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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-5 and 8-20 are pending.
Claims 1, 9-11, 14, 15, 19, and 20 are amended.
Claims 6 and 7 are cancelled.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/23/2026 has been considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/04/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Specifically, applicant’s amendment of independent claims 1, 11, and 15 to include “a second sidewall and a third sidewall opposite the second sidewall, the second sidewall perpendicular to the first surface and to the first sidewall, wherein the first sidewall extends in a second direction between the second and third sidewalls,” and “wherein a first of the laser-treated areas is spaced away in the first direction from the first surface and spaced away in the second direction from a second one of the laser-treated areas, and a first one of the first areas is on the sidewall and between the first and second ones of the laser-treated areas; and wherein each laser-treated area comprises a second nanoporosity, and the second nanoporosity is greater than the first nanoporosity” does not overcome the prior art of record. Obata (US PGPub 2019/0019692) in view of N’Gom (US PGPub 2017/0023841) teaches wherein the laser is applied to form laser-treated areas along singulation lines between die (Obata, [0006-0008]). The rejections of claims 1, 11, and 15 are maintained. The rejections of dependent claims 2-5, 8-10, 12-14, and 16-20 are maintained, accordingly.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 5, 8-11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Obata et al. (US PGPub 2019/0019692), herein Obata, in view of N’Gom et al. (US PGPub 2017/0023841), herein N’Gom.
Regarding claim 1, Obata teaches (Fig. 6) an integrated circuit (IC) device comprising: a substrate comprising a glass core (1, [0019]), the glass core comprising: a first surface (1a, [0019]) and a second surface (1b, [0019]) opposite the first surface; a first sidewall (First sidewall) extending in a first direction between the first surface and the second surface; a second sidewall (Second sidewall) and a third sidewall (Third sidewall) opposite the second sidewall, the second sidewall perpendicular to the first surface and to the first sidewall, wherein the first sidewall extends in a second direction between the second and third sidewalls (see annotated Fig. 8); at least one conductor (3, [0019]) within a through-glass via extending from the first surface to the second surface; a plurality of first areas of the glass core (area surrounding 40, [0030]); a plurality of laser-treated areas (40, [0033]) on the first sidewall, wherein a first one of the laser-treated areas is spaced away from a second one of the laser-treated areas ([0036]), and a first one of the first areas is on the first sidewall and between the first and second ones of the laser-treated areas (laser treated areas are formed along a scribe street line along the sidewalls of the die, [0008])
PNG
media_image1.png
512
484
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Obata does not explicitly teach each first area comprising a first nanoporosity and wherein each laser-treated area comprises a second nanoporosity, and the second nanoporosity is greater than the first nanoporosity. Obata does teach using a laser to treat an area within a glass substrate to create an area where the strength or other physical property of the substrate has been changed, which will start as a division starting point ([0035]).
N’Gom teaches (Fig. 2A) each first area (1, [0033]) comprising a first nanoporosity, each laser-treated area (2c, [0034]) comprising a second nanoporosity ([0034]), and the second nanoporosity is greater than the first nanoporosity ([0034]). N’Gom teaches that creating nanopores (as small as 100nm, [0035]) within the glass substrate allows for creating perforations with desired spatial separation to facilitate separation of the substrate ([0034]). N’Gom does not explicitly utilize the term ”nanoporosity,” however does teach a series of holes/perforations (e.g. 100nm < diameter < 10um) created by laser absorption within the glass substrate ([0034]). For the purposes of examination, the term “nanoporosity” will be interpreted in light of the specification of the instant application which teaches wherein the “pores” within the substrate may be voids on the scale of nanometers (e.g., 100nm-1000nm), described in at least paragraph 0198 of the instant application.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Obata and N’Gom to use a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way. See MPEP 2143.I(c).
Regarding claim 2, Obata in view of N’Gom teaches (N’Gom, Fig. 2A) the IC device of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of first areas (1, [0033]) comprises a first void area percentage (that of untreated glass) and each laser-treated area (2c, [0034]) comprises a second void area percentage (laser treating creates voids in the glass increasing the void area percentage, [0048]), wherein the second void area percentage is greater than the first void area percentage.
Regarding claim 5, Obata in view of N’Gom teaches the IC device of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of first areas comprises a first stress parameter value and each laser-treated area comprises a second stress parameter value, wherein the second stress parameter value is different from the first stress parameter value. N’Gom teaches wherein the laser treated area contains mechanical stress induced by the laser treatment ([0020]).
Regarding claim 8, Obata in view of N’Gom teaches the IC device of claim 1, wherein one of the plurality of first areas (A2) is on the first sidewall and is between the first one of the plurality of laser-treated areas (40) and the second surface (1b)
Regarding claim 9, Obata in view of N’Gom teaches the IC device of claim 1, wherein the glass core further comprises a fourth sidewall (SW2) opposite the first sidewall (SW1) and between the first surface (1a) and the second surface (1b); and one of the first areas (A1) is between the first sidewall and the second sidewall.
PNG
media_image2.png
393
550
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 10, Obata in view of N’Gom teaches (Obata) the IC device of claim 1, wherein the glass core further comprises: a fourth sidewall (annotated Fig. 6 above, SW2) opposite the first sidewall (annotated Fig. 6 above, SW1) and between the first surface (annotated Fig. 6 above, 1a) and the second surface (annotated Fig. 6 above, 1b); and a first width between the first sidewall and the fourth sidewall (annotated Fig. 6 above, W1); and wherein the substrate further comprises a first build-up layer (annotated Fig. 6 above, 4, [0034]), on the first surface of the glass core, the first build-up layer comprising: a third surface (annotated Fig. 7 below, 4a) and a fourth surface opposite the third surface (annotated Fig. 7 below, 1a), a fifth sidewall (annotated Fig. 7 below, SW3) and a fourth sidewall (annotated Fig. 7 below, SW4) opposite the fifth sidewall, each between the fifth surface and the sixth surface, and a second width (annotated Fig. 7 below, W2) between the fifth sidewall and the sixth sidewall, wherein the second width is less than the first width.
PNG
media_image3.png
515
800
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Obata teaches an integrated circuit (IC) device comprising: a substrate comprising a glass core, the glass core comprising: a first surface and a second surface opposite the first surface; a first sidewall between the first surface and the second surface; a first build-up layer on the first surface; a plurality of first areas on the first sidewall, each first area comprising a first nanoporosity; and a plurality of laser-treated areas on the first sidewall, each laser-treated area comprising a second nanoporosity, wherein the second nanoporosity is greater than the first nanoporosity.
Obata teaches (Fig. 6) an integrated circuit (IC) device comprising: a substrate comprising a glass core (1, [0019]), the glass core comprising: a first surface (1a, [0019 and a second surface (1b, [0019]) opposite the first surface; a first sidewall (vertical side) extending in a first direction between the first surface and the second surface; a second sidewall (Second sidewall) and a third sidewall (Third sidewall) opposite the second sidewall, the second sidewall perpendicular to the first surface and to the first sidewall, wherein the first sidewall extends in a second direction between the second and third sidewalls (see annotated Fig. 8); at least one conductor (3, [0019]) within a through-glass via extending from the first surface to the second surface; a plurality of first areas of the glass core (area surrounding 40, [0030]); a plurality of laser-treated areas (40, [0033]) on the first sidewall, wherein a first one of the laser-treated areas is spaced away from a second one of the laser-treated areas ([0036]), and a first one of the first areas is on the first sidewall and between the first and second ones of the laser-treated areas (laser treated areas are formed along a scribe street line along the sidewalls of the die, [0008]). A first build-up layer (4, [0034]) on the first surface; a plurality of first areas of the glass core (area surrounding 40, [0030]); and a plurality of laser-treated areas (40, [0033]) on the first sidewall, wherein a first one of the plurality of laser-treated areas is spaced away from a second one of the plurality of laser- treated areas ([0036]) and a first one of the first areas is on the first sidewall and between the first and second ones of the laser-treated areas (laser treated areas are formed along a scribe street line along the sidewalls of the die, [0008]).
PNG
media_image1.png
512
484
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Obata does not explicitly teach each first area comprising a first nanoporosity, each laser-treated area comprising a second nanoporosity, and the second nanoporosity is greater than the first nanoporosity. Obata does teach using a laser to treat an area within a glass substrate to create an area where the strength or other physical property of the substrate has been changed, which will start as a division starting point ([0035]).
N’Gom teaches (Fig. 2A) each first area (1, [0033]) comprising a first nanoporosity, each laser-treated area (2c, [0034]) comprising a second nanoporosity ([0034]), and the second nanoporosity is greater than the first nanoporosity ([0034]). N’Gom teaches that creating nanopores (as small as 100nm, [0035]) within the glass substrate allows for creating perforations with desired spatial separation to facilitate separation of the substrate ([0034]). N’Gom does not explicitly utilize the term ”nanoporosity,” however does teach a series of holes/perforations (e.g. 100nm < diameter < 10um) created by laser absorption within the glass substrate ([0034]). For the purposes of examination, the term “nanoporosity” will be interpreted in light of the specification of the instant application which teaches wherein the “pores” within the substrate may be voids on the scale of nanometers (e.g., 100nm-1000nm), described in at least paragraph 0198 of the instant application.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Obata and N’Gom to use a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way. See MPEP 2143.I(c).
Regarding claim 14, Obata in view of N’Gom teaches (Obata) the IC device of claim 11, wherein the glass core further comprises: a fourth sidewall (annotated Fig. 6 below, SW2) opposite the first sidewall (annotated Fig. 6 below, SW1) and between the first surface (annotated Fig. 6 below, 1a) and the second surface (annotated Fig. 6 below, 1b); and a first width between the first sidewall and the fourth sidewall (annotated Fig. 6 below, W1); and wherein the substrate further comprises a first build-up layer (annotated Fig. 6 below, 4, [0034]), on the first surface of the glass core, the first build-up layer comprising: a third surface (annotated Fig. 7 below, 4a) and a fourth surface opposite the third surface (annotated Fig. 7 below, 1a), a fifth sidewall (annotated Fig. 7 below, SW3) and a sixth sidewall (annotated Fig. 7 below, SW4) opposite the fifth sidewall, each between the third surface and the fourth surface, and a second width (annotated Fig. 7 below, W2) between the fifth sidewall and the sixth sidewall, wherein the second width is less than the first width.
PNG
media_image2.png
393
550
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
515
800
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Obata in view of N’Gom as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Kashyap (Femtosecond-Induced Refractive Index Changes in Glass, Fiber Bragg Gratings, Volume 2, Pages 503-526, 2010), herein Kashyap.
Regarding claim 3, Obata in view of N’Gom, teaches the IC device of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein each of the plurality of first areas comprises a first refractive index value and each laser-treated area comprises a second refractive index value, wherein the second refractive index value is different from the first refractive index value.
Kashyap teaches wherein treatment of glass using a femtosecond pulse laser results in modification of the refractive index of the treated area (11.1 Light Propagation in Glass, Para 1).
Because Obata in view of N’Gom and Kashyap are both directed toward laser treatment of glass substrates, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Obata in view of N’Gom and of Kashyap in order to write waveguides within the substrate in order to fabricate, for example, three-dimensional splitters and interferometers (11.2 Conclusion, Para 1).
Regarding claim 13, Obata in view of N’Gom teaches the IC device of claim 11, but does not explicitly teach wherein each of the plurality of first areas comprises a first refractive index value and each laser-treated area comprises a second refractive index value, wherein the second refractive index value is different from the first refractive index value.
Kashyap teaches wherein treatment of glass using a femtosecond pulse laser results in modification of the refractive index of the treated area (11.1 Light Propagation in Glass, Para 1).
Because Obata in view of N’Gom and Kashyap are both directed toward laser treatment of glass substrates, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Obata in view of N’Gom and of Kashyap in order to write waveguides within the substrate in order to fabricate, for example, three-dimensional splitters and interferometers (11.2 Conclusion, Para 1).
Claims 4 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Obata in view of N’Gom as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and as evidenced by Iwatsuki et al. (Examination of internal stress by photoelasticity in laser cleaving of glass, Precision Engineering, Volume 64, 2020, Pages 122-128), herein Iwatsuki.
Regarding claim 4, Obata in view of N’Gom teaches the IC device of claim 1, but does not explicitly teach wherein each of the plurality of first areas comprises a first photoelasticity parameter value and each laser-treated area comprises a second photoelasticity parameter value, wherein the second photoelasticity parameter value is different from the first photoelasticity parameter value. However, Obata in view of N’Gom does teach (N’Gom) wherein a thermal and mechanical stress are imparted into the glass substrate at the point of laser treatment ([0020]). Photoelasticity of glass is used to evaluate internal stresses of glass substrates, and thus a laser-treated area would necessarily have a different photoelasticity parameter value to an untreated area, as evidenced by Iwatsuki (Introduction, Para 3).
Regarding claim 12, Obata in view of N’Gom teaches the IC device of claim 11, but does not explicitly teach wherein each of the plurality of first areas comprises a first photoelasticity parameter value and each laser-treated area comprises a second photoelasticity parameter value, wherein the second photoelasticity parameter value is different from the first photoelasticity parameter value. However, Obata in view of N’Gom does teach (N’Gom) wherein a thermal and mechanical stress are imparted into the glass substrate at the point of laser treatment ([0020]). Photoelasticity of glass is used to evaluate internal stresses of glass substrates, and thus a laser-treated area would necessarily have a different photoelasticity parameter value to an untreated area, as evidenced by Iwatsuki (Introduction, Para 3).
Claims 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Obata et al. (US PGPub 2019/0019692), herein Obata.
Regarding claim 15, Obata teaches (Figs. 1-7) a method comprising: receiving a glass panel (1, [0019]) comprising a first surface (1a, [0019]), a first sidewall (annotated Fig. 8 below, First sidewall) extending in a first direction between the first surface (1a) and the second surface (1b), a second sidewall (annotated Fig. 8 below, second sidewall) and a third sidewall (annotated Fig. 8 below, Third sidewall) opposite the second sidewall, the second sidewall perpendicular to the first surface and to the first sidewall, wherein the first sidewall extends in a second direction between the second and third sidewalls (see annotated Fig. 8 below), and a second surface (1b, [0019]) opposite the first surface; forming a first build-up layer (4, [0020]) on the first surface and over a singulation street (2, [0019]), , and the first build-up layer comprises a third surface (4a, [0020]) and a fourth surface (1a, [0020]) opposite the third surface; and treating a plurality of first areas (40, [0033]) within the singulation street on the first surface with a laser (LB2, [0033]), wherein each of the plurality of areas is centered along a cleavage line (not shown, [0035]) coinciding with a singulation street, and the treating the first areas comprises: controlling the laser (LB2, [0033]) to provide a focal point ([0033]) between the first surface (1a) and the second surface (1b), and spaced away from the first surface (see Fig. 5), to form a first one of the first areas (40, [0033]); and controlling the laser to provide a focal point between the first surface and the second surface, and spaced away from the first surface, to form a second one of the first areas, wherein the first one of the first areas is spaced away in the second direction from the second one of the first areas. Obata teaches wherein the laser beam is repeatedly focused to form modified areas along a singulation street ([0035]).
Obata does not explicitly teach wherein a plurality of integrated circuit (IC) die substrates of the glass panel are demarked by a plurality of singulation streets, however it does teach wherein the buildup layers are a stacking surface for semiconductor chips ([0020]) therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include integrated circuit die substrates on the glass panel, for the purpose of providing electrical connection from the substrate to an IC die.
PNG
media_image1.png
512
484
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Obata teaches (Fig. 6) the method of claim 15, further comprising removing a portion (21, [0030]) of the first build-up layer (4) wherein the portion is on the first surface (1a) and over the singulation street (2, depicted in Fig. 3a, [0041]).
Regarding claim 17, Obata teaches (Fig. 7) the method of claim 16, further comprising separating the glass panel (1) into a plurality of the IC die cores ([0038]).
Regarding claim 18, Obata teaches (Fig. 7) the method of claim 17, wherein the separating the glass panel (1) comprises an expansion tape process (7, [0038]).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Obata in view of N’Gom.
Regarding claim 19, Obata teaches (Fig. 5) the method of claim 15, but does not explicitly teach wherein the glass panel comprises a first nanoporosity, the forming of the first one of the first areas produces a second nanoporosity in the first one of the first areas, and the second nanoporosity is greater than the first nanoporosity.
The instant application does not teach a criticality of the first and second nanoporosity, nor does it teach an unexpected result of the claimed first and second nanoporosities.
Obata does teach using a laser to treat an area within a glass substrate to create an area where the strength or other physical property of the substrate has been changed, which will start as a division starting point ([0035]).
N’Gom teaches (Fig. 2A) each first area (1, [0033]) comprising a first nanoporosity, each laser-treated area (2c, [0034]) comprising a second nanoporosity ([0034]), and the second nanoporosity is greater than the first nanoporosity ([0034]). N’Gom teaches that creating nanopores (as small as 100nm, [0035]) within the glass substrate allows for creating perforations with desired spatial separation to facilitate separation of the substrate ([0034]). N’Gom does not explicitly utilize the term ”nanoporosity,” however does teach a series of holes/perforations (e.g. 100nm < diameter < 10um) created by laser absorption within the glass substrate ([0034]). For the purposes of examination, the term “nanoporosity” will be interpreted in light of the specification of the instant application which teaches wherein the “pores” within the substrate may be voids on the scale of nanometers (e.g., 100nm-1000nm), described in at least paragraph 0198 of the instant application.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Obata and N’Gom to use a known technique to improve similar devices in the same way. See MPEP 2143.I(c).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Obata in view of Kashyap.
Regarding claim 20, Obata teaches the method of claim 15, but does not explicitly teach wherein the glass panel comprises a first refractive index value, the forming of the first one of the first areas produces a second refractive index value in the first one of the first areas, and the second refractive index value is different from the first refractive index value.
Kashyap teaches wherein treatment of glass using a femtosecond pulse laser results in modification of the refractive index of the treated area (11.1 Light Propagation in Glass, Para 1).
Because Obata and Kashyap are both directed toward laser treatment of glass substrates, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Obata and of Kashyap in order to write waveguides within the substrate in order to fabricate, for example, three-dimensional splitters and interferometers (Kashyap, 11.2 Conclusion, Para 1).
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 EMILY N FARMER whose telephone number is (703)756-1472. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00.
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, Davienne Monbleau can be reached at 571-272-1945. 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.
/EMILY FARMER/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
/DAVIENNE N MONBLEAU/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights