Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicants’ election without traverse of Group I, Subspecies 1, Fig. 11-15 of claims 1, 2, 8, 14-16 in the reply filed on December 8, 2025 is acknowledged.
Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 2, claim 2 should be amended, because it appears that some verbs are missing in claim 2, rendering claim 2 incomplete. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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 1, 2, 8 and 14-16 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.
Regarding claim 1, it is not clear what the limitation ”the first terminal portion comprises the first terminal the tip end portion of which is sandwiched between the first recess portions adjacent in the first direction and the first terminal the tip end portion of which is not sandwiched between the first recess portions adjacent in the first direction (emphases added)" suggests, because the verb and sentence structure appear to be incomplete and should be replaced, and therefore, it is not clear what Applicants claim in claim 1. Claims 2, 8 and 14-16 depend on claim 1, and therefore, claims 2, 8 and 14-16 are also indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
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-AlA) 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.
Claims 1, 2, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being unpatentable in view of Nakabayashiet al. (US 9887335 B2).
Regarding Claim 1, Nakabayashi et al. discloses a lead frame (10, paragraph 92, 24, paragraph 101) of a semiconductor device (20, paragraph 109) comprising:
A first terminal portion (lead portion 11a) in which a plurality of first terminals is arranged side by side in a first direction being a width direction (Fig. 4a),
A second terminal portion (11b) in which a plurality of second terminals wider in the first direction than the first terminals is arranged side by side in the first direction and which is arranged such that a die bond portion or a gap portion in which a semiconductor element is arranged is sandwiched between the first terminal portion and the second terminal portion (FIG. 1E);
PNG
media_image1.png
344
337
media_image1.png
Greyscale
A frame portion (resin member, 85) to which a tip end portion of each of the first terminals and the second terminals is connected, wherein first recess portions recessed along the first terminals in a direction from the die bond portion or the gap portion to the tip end portions are provided in the frame portion, and wherein the first terminal portion comprises the first terminal the tip end portion of which is sandwiched between the first recess portions adjacent in the first direction and the first terminal the tip end portion of which is not sandwiched between the first recess portions adjacent in the first direction.
PNG
media_image2.png
275
187
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Nakabayashi et al. discloses a lead frame wherein the first terminal portion (lead portion 11a) comprises a region in which the first terminals the tip end portions of which are sandwiched between the first recess portion adjacent in the first direction and the first terminals the tip end portions of which are not sandwiched between the first recess portions adjacent in the first direction are alternately arranged.
Regarding claim 14, Nakabayashi et al. discloses a semiconductor device comprising a lead frame (10) having a plurality of first terminals arranged side by side in a first direction and a plurality of second terminals arranged side by side in the first direction;
A die bond portion arranged between the first terminals and the second terminals in a second direction;
A semiconductor element arranged on the die bond portion and electrically connected to the first terminals;
An insulating sealing resin (resin member 18, paragraph 85, 86) which seals the die bond portion wherein the plurality of first terminals has two or more different terminal lengths from junction points with the sealing resin to tip ends (Fig. 4a/4b).
PNG
media_image3.png
578
393
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Nakabayashi et al. discloses a semiconductor device wherein the first terminals include a long terminal and a short terminal length wherein in a plan view (Fig. 4a/4b) the long terminal is an outer terminal which is bent to the third direction in a farther position from the sealing resin than where the short terminal is bent, and the short terminal is an inner terminal which is bent to a direction same as the direction the outer terminal is bent in a position closer to the sealing resin.
PNG
media_image4.png
723
491
media_image4.png
Greyscale
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious in view of Nakabayashiet al. (US 9887335 B2) with respect to 吉原 克彦 (JP 6763998 B2).
Regarding Claim 8, Nakabayashi et al. discloses a lead frame of the semiconductor device but does not disclose a positioning hole arranged in the frame portion. However, 吉原 克彦 (JP 6763998 B2) discloses the first recess portions or the first terminal the tip end portion of which is sandwiched between the first recess portions adjacent in the first direction, or in a position not overlapping, in a direction of the second terminals from the die bond portion or the gap portion to the tip end portions, the second recess portions or the second terminal the tip end portion of which is sandwiched between the second recess portions adjacent in the first direction. It would be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the application to ensure compact design and provide mechanical space for the lead frame by modifying the positioning hole location.
Regarding Claim 16, Nakabayashi et al. discloses a lead frame of the semiconductor device but does not disclose explicit dimensions of the terminal length portions. However, it would be obvious to one ordinarily skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the application to ensure compact design and provide mechanical space for the lead frame by dimensioning the terminal length of the long terminal to be longer than that of the short terminal by portions between 0.1mm and less than or equal to 10mm.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to JOSHUA SCOTT WYATT at telephone number (703)756-1937.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video 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, Joshua Benitez can be reached on (571) 270-1435. 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.
/JOSHUA SCOTT WYATT/Examiner, Art Unit 2815
/JAY C KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815