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 .
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.
DETAILED ACTION
This is an AIA application filed December 13, 2022.
The earliest effective filing date of this AIA application is seen as December 13, 2022, the actual filing date, there being no earlier priority applications.
The claims filed June 8, 2026 are entered, currently outstanding, and subject to examination.
This action is in response to the filing of the same date.
The current status and history of the claims is summarized below:
Last Amendment/Response
Previously
Amended:
1, 2, 6, 7, 9, & 10
N/A
Cancelled:
8 & 11-20
N/A
Withdrawn:
none
N/A
Added:
21-31
N/A
Claims 1-7, 9, 10, and 21-31 are currently pending and outstanding.
Regarding the last reply:
Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 9, and 10 were amended.
Claims 8 and 11-20 were cancelled.
No claims were withdrawn.
Claims 21-31 were added.
Claims 1-7, 9, 10, and 21-31 are currently outstanding and subject to examination.
This is a final action and is the second action on the merits.
Allowable subject matter is not indicated below.
Often, in the substance of the action below, formal matters are addressed first, claim rejections second, and any response to arguments third.
Special Definitions for Claim Language - MPEP § 2111.01(IV)
No special definitions are seen as present in the specification regarding the language used in the claims. Consequently, the words and phrases of the claims are given their plain meaning. MPEP §§ 2173.01, 2173.05(a), and 2111.01.
If special definitions are present, Applicant should bring those to the attention of the examiner and the prosecution history with its next response in a manner both specific and particular. In doing so, there will be no mistake, confusion, and/or ambiguity as to what constitutes the special definition(s).
To date, Applicant has provided no indication of special definitions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims s 1-6, 21-27, and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20230367087 of Mayukh et al. (Mayukh).
With respect to claim 1, Mayukh discloses an apparatus (Figs. 1-6, but particularly Fig. 3), comprising:
a photonic integrated circuit (PIC) device (PIC 320, Fig. 3, ¶ 34) within an opening (right side of Fig. 3) in a glass core substrate (¶ 34, substrate 305, "FIG. 3 is a schematic cross-sectional view of a semiconductor package 300 with an integrated OM in a glass core substrate, in accordance with various embodiments. The semiconductor package 300 includes a substrate 305 having a core 310, one or more dies 315, PIC 320, EIC 325, and an FOC 330a, 330b."),
the PIC device (320) comprising a plurality of first metal bond pads over a surface of the PIC device (¶ 31, "Connections may be routed, for example, through copper pads, copper/metal traces deposited on/in the substrate layer, and through-hole vias, or other suitable interconnects.");
an electronic integrated circuit (EIC) device (EIC 325 and/or die(s) 315) comprising a plurality of second metal bond pads over a surface of the EIC device (325; ¶ 31, "Connections may be routed, for example, through copper pads, copper/metal traces deposited on/in the substrate layer, and through-hole vias, or other suitable interconnects."),
wherein the first metal bond pads are directly bonded to corresponding ones of the second metal bond pads (¶ 37, "For example, vias may be drilled into the glass core 310, allowing copper (or other metal) traces, pillars, and/or wires to couple the EIC 325 to the PIC 320."); and
an optical waveguide (core 310) within the glass core substrate (¶ 36, "In yet further examples, the core 310 of the substrate 305 may be formed into a waveguide and/or lens, configured to guide and optical signal, through the core 310, to the PIC 320.") between a top surface and a bottom surface of the glass core substrate (per Fig. 3),
the optical waveguide (310) comprising a first terminal end edge coupled to the PIC device within the opening (Fig. 3, right side) and a second terminal end exposed at an outer sidewall of the glass core substrate (Fig. 3, left side).
With respect to claim 2, Mayukh as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 1, including one wherein
a second surface of the PIC device opposite the surface is substantially coplanar with an upper surface of the glass core substrate (per Fig. 3),
and wherein the plurality of first metal bond pads and the plurality of second metal bond pads are within the opening between the top surface and the bottom surface (per Fig. 3 and the spatial relationship between EIC 325 and PIC 320).
With respect to claim 3, Mayukh as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 1, including one further comprising:
a microcontroller device (EIC 325 or a duplicate thereof; ¶ 25, "EIC 145 may include electronic components of the OM, such as, without limitation, control circuitry, power circuitry (e.g., electronic amplifiers), filters, converters, and/or other components for managing electrical signals of the OM.” Please note the “control circuitry”.) within a second opening (per Fig. 3) in the glass core substrate (305),
the microcontroller device (325) comprising a plurality of third metal bond pads (additional pads per ¶ 31, "Connections may be routed, for example, through copper pads, copper/metal traces deposited on/in the substrate layer, and through-hole vias, or other suitable interconnects." and ¶ 37, "For example, vias may be drilled into the glass core 310, allowing copper (or other metal) traces, pillars, and/or wires to couple the EIC 325 to the PIC 320.") over a surface of the microcontroller device (325),
wherein the third metal bond pads are directly bonded to corresponding ones of the second metal bond pads of the EIC device (¶ 33, "As with the one or more dies 215, the EIC 225 may be coupled to the interposer 210 and/or the PIC 220 utilizing solder bumps (e.g., Cu bumps and/or microbumps) or through copper bonding (e.g., direct copper bonding and/or hybrid copper bonding).” This disclosure is seen to provide regular connections between different circuit elements/dies.).
With respect to claim 4, Mayukh as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 1, including one further comprising
a bonding interface between each of the first metal bond pads of the PIC device and the corresponding ones of the second metal bond pads of the EIC device.
This inherently exists in order to establish the connections per ¶ 37 and the coupling of EIC 325 to the PIC 320.
With respect to claim 5, Mayukh as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 4, including one wherein
the bonding interface comprises an interdiffusion region of metals from the first and second bond pads.
For product and apparatus claims, when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties and/or functions are presumed to be inherent. Where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 430, 433 (CCPA 1977). MPEP § 2112.01(I).
Consequently, because Mayukh as set forth above as set forth above provides the structure of claim 4, the combination is seen as also providing the same claimed properties or functions of claim 5.
Unsupported features are seen to directly result from the supported/claimed structures. No authority is known by which unsupported or “naked” functions/characteristics/features can be claimed and subject to exclusive protection.
Below, this analysis is referred to as “same product/same features”.
With respect to claim 6, Mayukh as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 1, including one wherein
the PIC device is abutted against a sidewall of the opening in the glass core substrate (per Fig. 3).
With respect to claim 21, Mayukh as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 1, including one further comprising:
a system substrate (¶ 3, "On-package optics modules (OM) and fiber optic couplers (FOCs) are typically placed in a multi-chip module (MCM) configuration, and typically as an isolated module at the edge of a semiconductor package.” The semiconductor package is seen as a system substrate. See also ¶ 54.); and
an electro-optical module coupled to the system substrate, the electro-optical module comprising
the PIC device,
the glass core substrate,
the EIC device, and
the optical waveguide.
The remainder per claim 1, above.
With respect to claim 22, Mayukh as set forth above discloses an apparatus, comprising:
a photonic integrated circuit (PIC) device within an opening in a glass core substrate;
an electronic integrated circuit (EIC) device directly bonded to the PIC device by interconnects between a surface of the PIC device and a surface of the EIC device; and
an optical waveguide within the glass core substrate between a top surface and a bottom surface of the glass core substrate,
the optical waveguide comprising a first terminal end edge coupled to the PIC device within the opening and a second terminal end exposed at an outer sidewall of the glass core substrate.
The remainder, per claim 1, above.
With respect to claim 23, Mayukh as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 22, including one wherein
a second surface of the PIC device opposite the surface is substantially coplanar with an upper surface of the glass core substrate, and
wherein the interconnects are within the opening between the top surface and the bottom surface.
Per claim 2, above.
With respect to claim 24, Mayukh as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 22, including one further comprising:
a microcontroller device within a second opening in the glass core substrate,
the microcontroller device directly bonded to the EIC device.
Per claim 3, above.
With respect to claim 25, Mayukh as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 22, including one wherein
the interconnects comprise a bonding interface between each of first metal bond pads of the PIC device and second metal bond pads of the EIC device.
Per claim 4, above.
With respect to claim 26, Mayukh as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 25, including one wherein
the bonding interface comprises an interdiffusion region of metals from the first and second bond pads.
Per claim 5, above.
With respect to claim 27, Mayukh as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 22, including one wherein
the PIC device is abutted against a sidewall of the opening in the glass core substrate.
Per claim 6, above.
With respect to claim 31, Mayukh as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 22, further comprising:
a system substrate; and
an electro-optical module coupled to the system substrate, the electro-optical module comprising
the PIC device,
the glass core substrate,
the EIC device, and
the optical waveguide.
Per claim 21, above.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims, the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 7 and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Mayukh as set forth above.
With respect to claim 7, Mayukh as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 1, but not one wherein
a transparent polymer is between and in contact with the PIC device and the sidewall of the opening.
Fig. 2 of Mayukh shows an interposer adjacent to a PIC 220.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include an interposer along the lines of Mayukh Fig. 2 in a system according to Mayukh in view of Zhang as set forth above in order to provide additional routing and/or features (Mayukh, ¶ 14). This provides one rationale to combine the references.
Another completely independent and separately sufficient rationale arises as follows. In making the combination (above), prior art elements (listed above) are combined according to known methods (per the references) to yield predictable results (an optical module) would occur as each element merely performs the same function in combination as it does separately. MPEP § 2141(III). This additional rationale is a sufficient, a complete, and an explicitly-recognized rationale to combine the references and conclude that the claim is obvious both under the controlling KSR Supreme Court case and MPEP § 2141(III)(A). Current Office policy regarding the determination of obviousness is set forth in the Federal Register notice at 89 Fed. Reg. 14449 (Feb. 27, 2024).
Further, the combination would then provide:
a transparent polymer between and in contact with the PIC device and a sidewall of the opening.
With respect to claim 28, Mayukh as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 22, including one wherein
a transparent polymer is between and in contact with the PIC device and the sidewall of the opening.
Per claim 7, above.
Claims 9, 10, 29, and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Mayukh as set forth above in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20220216128 of Zhang et al. (Zhang).
With respect to claim 9, Mayukh as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising:
a passive cooling structure or an active cooling device laterally adjacent the EIC device and on the glass core substrate vertically adjacent the optical waveguide.
Zhang discloses a semiconductor device package having thermally conductive pathways that includes (¶ 10):
"a first thermal conduction means for passively conducting heat generated by the integrated circuit die through the encapsulation means, the first thermal conduction means extending at least partially into the integrated circuit die."
Per ¶ 28 re Fig. 2:
"In some embodiments, heat may be conducted away from the heat-generating components (e.g., IC die 102, NAND dies 112) through thermally conductive material 204 and/or thermally conductive material 208 to the surface treatment 210."
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a passive heat sink or cooling structure along the lines of Zhang in a system according to Mayukh as set forth above in order to prevent overheating and/or provide cooling for associated dies/ICs. This provides one rationale to combine the references.
Another completely independent and separately sufficient rationale arises as follows. In making the combination (above), prior art elements (listed above) are combined according to known methods (per the references) to yield predictable results (an optical module) would occur as each element merely performs the same function in combination as it does separately. MPEP § 2141(III). This additional rationale is a sufficient, a complete, and an explicitly-recognized rationale to combine the references and conclude that the claim is obvious both under the controlling KSR Supreme Court case and MPEP § 2141(III)(A). Current Office policy regarding the determination of obviousness is set forth in the Federal Register notice at 89 Fed. Reg. 14449 (Feb. 27, 2024).
Further, the combination would then provide:
a passive cooling structure laterally adjacent the EIC device and on the glass core substrate vertically adjacent the optical waveguide.
U.S. Patent No. 5403783 of Nakanishi et al. (Nakanishi) is seen to provide an active cooling device along the same lines as Zhang, above.
With respect to claim 10, Mayukh as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 1, but not one further comprising:
an encapsulation material laterally adjacent the EIC device and on the glass core substrate,
the encapsulation material comprising a surface opposite the glass core substrate that is substantially coplanar with a second surface of the EIC device opposite the surface of the EIC device, wherein the encapsulation material has an outer sidewall aligned with the outer sidewall of the glass core substrate.
Zhang discloses a semiconductor device package having thermally conductive pathways that includes encapsulation of a semiconductor device package:
¶ 20, "As further illustrated in FIG. 1, one or more components of semiconductor device package 100 are encapsulated by an encapsulant 120, which helps protect the one or more components."
As shown in Fig. 1, the encapsulation layer/encapsulant 120 is highly planar.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to encapsulate the resulting device along the lines of Zhang in a system according to Mayukh as set forth above in order to protect the enclosed components/structures. This provides one rationale to combine the references.
Another completely independent and separately sufficient rationale arises as follows. In making the combination (above), prior art elements (listed above) are combined according to known methods (per the references) to yield predictable results (an optical module) would occur as each element merely performs the same function in combination as it does separately. MPEP § 2141(III). This additional rationale is a sufficient, a complete, and an explicitly-recognized rationale to combine the references and conclude that the claim is obvious both under the controlling KSR Supreme Court case and MPEP § 2141(III)(A). Current Office policy regarding the determination of obviousness is set forth in the Federal Register notice at 89 Fed. Reg. 14449 (Feb. 27, 2024).
Further, the foregoing complete combination would then provide:
an encapsulation material laterally adjacent the EIC device and on the glass core substrate,
the encapsulation material comprising a surface opposite the glass core substrate that is substantially coplanar with a second surface of the EIC device opposite the surface of the EIC device.
Moreover, as the encapsulation material 120 of Zhang has an outer sidewall aligned with the outer sidewall of the substrate 104, per the obviousness analysis above, it would also be obvious wherein the encapsulation material has an outer sidewall aligned with the outer sidewall of the glass core substrate.
With respect to claim 29, Mayukh in view of Zhang as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 22, including one further comprising:
a passive cooling structure or an active cooling device laterally adjacent the EIC device and on the glass core substrate vertically adjacent the optical waveguide.
Per claim 9, above.
With respect to claim 30, Mayukh in view of Zhang as set forth above discloses the apparatus of claim 22, further comprising:
an encapsulation material laterally adjacent the EIC device and on the glass core substrate,
the encapsulation material comprising a surface opposite the glass core substrate that is substantially coplanar with a second surface of the EIC device opposite the surface of the EIC device,
wherein the encapsulation material has an outer sidewall aligned with the outer sidewall of the glass core substrate.
Per claim 10, above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 8, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive and the claim rejections are not rebutted.
Applicant argues that:
Independent claim 1 is currently amended to recite "an optical waveguide within the glass core substrate between a top surface and a bottom surface of the glass core substrate, the optical waveguide comprising a first terminal end edge coupled to the PIC device within the opening and a second terminal end exposed at an outer sidewall of the glass core substrate". Support for these amendments may be found at least at p. 9, 11. 4-17 of the Specification as Filed. Mayukh fails to disclose or render obvious an optical waveguide within a glass core substrate having one terminal end edge coupled to the PIC device and another exposed at an outer wall of the glass core substrate, as claimed. Mayukh discusses a PIC (320) in a core (310) of a substrate (305) formed of optically transmissive glass. (Mayukh, FIG. 3 and [0034] & [0035]). A fiber optic coupler (FOC, 330a,b) may be on a top or side of the substrate, and the core may be formed into a waveguide and/or lens. (Mayukh, FIG. 3 [0036]). However, there is no indication the waveguide formed in the core would extend from a sidewall of the core to edge couple to the PIC. Therefore, independent claim 1 as amended is patentable over Mayukh. Claims 2-6 are patentable over Mayukh based at least on their dependencies.
Examiner response: While Applicant argues that "there is no indication the waveguide formed in the core would extend from a sidewall of the core to edge couple to the PIC.", Mayukh (¶ 35) states that "In some examples, the PIC is embedded inside a transmissive glass core 310 of the substrate 305, and configured to carry an optical signal to and/or from the PIC 320."
When coupled with the disclosure that "In yet further examples, the core 310 of the substrate 305 may be formed into a waveguide and/or lens, configured to guide and optical signal, through the core 310, to the PIC 320.", it is clear that Mayukh indeed does disclose or render obvious an optical waveguide within a glass core substrate having one terminal end edge coupled to the PIC device and another exposed at an outer wall of the glass core substrate, as claimed. Mayukh Fig. 3 shows this clearly.
Applicant's arguments with regards to the remaining claims all rely upon the arguments set forth above. Consequently, these remaining arguments as seen as being addressed by the examiner's corresponding remarks.
Applicant’s remaining arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references. As such, the examiner makes no remarks regarding them.
Conclusion
Applicant’s publication US 20240194657 A1 published June 13, 2024 was previously cited.
Previously-cited US 20230091834 A1 of Angoua et al. filed September 22, 2021 and published March 23, 2023 provides that (¶ 10) "FIG. 8 illustrates a cross-section side view of a package that includes a PIC optically coupled with an optical waveguide within a glass core that includes multiple dies on top of the glass core, in accordance with various embodiments."
No new art is cited.
Applicant's amendment necessitated any 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW JORDAN whose telephone number is (571) 270-1571. The examiner can normally be reached most days 1000-1800 PACIFIC TIME ZONE (messages are returned).
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. While examiner does not examine over the phone (see 37 C.F.R. § 1.2), examiner is glad to clarify or discuss issues so long as it forwards prosecution.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Thomas (Tom) HOLLWEG can be reached at (571) 270-1739. 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.
/Andrew Jordan/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2874
V: (571) 270-1571 (Pacific time)
F: (571) 270-2571
August 22, 2026
Prosecution Insights