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 .
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 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park (US Pub. No.: 2021/0375551), and further in view of Fujita (US Pub. No. 2020/00275558).
Claim 1. Park discloses in Fig. 2H, a package core, comprising:
a core substrate (202) comprising glass;
a cavity (222, 224) into the core substrate; and
a capacitor lining sidewalls of the cavity, wherein the capacitor comprises:
a first layer (210);
a dielectric layer (212) over the first layer; and
a second layer (214) over the dielectric layer.
Park fails to disclose:
the core substrate comprising glass.
However, Fujita discloses:
a core substrate (10) comprising glass [0045].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim 2. Park illustrates in Fig. 2H, wherein the capacitor has a U-shaped cross-section.
Claim 3. Park illustrates in Fig. 2H, wherein sidewalls of the cavity are vertical.
Claim 4. Park fails to disclose, wherein sidewalls of the cavity are sloped.
However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the sidewalls of the cavity sloped, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Claim 5. Park discloses, further comprising: a seed layer (208) between the core substrate and the first layer.
Claim 6. Park discloses, wherein the first layer and the second layer comprise ruthenium, ruthenium and oxygen, or tungsten [0036] and [0040].
Claim 7. Park fails to disclose, wherein the dielectric layer comprises titanium and oxygen, aluminum and oxygen, or hafnium and oxygen.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim 8. Park discloses, further comprising: a via through the core substrate, wherein the via is electrically coupled to the capacitor.
Claim 9. Park fails to disclose, wherein the via has an hourglass shaped cross-section.
However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the sidewalls of the cavity sloped, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the shape of a component. A change in shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Claim 10. Park discloses, wherein the package core is part of a computing system for a personal computer, a server, a mobile device, a tablet, or an automobile.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park.
Claim 14. Park fails to disclose, wherein the dielectric layer comprises titanium and oxygen, aluminum and oxygen, or hafnium and oxygen.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
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.
Claims 11-13 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park.
Claim 11. Park discloses in Fig. 2H, package substrate, comprising:
a core (202);
a buildup layer (206, 208) over the core; and
a corrugated capacitor within the buildup layer, wherein the corrugated capacitor comprises:
a plurality of trenches (222, 224) into the core, wherein the trenches have sidewall surfaces; and
a capacitor structure (210, 212, 214) lining the sidewall surfaces of the plurality of trenches.
Claim 12. Park discloses, further comprising: an underlying pad (240), wherein the corrugated capacitor contacts the underlying pad at more than one location.
Claim 13. Park discloses, wherein the corrugated capacitor comprises a dielectric layer (212) between a first layer and a second layer.
Claim 15. Park discloses, wherein the plurality of trenches comprises three or more trenches.
Claims 16 and 20. Park discloses, wherein the package core is part of a computing system for a personal computer, a server, a mobile device, a tablet, or an automobile.
Claim 17. Park discloses in Fig. 2H, a package substrate, comprising:
a layer (202) comprising a dielectric;
a scaffold (photoresist) over the layer; and a capacitor over the scaffold, wherein the capacitor comprises:
a first layer (210);
a dielectric layer (212) over the first layer; and
a second layer (214) over the dielectric layer.
Claim 18. Park discloses, wherein the scaffold is a photo-imageable dielectric (PID).
Claim 19. Park discloses, wherein the scaffold has substantially vertical sidewalls.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARVIN PAYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7435. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday, Fridays off.
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, Zandra Smith can be reached on (571)272-2429. 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.
/MARVIN PAYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899