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 the Application
Acknowledgement is made of the amendment received on 9/4/2026. Claims 1-6, 8-14 and 17-19 are pending in this application. Claim 1 is amended.
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, 4-6, 8-10, and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2018/0374738; hereinafter ‘Lee’) in view of Yu et al. (US 2020/0043909; hereinafter ‘Yu’).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches a method ([0011]) for bonding a die (130, FIG. 5, [0027]), to a carrier substrate (200) comprising the steps of:
providing the carrier substrate (200), said carrier substrate having at least one interface area on a surface of the carrier substrate (interface area between 221, 222 and 200, [0028]; hereinafter ‘IA’), said interface area being configured to receive one die (IA being configured to receive one of 130);
providing an assembly (100), comprising a rigid transparent transfer substrate (110, [0019]), a light-releasable bonding layer (120, [0021]) on a front surface of the rigid transparent transfer substrate (110a, [0020]) and a plurality of dies (130) attached at one side of the dies to the light-releasable bonding layer (the side of 130 adjacent to 120; hereinafter ‘130R’), the dies having a bonding surface opposite the one side of the dies attached to the light-releasable bonding layer (130 having a bonding surface on the opposite side of 130R; hereinafter ‘130B’), the dies being physically separated from each other (130 being physically separated from each other, [0024]);
aligning the assembly to the carrier substrate with the dies facing the carrier substrate (aligning 100 to 200 with 130 facing 200), so that the bonding surface of one or more dies is aligned with and positioned parallel to respective one or more interface areas of the carrier substrate (bonding surface 130B being aligned with and positioned parallel to the corresponding interface area IA, FIG. 6A);
illuminating one of the one or more dies through the back surface of the rigid transparent transfer substrate (illuminating 130 through 110b, FIG. 6A, [0020]), to thereby release the die and transfer the die to an interface area of the carrier substrate (release 130 and transfer 130 IA); and
forming, after transferring one or more dies to respective interface area of the carrier substrate (after transferring die 130-3 to corresponding interface area IA, FIG. 6B, [0033]), a permanent bond (a permanent bond being formed between transferred die 130-3 and carrier substrate 200 through solder layers 231 and 232, FIG. 7B, [0037]), wherein the permanent bond is established by a bond anneal (the bond anneal causing reflow of solder layers 231 and 232, FIG. 7A, [0038]) between the one or more dies and the respective interface areas (between transferred die 130-3 and corresponding interface area IA, FIG. 7B).
Lee does not teach the method comprising the steps of forming a hybrid bond including both a dielectric bond and a permanent bond.
Yu teaches a method (300, FIG. 48, [0018]) comprising the steps of forming a hybrid bond (forming a hybrid bond at the die-to-wafer level, FIGS. 4 and 45, [0024-0025, 0028]), hybrid bond including both a dielectric bond and a permanent bond (the hybrid bond including fusion oxide-to-oxide bonding between dielectric layers 38 and 238 and direct metal-to-metal bonding between bond pads 36 and 236, wherein annealing causes interdiffusion of copper between bond pads 36 and 236, thereby establishing the permanent metal-to-metal bond, FIG. 45, [0024-0025, 0056]).
As taught by Yu, one of ordinary skill in the art would utilize and modify the above teaching into Lee to obtain and achieve the method comprising the steps of forming a hybrid bond including both a dielectric bond and a permanent bond as claimed, because the hybrid bond provides mechanical attachment through the dielectric bond and electrical interconnection through the metal-to-metal bond at the same bonding interface [0024-0025].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the teaching as taught by Yu in combination with Lee due to the above reason.
Regarding claim 2, Lee in view of Yu teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the illumination step is performed by illuminating the totality of the surface of the die through the back side of the transfer substrate (Lee: illuminating the totality of the surface of 130 through 110b, FIG. 6A).
Regarding claim 4, Lee in view of Yu teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the illumination step is performed by directing laser light at the die (Lee: LB1 is directed at 130 through 110, FIG. 6A, [0031]).
Regarding claim 5, Lee in view of Yu teaches the method of claim 4, wherein the illumination step is performed by applying one pulse of a pulsed laser (Lee: LB1 is a UV pulsed laser beam used to ablate the sacrificial layer, [0033]).
Regarding claim 6, Lee in view of Yu teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the illumination step is performed by one of the following: a UV light source, an IR light source, or an LED light source (Lee: LB1 is a UV laser beam, [0033]).
Regarding claim 8, Lee in view of Yu teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising producing the assembly by the steps of:
providing the transfer substrate (Lee: providing 110, FIG. 1);
producing the light-releasable layer on the front surface of the transfer substrate (forming 120 on 110a, FIG. 2);
producing a layer comprising the plurality of dies on the light-releasable layer (bonding 130a including 130 on 120, FIG. 2); and
performing a dicing step to physically separate the dies from each other by a plurality of dicing lanes (dividing 130a into 130 using B, FIG. 3, [0024]).
Regarding claim 9, Lee in view of Yu teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the illumination step is performed by illuminating the totality of the surface of the die through the back side of the transfer substrate (Lee: LB1 is irradiated through 110b to full area of 130-3, FIG. 6A).
Regarding claim 11, Lee in view of Yu teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the illumination step is performed by directing laser light at the die (Lee: LB1 is directed at 130 through 110, FIG. 6A, [0031]).
Regarding claim 12, Lee in view of Yu teaches the method of claim 9, wherein the illumination step is performed by applying one pulse of a pulsed laser (Lee: LB1 is a UV pulsed laser beam used to ablate the sacrificial layer, [0033]).
Claims 3, 10, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 2018/0374738) in view of Yu (US 2020/0043909), and further in view of Yoon et al. (US 2021/0082717; hereinafter ‘Yoon’).
Regarding claim 3, Lee in view of Yu teaches the method of claim 1, but does not teach the method wherein the illumination step is performed by a first illumination of a location at the center of the die, to thereby release the die at the central location and obtain a physical contact between the die and the carrier substrate at the central location, followed by a second illumination of the totality of the die.
Yoon teaches a method (600, Figure 6, [0082]) wherein the illumination step (630, [0098]) is performed by a first illumination of a location at the center of the die (during an early stage of a bonding process focused on the central region of 10, Figure 5A, [0081]) to thereby release the die at the central location and obtain a physical contact between the die and the carrier substrate at the central location (the center-most area being heated first and forms a U-shaped warpage, [0062]) followed by a second illumination of the totality of the die (during a middle stage of the bonding process in which the entire top surface of 10, Figure 5B).
As taught by Yoon, one of ordinary skill in the art would utilize and modify the above teaching into Lee in view of Yu to obtain and achieve the method wherein the illumination step is performed by a first illumination of a location at the center of the die, to thereby release the die at the central location and obtain a physical contact between the die and the carrier substrate at the central location, followed by a second illumination of the totality of the die as claimed, because selective central irradiation causes a steep thermal gradient across the die, leading to localized thermal expansion and mechanical deformation [0062].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the teaching as taught by Yoon in combination with Lee in view of Yu due to the above reason.
Regarding claim 10, Lee in view of Yu teaches the method of claim 9, but does not teach the method wherein the illumination step is performed by a first illumination of a location at the center of the die, to thereby release the die at the central location and obtain a physical contact between the die and the carrier substrate at the central location, followed by a second illumination of the totality of the die.
Yoon teaches a method (600, Figure 6, [0082]) wherein the illumination step (630, [0098]) is performed by a first illumination of a location at the center of the die (during an early stage of a bonding process focused on the central region of 10, Figure 5A, [0081]), to thereby release the die at the central location and obtain a physical contact between the die and the carrier substrate at the central location (the center-most area being heated first and forms a U-shaped warpage, [0062]), followed by a second illumination of the totality of the die (during a middle stage of the bonding process in which the entire top surface of 10, Figure 5B).
As taught by Yoon, one of ordinary skill in the art would utilize and modify the above teaching into Lee in view of Yu to obtain and achieve the method wherein the illumination step is performed by a first illumination of a location at the center of the die, to thereby release the die at the central location and obtain a physical contact between the die and the carrier substrate at the central location, followed by a second illumination of the totality of the die as claimed, because selective central irradiation causes a steep thermal gradient across the die, leading to localized thermal expansion and mechanical deformation [0062].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the teaching as taught by Yoon in combination with Lee in view of Yu due to the above reason.
Regarding claim 13, Lee in view of Yu and Yoon teaches the method of claim 10, but Lee in view of Yu does not teach the method wherein the first and second illumination are each performed by applying one pulse of a pulsed laser.
Yoon, however, provides a teaching of a laser beam source controller (150) that is configured to control various laser parameters, including laser on/off timing, pulse width, pulse frequency, total output power, and spot size (Figure 3A, [0033, 0058]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ and modify the etching process of Yoon to obtain the method wherein the first and second illumination are each performed by applying one pulse of a pulsed laser as claimed, because using one pulse of a pulsed laser per stage-already optimized by the controller-would be sufficient to achieve effective bonding while also minimizing thermal stress and thermal shock on the die [0081].
Regarding claim 14, Lee in view of Yu and Yoon teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the illumination step is performed by one of the following: a UV light source, an IR light source, or an LED light source (Lee: LB1 is a UV laser beam, [0033]).
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 2018/0374738) in view of Yu (US 2020/0043909), and further in view of Bayless (US 2021/0183803).
Regarding claim 17, Lee in view of Yu teaches the method of claim 1, but does not teach the method further comprising one or more surface preparation steps performed on the bonding surfaces of the plurality of dies while the dies are attached to the transfer substrate.
Bayless teaches a method (350, FIG. 3B, [0046]) further comprising one or more surface preparation steps (planarization operation, [0047]) performed on the bonding surfaces of the plurality of dies while the dies are attached to the transfer substrate (110 with 114, [0040-0041]).
As taught by Bayless, one of ordinary skill in the art would utilize and modify the above teaching into Lee in view of Yu to obtain and achieve the method further comprising one or more surface preparation steps performed on the bonding surfaces of the plurality of dies while the dies are attached to the transfer substrate as claimed, because the surface preparation including cleaning and planarization, serves to stabilize the reconstructed wafer prior to bonding , thereby enhancing alignment accuracy and process precision in subsequence [0048].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the teaching as taught by Bayless in combination with Lee in view of Yu due to the above reason.
Regarding claim 18, Lee in view of Yu teaches the method of claim 1, but does not teach wherein the bonding surface of the die comprises first contact pads embedded in a first dielectric layer that is coplanar with the first contact pads, and wherein the interface area of the carrier substrate comprises second contact pads embedded in a second dielectric layer that is coplanar with the second contact pads, and wherein forming the hybrid bond of the die to the interface area comprises bringing the first and second contact pads together and bringing the first and second dielectric layers together.
Bayless teaches the method
wherein the bonding surface of the die comprises first contact pads embedded in a first dielectric layer that is coplanar with the first contact pads (copper pads formed over 216 and embedded in 320, with the top surface of 216 being coplanar with both the copper pads and 320 after planarization, [0047, 0054]) and
wherein the interface area of the carrier substrate comprises second contact pads embedded in a second dielectric layer that is coplanar with the second contact pads (copper pads formed over 422 of 425 and embedded in an oxide layer surrounding 422, with the top surface of 422 being coplanar with both the copper pads and the oxide layer, FIG. 4, [0054]), and
wherein forming the hybrid bond of the die to the interface area comprises bringing the first and second contact pads together and bringing the first and second dielectric layers together (hybrid fusion bonding operation, an oxide to oxide fusion bond and coper to coper bond).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ and modify the teaching as taught by Bayless to obtain the method wherein the bonding surface of the die comprises first contact pads embedded in a first dielectric layer that is coplanar with the first contact pads, and wherein the interface area of the carrier substrate comprises second contact pads embedded in a second dielectric layer that is coplanar with the second contact pads, and wherein bonding the die to the interface area comprises bringing the first and second contact pads together and bringing the first and second dielectric layers together. as claimed, because forming the copper pads and dielectric layers in a coplanar structure enables precise hybrid bonding-both coper to coper and oxide to oxide by ensuring uniform contact surface.
Regarding claim 19, Lee in view of Yu teaches the method of claim 1, but does not teach the method wherein an additional temporary bonding layer is present between the transfer substrate and the light-releasable layer and/or between the light-releasable layer and the plurality of dies.
Bayless teaches a method (350, FIG. 3B, [0046]) wherein an additional temporary bonding layer (the bond that is degradable, [0056]) is present between the transfer substrate and the light-releasable layer and/or between the light-releasable layer and the plurality of dies (the bond between 110 and 112, FIG. 5).
As taught by Bayless, one of ordinary skill in the art would utilize and modify the above teaching into Lee in view of Yu to obtain and achieve the method wherein an additional temporary bonding layer is present between the transfer substrate and the light-releasable layer and/or between the light-releasable layer and the plurality of dies as claimed, because the bond between the transfer substrate and the light-releasable layer is intentionally designed to be degraded by laser irradiation, thereby functioning as a temporary bonding layer to enable easy detachment after processing [0059].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the teaching as taught by Bayless in combination with Lee in view of Yu due to the above reason.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground of rejection. Response to arguments on newly added limitations are responded to in the above rejection.
Applicant submits, in page 7 of Remark, that
“none of the relied upon references, either alone or in combination with each other, teach or suggest at least the following features recited in independent claim 1 (emphasis added):
aligning the assembly to the carrier substrate with the dies facing the carrier substrate, so that the bonding surface of one or more dies is aligned with and positioned parallel to respective one or more interface areas of the carrier substrate”.
The examiner respectfully disagrees.
Lee’s FIG. 6A shows the bonding surfaces of dies 130 facing, aligned with, and positioned parallel to the corresponding interface areas on carrier substrate 200. Accordingly, the amended requirement that the bonding surface be “positioned parallel to” the respective interface area is taught by Lee.
Applicant submits, in page 7 of Remark, that
“none of the relied upon references, either alone or in combination with each other, teach or suggest at least the following features recited in independent claim 1 (emphasis added):
illuminating one of the one or more dies through the back surface of the rigid transparent transfer substrate, to thereby release the die and transfer the die to an interface area of the carrier substrate”.
The examiner respectfully disagrees.
Lee teaches irradiating selected chip 130-3 through transparent substrate 100 with laser beam LB1, thereby selectively releasing chip 130-3 and depositing it on second substrate 200, while another chip may remain on substrate 100 (FIG. 6A, [0035]).
Applicant submits, in page 8 of Remark, that
“Lee is silent regarding a hybrid including both a dielectric bond and a permanent bond, wherein the permanent bond is established by a bond anneal”.
The examiner respectfully disagrees.
The rejection does not rely upon Lee alone for the claimed hybrid bond. Lee is relied upon for selectively releasing and transferring a die to a respective interface area, whereas Yu is relied upon for forming the claimed hybrid bond. Yu teaches oxide-to-oxide bonding between dielectric layers 38 and 238 and direct metal-to-metal bonding between bond pads 36 and 236 (FIG. 45, [0024-0025]). Yu further teaches establishing the permanent metal-to-metal bond through annealing [0056].
Applicant submits, in page 10 of Remark, that
“this proposed combination of Lee and Yu changes the operation of Lee. In particular, Applicant submits that the hybrid bonding of Yu occurs while both the normal chip 130-1 and the defective chip 130-2 is not selectively separated from the defective chip 130-2 but both are instead de-bonded together as described in Yu”.
The examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicant’s argument assumes that Yu’s entire wafer-level bonding and de-bonding sequence must be incorporated into Lee. That is not the proposed combination. Lee’s selective release and transfer process is retained, and Yu is relied upon for forming the hybrid bond after the selected die has been transferred to the respective interface area.
Moreover, Yu does not teach de-bonding dies 26 from wafer 200. Rather, Yu teaches de-bonding carrier 20 by decomposing or dissolving release layer 22, after which device dies 26 remain bonded to wafer 200 through hybrid bonding (FIG. 5, [0027]).
The particular conditions asserted by Applicant are also not recited in claim 1. Claim 1 does not require that hybrid bonding occur while both a normal die and a defective die remain secured to the transfer substrate or that the dies subsequently be de-bonded together, Instead, claim 1 recited forming the hybrid bond “after transferring one or more dies to respective interface areas of the carrier substrate”. Accordingly, Applicant’s asserted conditions do not distinguish the claimed method from the proposed combination of Lee and Yu.
Applicant submits, in page 10 of Remark, that
“Yoon is silent regarding forming a hybrid bond” and
“Bayless is similarly silent regarding forming a hybrid bonding”.
The examiner respectfully disagrees.
Yoon and Bayless are not relied upon for teaching the claimed hybrid bond; Yu is relied upon for that limitation. Accordingly, the absence of a hybrid-bond teaching in Yoon or Bayless does not identify a deficiency in the rejection.
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Therefore, the rejections are maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure in that Marinov et al. (US 2022/0076983) as a method for selective die transfer and subsequent bonding.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JIYOUNG OH whose telephone number is (703)756-5687. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9AM-5PM EST.
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, EVA MONTALVO can be reached on (571) 270-3829. 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.
/JIYOUNG OH/Examiner, Art Unit 2818
/DUY T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818 9/17/26
Prosecution Insights