
With respect to claim 5, Zeng teaches the package structure as claimed in claim 4, wherein the electrical connection portion is configured to electrically connect to a substrate 15 (connection portion 131c is connected to conductor 13a of substrate 15), and the support portion is configured to support the electrical connection portion (para. [0091]).
With respect to claim 6, Zeng teaches the package structure as claimed in claim 4, wherein the electrical connection portion and the support portion are located on opposite sides of the conductive wire in a cross-sectional view (para. [0091]).
With respect to claim 7, Zeng teaches the package structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein the conductive wire comprises a first portion 131c and a second portion (portion between pins 131 and 132) electrically connected to each other by the connection element (para. [0091]). It’s proper to interpret annotated element 131c as claimed in claims 5 and 7 because of the different dependency.
With respect to claim 8, Zeng teaches the package structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein a lateral surface (peripheral surface) of the connection element is covered by the conductive wire (para. [0091]).
With respect to claim 9, Zeng teaches the package structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein the electronic component has a structure which is substantially symmetrical with a horizontal plane (para. [0091]).
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng, as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of Lyoo et al. (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2016/0351321 A1).
With respect to claim 10, Zeng teaches the as claimed in claim 9. Zeng does not expressly teach a modulus of the connection element is greater than a modulus of the conductive wire.
Lyoo et al., hereinafter referred to as “Lyoo,” teaches a package substrate (FIGs. 2, 6J and 6K), wherein a modulus of the connection element 251 (FIG. 6J) is greater than a modulus of the conductive wire 21 (paras. [0049] and [0125]). Connection element 251 made of titanium has greater modulus than copper wire 21. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the modulus relationship between the connection element and the conductive wire as taught by Lyoo to the package structure of Zeng to reduce deterioration of the connection element.
Claims 11 and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng in view of Nelson et al. (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2024/0428981 A1). The provisional application filing date of Nelson predates the earliest effective filing date of the instant application.
With respect to claim 11, Zeng teaches a package structure 10 (annotated FIG. 10 above), comprising:
an electronic component 10 comprising a magnetic body 11 and 12 and a conductive wire 13 or 1302 embedded in the magnetic body; and
a conductive element 131 penetrating the magnetic body and contacting the conductive wire (paras. [0070] and [0091]). Zeng does not expressly teach a conductive gel.
Nelson et al., hereinafter referred to as “Nelson,” teaches a package structure 102 (FIG. 1) comprising:
a conductive gel 114 (para. [0016]). Paragraph [0015] of the provisional application number 63270589 discloses the conductive gel 114. It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the conductive gel as taught by Nelson to the package structure of Zeng to facilitate electronic connection (para. [0016]).
With respect to claim 21, Zeng in view of Nelson teaches the package structure as claimed in Claim 11, further comprising a connection element 132 penetrating and contacting the magnetic body and the conductive wire, wherein the magnetic body has a first surface 11a and a second surface 11b opposite to the first surface, and the connection element comprises a first contact 132a exposed by the first surface of the magnetic body and a second contact 132b exposed by the second surface of the magnetic body (Zeng, para. [0091]).
With respect to claim 22, Zeng in view of Nelson teaches the package structure as claimed in Claim 21, wherein the first contact and the second contact overlap in a direction (vertical direction) substantially perpendicular to the first surface of the magnetic body (Zeng, para. [0091]).
With respect to claim 23, Zeng in view of Nelson teaches the package structure as claimed in Claim 21, wherein the connection element comprises an electrical connection portion 132c and a support portion 132d at substantially the same potential (Zeng, para. [0091]).
With respect to claim 24, Zeng in view of Nelson teaches the package structure as claimed in Claim 23, wherein the electrical connection portion is configured to electrically connect to a substrate (conductor 13b of substrate 15), and the support portion is configured to support the electrical connection portion (Zeng, para. [0091]).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng in view of Nelson, as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Ning et al. (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2022/0406512 A1).
With respect to claim 15, Zeng in view of Nelson teaches the package structure as claimed in claim 11. Zeng in view of Nelson does not expressly teach a central line of the conductive gel is free from crossing a central line of the conductive wire.
Ning et al., hereinafter referred to as “Ning,” teaches a package substrate (FIG. 3B), wherein a central line 306a1 of the conductive gel 306 is free from crossing a central line 315a1 of the conductive wire 315 (para. [0070]). It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the centerlines as taught by Ning to the package structure of Zeng in view of Nelson to provide the required connection while reducing cost.
Claims 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zeng in view of Radhakrishnan (U.S. PG. Pub. No. 2022/0093537 A1).
With respect to claim 17, Zeng teaches a package structure 10 (FIG. 10 above), comprising:
an inductor (coil 13 formed by conductor 1302 and magnetic layers 11 and 12) comprising a conductive wire 13 or 1302;
a first connection element 131 penetrating the inductor and contacting the conductive wire (paras. [0070] and [0091]). Zeng does not expressly teach
a first conductive via electrically connected to the first connection element, wherein a contact interface between the first conductive via and the first connection element substantially aligns with a first surface of the inductor
even though the protruding portion 132e of connection element 131 above surface 11a of magnetic layer 11 could have been interpreted as the “first conductive via” as claimed.
Nonetheless, Radhakrishnan teaches a package structure (annotated FIG. 1 below) comprising:
a first conductive via (annotated 17v “vias, pads, etc. connect the plated through hole 127 to solder balls 131A and 131B” para. [0018]) electrically connected to the first connection element 127, wherein a contact interface 110a between the first conductive via and the first connection element substantially aligns with a first surface of the inductor 125 (para. [0018]).
PNG
media_image2.png
414
476
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have the connection via as taught by Radhakrishnan to the package structure of Zeng to provide the required electrical connection to other electronic components.
With respect to claim 18, Zeng in view of Radhakrishnan teaches the package structure as claimed in claim 17, further comprising a substrate defining a cavity, wherein the inductor is disposed within the cavity (space filled by conductor 1302 of coil 13 and connection conductors 131 and 132), and the first conductive via electrically connects the substrate to the first connection element (Zeng, para. [0091]).
With respect to claim 19, Zeng in view of Radhakrishnan teaches the teaches the package structure as claimed in claim 18, further comprising a dielectric structure filled (dielectric structure 14 filled in connection conductor 132, para. [0081]) in the cavity and spaced apart from the first connection element (Zeng, para. [0081] and [0091]).
With respect to claim 20, Zeng in view of Radhakrishnan teaches the teaches the package structure as claimed in claim 19, wherein a top surface (top surface) of the dielectric structure substantially aligns with the contact interface between the first conductive via and the first connection element (Zeng, para. [0081] and [0091], Radhakrishnan, para. [0018]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. A list of pertinent prior art is attached in form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MANGTIN LIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5729. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 0800-1700.
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, Shawki S. Ismail can be reached at 571-272-3985. 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.
/MANG TIN BIK LIAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837