DETAILED ACTION
This is the Office action based on the 18044336 application filed March 7, 2023. Claims 1-26 are currently pending and have been considered below.
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 provisi ons of the AIA .
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 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.
Claim Interpretations
Claim 1 recites the term “stimulus responsive polymer (SRP)”. Although the specification discloses in paragraphs 0015-0018] that “(i)n any embodiment herein, the SRP includes a ceiling temperature less than about 300° C. In some embodiments, the ceiling temperature is less than about 60° C., less than about 50° C., less than about 40° C., less than about 30° C., or lower.
In any embodiment herein, the SRP further includes an acid catalyst, an organic acid, a photoacid generator, or a thermal acid generator (e.g., any described herein).
In any embodiment herein, the SRP further includes a metal-binding moiety (e.g., any described herein). Non-limiting metal-binding moieties include optionally substituted heterocyclyl (e.g., an azole), optionally substituted heterocyclyloxy, optionally substituted heterocyclyloyl, thiol, optionally substituted amino, optionally substituted aminoalkyl, carboxyl, optionally substituted carboxyalkyl, hydroxyl, and/or optionally substituted hydroxyalkyl, and others described herein.
In any embodiment herein, the SRP includes a structure of one of formulas (I)-(XIII), (Ia), (Ib), or a salt thereof, as described herein”, and discloses various SRP compounds in paragraphs 0125-0222, these are not considered a definition of this term.
According to Wikipedia, “Smart polymers, stimuli-responsive polymers or functional polymers are high-performance polymers that change according to the environment they are in. Such materials can be sensitive to a number of factors, such as temperature, humidity, pH, chemical compounds, the wavelength or intensity of light or an electrical or magnetic field and can respond in various ways, such as altering color or transparency, becoming conductive or permeable to water or changing shape (shape memory polymers). Usually, slight changes in the environment are sufficient to induce large changes in the polymer's properties”. Since neither the specification nor Wikipedia specifies the amount of the stimuli or the degree of the change; therefore, unless a specific chemical formula is identified, a stimulus responsive polymer is interpreted as any polymer that changes according to the environment it is in.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) 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 15 recites the limitation “The method of claim 12, wherein said removing…”; however, the term “said removing” in claim 15 lacks antecedent basis because claim 12 does not recite any removing. For the purpose of examining it will be assumed that the limitation is “The method of claim 13, wherein said removing…”.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claims 1-2, 5-14 and 16-21 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Shih et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 10770424), hereinafter “Shih”, in view of Chen et al. (U.S. PGPub. No. 20210265313), hereinafter “Chen”:--Claims 1, 6, 7, 12, 13, 18, 19, 20, 21: Shih teaches a method of bonding a first semiconductor structure to a second semiconductor structure (Fig. 10), comprising(i) providing a substrate comprising a first conductive pad 131 (Fig. 4; Col. 5, Lines 3-15), (ii) depositing a filling material 160 including benzocyclobutene (BCB) on the conductive pad 131 (Fig. 5; Col. 5, Lines 16-33; Col. 7, Lines 22-45);(iii) removing the filling material 160 to expose the first conductive pad 131 (Fig. 6; Col. 5, Lines 34-67), thus forming a first semiconductor structure;(iv) repeating step (i)-(iii) to form a second semiconductor structure having a second conductive pad 231 (Fig. 8; Col. 6, Lines 1-38);(v) aligning the first conductive pad 131 to the second conductive pad 231, then bonding the first semiconductor structure to the second semiconductor structure (Fig. 9; Col. 6, Lines 39-58; Claim 3). Shih further teaches that the conductive pads may include copper (Col. 4, Lines 35-50). Shih fails to teach that the filling material 160 including benzocyclobutene includes a polymer. Chen, also directed to bonding a first semiconductor structure to a second semiconductor structure, comprising- forming a first semiconductor structure comprising a first conductive pad 172a surrounded by a first dielectric layer 174, wherein the first dielectric layer 174 is a polymer-based BCB material and the conductive pad comprise copper (Fig. 1E, [0026]);- forming a second semiconductor structure comprising a second conductive pad 272a surrounded by second dielectric layer 274 (Fig. 1F, [0029-0032]), wherein the second conductive pad 272a and the second dielectric layer 274 are similar to the first conductive pad 172a and the first dielectric layer 174 ([0033]);- aligning the first conductive pad 172a to the second conductive pad 272a, then bonding the first semiconductor structure to the second semiconductor structure ([0038], Fig. 1F) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to use a BCB polymer for the filling material in the invention of Shih because Shih teaches that the filling material includes BCB but fails to teach a polymer including BCB, and Chen teaches that a BCB polymer would be effective. It is noted that BCP polymer is a stimuli-responsive polymer that responds to light, as evidence by Wikipedia (see attachment), and that the bonding forms a metal-metal bond between the first conductive pad and the second conductive pad.--Claims 2, 16: Although Shih is silent about the filling material 160 including benzocyclobutene (BCB) on the conductive pad prevents oxidation of the conductive pad, since the filling material completely cover the conductive pad in step (ii), it would have been obvious that it prevents oxidation of the conductive pad.--Claim 5: Since Shih does not teach bonding the first semiconductor structure to the second semiconductor structure in a special environment, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention, in routine experimentations, to perform the bonding in ambient air as the simplest option.--Claims 8, 9: It is noted that during the depositing the filling material 160, the first portion of the filling material 160 fills the spaces between the conductive pads, and the second portion of the filling material 160 is formed on the first portion.--Claim 10: Chen further teaches that a surface cleaning may be performed prior to the bonding ([0038]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention, in routine experimentations, to clean the bonding surfaces of the first structure and the second structure prior to the bonding in the invention of Shih because Chen teaches that this would be effective.--Claims 11, 14: Shih further teaches that the filling material 160 may be deposited by using chemical vapor deposition (Col. 5, Lines 16-33).--Claim 17: Shih further teaches that the filling material 160 fills a groove between conductive pads, wherein the grove may be a lateral width of 0.1 µm (Col. 5, Lines 12-20). Thus, the filling material 160 may have a lateral thickness of about 0.1 µm.
Claims 3, 4, 15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Shih in view of Chen as applied to claims 1 and 12 above, and further in view of McConnell et al. (U.S. PGPub. No. 20120028466), hereinafter “McConnell”:--Claims 3, 4, 15: Shih further teaches that the removing the filling material 160 to expose the first conductive pad 131 is by using CMP (Col. 5, Lines 34-39). Shih fails to teach the removing comprises heat.McConnell, also directed to manufacturing a semiconductor device, teaches that CMP a layer would generate heat ([0002, 0024])Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention, in routine experimentations, to use a CMP process comprising heat in the removing the filling material 160 to expose the first conductive pad 131 in the invention of Shih because McConnell teaches that chemical mechanical polishing a layer would generate heat.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 22 - 26 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: With respect to claims 22 - 26, none of the cited prior arts discloses SRP that comprises the claimed chemical compounds recited in each of these claims
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submission should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS PHAM whose telephone number is (571) 270-7670 and fax number is (571) 270-8670. The examiner can normally be reached on MTWThF9to6 PST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joshua Allen can be reached on (571) 270-3176. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/THOMAS T PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights