DETAILED ACTION
This Office action responds to the Amendment file on March 2, 2026, responding to the Office action mailed on December 03, 2025, has been entered. The present Office action is made with all the suggested amendments being fully considered. Applicant added new claims 36-44. Applicant cancelled claims 1-15, 18, 19, and 25-31. Accordingly, pending in the application are claims 16, 17, 20-24, and 32-44.
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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims filed on March 02, 2026 have been considered, but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejections.
The methods/techniques of using 3D printing and selectively curing/non-curing the same or similar liquid compounds have been utilized in many arts.
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 “the optoelectronic semiconductor chip is located in the cavity” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim 33. No new matter should be entered.
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
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.
Claim 33 is 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.
Claim 33 recites “comprising applying an optoelectronic semiconductor chip on the connection carrier before forming the housing body, wherein the optoelectronic semiconductor chip is located in the cavity”. Claim 33 depends on Claim 32 which recites “forming cured layer portions forming a housing body and uncured layer portions for forming a cavity on the connection carrier” and “removing the uncured layer portions to form the cavity”. Since the step of “applying an optoelectronic semiconductor chip on the connection carrier” occurs prior to the step of “forming the housing body” and prior to the step of “forming uncured layer portions for forming a cavity”, it is not clear how the optoelectronic semiconductor chip is located in the cavity. The Specification and the Drawings do not support the “the optoelectronic semiconductor chip is located in the cavity”. Hence, claiming “the optoelectronic semiconductor chip is located in the cavity” raises new matter.
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.
Claims 16-24, 36, and 37 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.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the housing" in lines 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear how “the housing” relates to “a housing body” in line 3.
Claims 17-24, 36 and 37 depend on the independent Claim 16 and inherit the deficiencies identified for Claim 16. Hence, Claims 17-24, 36, and 37 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) second paragraph as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
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.
Claims 16, 20, 21, 24, 32, 34, 35, and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elian et al. (Elian hereinafter) (US 9,818,665) in view of Ebert et al. (Ebert hereinafter) (US 9,592,635).
Regarding Claims 16, 20, 21, 24, 32, 34, 35, and 37 :
Elian (see col.4/l.42–col.5/l.5, and Figs 4-7) teaches
{16} a method for producing a component, the method comprising: providing a connection carrier 100; and forming a housing body 120/150 comprising a cavity (128/136)/152 on at least a part of the connection carrier by a 3D printing method, wherein forming the housing body comprising the cavity comprises: applying at least one layer of a liquid potting compound; selectively curing the at least one layer of the liquid potting compound forming the housing;
{20} curing of the liquid potting compound is carried out by selective exposure with an electromagnetic radiation source;
{32} a method for producing a component, the method comprising: curing portions of each layer by selectively exposing each layer with an electromagnetic radiation source one after another thereby forming cured layer portions forming a housing body 120/150 and uncured layer portions for forming a cavity (128/136)/152 on the connection carrier; and
{34} the housing body is formed through the connection carrier.
Elian (see col.4/l.16 - col.5/l.5) teaches “The semiconductor module 114 may be any kind of integrated circuit device … Any one or all of the components in the packaging assembly 102 … with the exception of the semiconductor module 114, may be formed by a 3D printing process … the package assembly 102 may include multiple semiconductor modules 114 arranged on the mounting surface 104 or stacked on top of one another … a 3D printing process … in which layers of material are sequentially deposited in locations by a 3d print head … gradually releases a liquid material that hardens under different conditions … to harden liquid material include … a variation in radiation, such as light … features of the 3D structure are deposited and hardened at different time intervals”.
However, Elian does not explicitly teach {16} removing an unexposed and uncured liquid potting compound to form the cavity; {32} providing a container holding a liquid potting compound; placing a connection carrier 100 in the container with the liquid potting compound thereby presenting layers of the liquid potting compound at the connection carrier; removing the connection carrier and the housing body from the container; and removing the uncured layer portions to form the cavity; {21} curing of the liquid potting compound is carried out by a laser; {24, 35} the liquid potting compound comprises an epoxide, an acrylate, a vinyl ester resin, a silicone, a titanium dioxide, and/or a co- initiator; nor {37} removing the unexposed and uncured liquid potting compound by gravity.
Ebert (see Abstract, col.3/ll.18-62, col.4/ll.36-45, col.5/ll.37-67, and col.6/ll.28-37 and FIGS. 1-4) teaches “the tank 10 contains a filling of highly viscous photopolymerizable material”, a drum-shaped carrier 6 holding the production platforms 1-4, an exposure unit 12, an ink application station 30, an ink fixing station 40, and a cleaning station 20 and teaches “a layer of liquid photopolymerizable material is defined … the layer is polymerized in an exposure region having a predetermined contour by exposure, a further layer of photopolymerizable material is defined on the polymerized layer … the latter two steps are repeated until a shaped body having a predetermined shape has been formed by the sequence of cured layers with contours predetermined layer by layer …the movement of the production platform between various processing stations is carried out by rotating a drum-shaped carrier … around a horizontal or vertical axis of rotation”, “the production platform is raised relative to the tank bottom after each exposure step and photopolymerizable material … is replenished, … the production platform … is lowered again into the replenished photopolymerizable material …”, “remove all the adhering monomer residues in a cleaning station contactless (for example by suction, blowing) to cure, or polymerize, the coloring components with UV light … Corresponding additives, such as absorbers and initiators, are to be selected according to the preferred wavelength”, “after the solidification of a layer it is preferable for unsolidified coloring material possibly still adhering to be removed in a suitable cleaning step, for example by suction or blowing”, “a laser may be used in the exposure unit, the light beam of which is controlled by means of a mobile mirror”, “the position-selective exposure desired for this layer is carried out by the exposure unit 12, in order to cure it in the desired shape”, and “the construction platform 1 with the shaped body part already formed … by rotating the carrier 6 to a cleaning station 20 in which adhering residues of unpolymerized material, which has not been cured, are removed … carried out mechanically by stripping … blowing or suction”.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teaching of Elian to include the teaching of Ebert to (1) remove the uncured liquid material from the cured/hardened mold to have a clean surface preparing for next process; (2) to use alternative curing source, such as laser instead of other light sources for more precision control and efficiency; (3) to include an initiator in the liquid material to optimize the manufacturing process to reduce material waster and streamline production timelines; (4) to form the packaging assembly by other well-known 3D printing techniques, such as applying a layer of liquid compound/material, curing such layer, lifting the platform separated from liquid container, lowering the platform into the liquid container, and then applying another layer of liquid compound/material and repeating them until desired mold being form by this layer-by-layer method in order to meet the manufacturing requirements; and (5) to anticipate the uncured liquid potting compound being removed by gravity when the packaging assembly platform being lifted and separated from liquid container.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elian et al. (Elian hereinafter) (US 9,818,665) in view of Ebert et al. (Ebert hereinafter) (US 9,592,635) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Wegleiter et al. (Wegleiter hereinafter) (US 8,563,998).
Regarding Claim 17:
Elain in the method of Ebert does not explicitly teach {17} applying at least one optoelectronic semiconductor chip on the connection carrier before forming the housing body.
Wegleiter (see, col.1/ll.50-51, col.4/ll.34-38, and col.11/ll.44 – col.12/ll.10 and FIGs. 7D-7F) teaches “at least one radiation-transmissive cast body which at least partially surrounds the semiconductor chip”, “intermediate film and cast body preferably consist of the same material”, and “the semiconductor chips 3 with associated cast bodies 4 may be singulated, so resulting in a plurality of optoelectronic semiconductor components 1”.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the combined teaching of Elian in the method of Ebert to include the teaching of Wegleiter to specify the semiconductor chips are optoelectronic semiconductor chips since they are commonly encapsulated by cured radiation-transmissive materials.
Claims 22 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elian et al. (Elian hereinafter) (US 9,818,665) in view of Ebert et al. (Ebert hereinafter) (US 9,592,635) as applied to claim 16 or 32 above, and further in view of Sievers et al. (Sievers hereinafter) (US 2020/0016916).
Regarding Claims 22 and 36:
Elian in the method of Ebert does not explicitly teach {22} curing of the liquid potting compound is carried out by using a digital mirror device and {36} removing the unexposed and uncured liquid potting compound by washing the component.
Sievers (see, ¶ [0089], [0132] and [0143] and FIG. 16) teaches “the ‘washing’ step may refer to any non-cured-polymer-removal step that removes non-cured polymer from the plate … may include a traditional solvent (or water) washing step”; “a Digital Light Processor (DLP) 1640 comprising a plane of digital mirrors that is illuminated by a UV radiation source 1660” to cure the photopolymer.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the combined teaching of Elian in the method of Ebert to include the teaching of Sievers to cure the liquid material with known techniques, such as ultraviolet radiation through a plane of digital mirrors to achieve the same purpose of hardening the liquid material and to utilize other known alternative manufacturing process to remove the uncured liquid potting compound by washing to achieve the desirable shape of the cured liquid potting compound.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elian et al. (Elian hereinafter) (US 9,818,665) in view of Ebert et al. (Ebert hereinafter) (US 9,592,635) as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Koo et al. (Koo hereinafter) (US 2020/0076402).
Regarding Claim 23:
Elian in the method of Ebert does not explicitly teach applying at least two semiconductor chips on the connection carrier before forming the housing body, wherein the connection carrier remains free of the housing body in a free region between two adjacent semiconductor chips
Koo (see ¶ [0105] and FIGs. 2A-2B) teaches “the edge portion 206 of the wafter substrate is free from the photosensitive resin forming the insulation layer 232 … This allows the saw street area, where die are diced and singulated, to be free from the encapsulation of the insulating layer … allows the use of a relatively thinner blade to singulate die … facilitate smaller spacing between the adjacent die and more die on a wafer of a given size … a thinner blade for singulation can improve reliability by reducing chipping”.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the combined teaching of Elian in the method of Ebert to including the teaching of Koo to selectively cure the liquid compound to form the housing so that an opening space between adjacent semiconductor die/chip in order to have thinner area for singulation to improve the reliability.
Claims 38, 40, and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elian et al. (Elian hereinafter) (US 9,818,665) in view of Ohara et al. (Ohara hereinafter) (WO 2020/129933).
Regarding Claims 38, 40, and 43:
Elian (see col.4/l.42–col.5/l.5, and Figs 4-7) teaches
{38} a method for producing a component, the method comprising: providing a connection carrier 100; and forming a housing body 120/150 on at least a part of the connection carrier by a 3D printing method, wherein forming the housing body comprises: applying at least one layer of a liquid potting compound; selectively curing the at least one layer of the liquid potting compound; and removing an unexposed and uncured liquid potting compound from the component;
{40} electively curing the at least one layer of the liquid potting compound comprises forming cured portions of the layer to form the housing body and forming uncured portion of the layer to form a cavity to be in the housing; and
{43} curing of the liquid potting compound is carried out by selective exposure with an electromagnetic radiation source.
Elian (see col.4/l.16 - col.5/l.5) teaches “The semiconductor module 114 may be any kind of integrated circuit device … Any one or all of the components in the packaging assembly 102 … with the exception of the semiconductor module 114, may be formed by a 3D printing process … the package assembly 102 may include multiple semiconductor modules 114 arranged on the mounting surface 104 or stacked on top of one another … a 3D printing process … in which layers of material are sequentially deposited in locations by a 3d print head … gradually releases a liquid material that hardens under different conditions … to harden liquid material include … a variation in radiation, such as light … features of the 3D structure are deposited and hardened at different time intervals”.
However, Elian does not explicitly teach {38} the liquid potting compound is titanium dioxide.
Ohara (see ¶ [0063]) teaches “curing a coating liquid containing particulate inorganic materials such as organosilicon compound, tin oxide, silicon dioxide, zirconium oxide, and titanium dioxide”.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the teaching of Elian to further include the teaching of Ohara to use other known curable liquid compounds, such as titanium dioxide for the housing material to form desirable shapes of the housing.
Claim 39 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elian et al. (Elian hereinafter) (US 9,818,665) in view of Ohara et al. (Ohara hereinafter) (WO 2020/129933) as applied to claim 38 above, and further in view of Wegleiter et al. (Wegleiter hereinafter) (US 8,563,998).
Regarding Claim 39:
Elain in the method of Ohara does not explicitly teach {39} applying at least one optoelectronic semiconductor chip on the connection carrier before forming the housing body.
Wegleiter (see, col.1/ll.50-51, col.4/ll.34-38, and col.11/ll.44 – col.12/ll.10 and FIGs. 7D-7F) teaches “at least one radiation-transmissive cast body which at least partially surrounds the semiconductor chip”, “intermediate film and cast body preferably consist of the same material”, and “the semiconductor chips 3 with associated cast bodies 4 may be singulated, so resulting in a plurality of optoelectronic semiconductor components 1”.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the combined teaching of Elian in the method of Ohara to include the teaching of Wegleiter to specify the semiconductor chips are optoelectronic semiconductor chips since they are commonly encapsulated by cured radiation-transmissive materials.
Claim 41 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elian et al. (Elian hereinafter) (US 9,818,665) in view of Ohara et al. (Ohara hereinafter) (WO 2020/129933) as applied to claim 40 above, and further in view of Sievers et al. (Sievers hereinafter) (US 2020/0016916).
Regarding Claim 41:
Elian in the method of Ohara does not explicitly teach {41} removing the unexposed and uncured liquid potting compound by washing the component thereby forming the cavity.
Sievers (see, ¶ [0089] and FIG. 16) teaches “the ‘washing’ step may refer to any non-cured-polymer-removal step that removes non-cured polymer from the plate … may include a traditional solvent (or water) washing step”.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the combined teaching of Elian in the method of Ohara to include the teaching of Sievers to utilize other known alternative manufacturing process to remove the uncured liquid compound by washing to achieve the desirable shape of the cured liquid compound.
Claim 42 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elian et al. (Elian hereinafter) (US 9,818,665) in view of Ohara et al. (Ohara hereinafter) (WO 2020/129933) as applied to claim 40 above, and further in view of Ebert et al. (Ebert hereinafter) (US 9,592,635).
Regarding Claim 42:
Elian in the method of Ohara does not explicitly teach {42} removing the unexposed and uncured liquid potting compound by gravity thereby forming the cavity.
Ebert (see Abstract, col.3/ll.18-62, col.4/ll.36-45, and col.5/ll.37-67 and FIGS. 1-4) teaches “the tank 10 contains a filling of highly viscous photopolymerizable material”, a drum-shaped carrier 6 holding the production platforms 1-4, an exposure unit 12, an ink application station 30, an ink fixing station 40, and a cleaning station 20 and teaches “a layer of liquid photopolymerizable material is defined … the layer is polymerized in an exposure region having a predetermined contour by exposure, a further layer of photopolymerizable material is defined on the polymerized layer … the latter two steps are repeated until a shaped body having a predetermined shape has been formed by the sequence of cured layers with contours predetermined layer by layer …the movement of the production platform between various processing stations is carried out by rotating a drum-shaped carrier … around a horizontal or vertical axis of rotation”, “the production platform is raised relative to the tank bottom after each exposure step and photopolymerizable material … is replenished, … the production platform … is lowered again into the replenished photopolymerizable material …”, “the position-selective exposure desired for this layer is carried out by the exposure unit 12, in order to cure it in the desired shape”.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the combined teaching of Elian in the method of Ohara to include the teaching of Ebert to form the packaging assembly by other well-known 3D printing techniques, such as applying a layer of liquid compound/material, curing such layer, lifting the platform separated from liquid container, lowering the platform into the liquid container, and then applying another layer of liquid compound/material and repeating them until desired mold being form by this layer-by-layer method in order to meet the manufacturing requirements; and to anticipate the uncured liquid potting compound being removed by gravity when the packaging assembly platform being lifted and separated from liquid container.
Claim 44 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elian et al. (Elian hereinafter) (US 9,818,665) in view of Ohara et al. (Ohara hereinafter) (WO 2020/129933) as applied to claim 38 above, and further in view of Koo et al. (Koo hereinafter) (US 2020/0076402).
Regarding Claim 44:
Elian in the method of Ohara does not explicitly teach applying at least two semiconductor chips on the connection carrier before forming the housing body, wherein the connection carrier remains free of the housing body in a free region between two adjacent semiconductor chips
Koo (see ¶ [0105] and FIGs. 2A-2B) teaches “the edge portion 206 of the wafter substrate is free from the photosensitive resin forming the insulation layer 232 … This allows the saw street area, where die are diced and singulated, to be free from the encapsulation of the insulating layer … allows the use of a relatively thinner blade to singulate die … facilitate smaller spacing between the adjacent die and more die on a wafer of a given size … a thinner blade for singulation can improve reliability by reducing chipping”.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the combined teaching of Elian in the method of Ohara to including the teaching of Koo to selectively cure the liquid compound to form the housing so that an opening space between adjacent semiconductor die/chip in order to have thinner area for singulation to improve the reliability.
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.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALICE W TANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7227. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 8:30 am to 5 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, Wael Fahmy can be reached at (571)272-1705. 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.
/ALICE W TANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2814
/WAEL M FAHMY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2814