DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to the amendment filed 2 July 2026. By this amendment, claims 1, 3, 10 are amended; claims 11-20 are cancelled; claims 21-26 are new. Claims 1-10 and 21-26 are currently pending.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2 July 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive; the rejections of the claims have been modified in response to Applicant's amendments to the claims. The amended limitations (and Applicant’s arguments regarding the amended limitations) are addressed by the modified rejections below.
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 1-10, 21-23, and 25-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2014/0291826 A1 to Ishida (hereinafter “Ishida”).
Examiner notes that the rejections of newly added claims 21-23 and 25-26 have been grouped with the independent claims from which they depend, respectively.
Regarding independent claim 1, Ishida (Fig. 9 – annotated below) discloses a package structure, comprising: a die bonding region 1c (¶ 0041); and a first lead region (annotated in Fig. 9; ¶ 0094) extending along a first direction (direction from top to bottom of Fig. 9), wherein the first direction is along a first edge (left edge) of the die bonding region 1c, and wherein the first lead region comprises a first high density lead region (labelled in Fig. 9) and a first low density lead region (labelled in Fig. 9), and the first high density lead region overlaps the first low density lead region in the first direction (Fig. 9),
wherein the first high density lead region comprises a plurality of first leads (Fig. 9), and at least one of the plurality of first leads (Fig. 9) has an outer portion (portion furthest away from 1c) and an inner portion (portion closest to 1c) connected to and nonparallel to the outer portion (Fig. 9).
PNG
media_image1.png
758
814
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Ishida (Fig. 9 – annotated above) discloses the package structure of claim 1, wherein the first high density lead region (labelled in Fig. 9) is closer to an end portion of the first lead region (labelled in Fig. 9) than the first low density lead region (labelled in Fig. 9) is.
Regarding claim 3, Ishida (Fig. 9 – annotated above) discloses the package structure of claim 2, wherein the plurality of first leads (comprised in the first high density lead region labelled in Fig. 9) has a first pitch (pitch of 1a at ends closest to 1c), and the first low density lead region (labelled in Fig. 9) comprises a plurality of second leads having a second pitch (pitch of 1b at ends closest to 1c) greater than the first pitch (Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 4, Ishida (Fig. 9 – annotated above) discloses the package structure of claim 3, wherein the first lead region (labelled in Fig. 9) has an inner region proximal to the die bonding region 1c and an outer region distal from the die bonding region (Fig. 9), and a pitch of the plurality of first leads in the outer region is substantially equal to a pitch of the plurality of second leads in the outer region (Fig. 9 – all leads have substantially equal pitch in the outer region distal from 1c).
Regarding claim 5, Ishida (Fig. 9 – annotated above) discloses the package structure of claim 4, wherein a pitch of the plurality of first leads in the inner region (pitch of 1a at ends closest to 1c in first high density region as labelled in Fig. 9) is less than a pitch of the plurality of second leads in the inner region (pitch of 1b at ends closest to 1c in first low density region as labelled in Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 6, Ishida (Fig. 9 – annotated above) discloses the package structure of claim 1, wherein the first low density lead region (labelled in Fig. 9) is closer to a center of the first edge of the die bonding region 1c than the first high density lead region (labelled in Fig. 9) is.
Regarding claim 7, Ishida (Fig. 9 - annotated above) discloses the package structure of claim 1, wherein the first lead region (labelled in Fig. 9) further comprises a second high density lead region (labelled in Fig. 9) overlapping the first low density lead region (labelled in Fig. 9) in the first direction (direction from top to bottom in Fig. 9), and wherein the first low density lead region is in between the first high density lead region and the second high density lead region (Fig. 9).
PNG
media_image2.png
760
814
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Ishida (Fig. 9 - annotated above) discloses the package structure of claim 3, further comprising: a second lead region (labelled in Fig. 9) extending along a second direction (direction from left to right of Fig. 9), wherein the second direction is along a second edge of the die bonding region 1c, and the first edge is not parallel to the second edge, and wherein the second lead region comprises a second high density lead region (labelled in Fig. 9) and a second low density lead region (labelled in Fig. 9), and the second high density lead region overlaps the second low density lead region in the second direction (Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 9, Ishida (Fig. 9 - annotated above) discloses the package structure of claim 3, wherein an amount of the plurality of first leads is greater than or equal to an amount of the plurality of second leads (“plurality of first leads” and “plurality of second leads” can be defined to meet the claimed amount).
Regarding claim 21, Ishida (Fig. 9 – annotated above) discloses the package structure of claim 3, wherein at least one of the plurality of second leads (comprised in first low density lead region as labelled in Fig. 9) has an outer portion and an inner portion connected to and nonparallel to the outer portion of the at least one of the plurality of second leads (Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 25, Ishida (Fig. 9 – annotated above) discloses the package structure of claim 3, wherein the inner portion of the at least one of the plurality of first leads (comprised in first high density lead region as labelled in Fig. 9) has an end facing the first edge of the die bonding region 1c, an inner portion of at least one of the plurality of second leads (comprised in first low density lead region as labelled in Fig. 9) has an end facing the first edge, a distance between the end of the at least one of the plurality of first leads and the die bonding region is less than a distance between the end of the at least one of the plurality of second leads and the die bonding region 1c (Fig. 9), and a portion of the at least one of the plurality of first leads (comprised in first high density lead region as labelled in Fig. 9) is disposed between the at least one of the plurality of second leads (comprised in first low density lead region as labelled in Fig. 9) and the die bonding region 1c, and wherein, from a top view, the outer portion (portion furthest away from 1c) of the at least one of the plurality of first leads is aligned with an outer portion (portion furthest away from 1c) of the at least one of the plurality of second leads along the first direction (Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 26, Ishida (Fig. 9 – annotated above) discloses the package structure of claim 3, further comprising: a die paddle 1c (¶ 0041) configured to provide the die bonding region 1c, wherein at least one of the plurality of second leads (comprised in first low density lead region as labelled in Fig. 9) has an inner portion proximal to the die bonding region 1c and an outer portion connected to the inner portion, the inner portion of the at least one of the plurality of first leads (comprised in first high density lead region as labelled in Fig. 9) has a first end facing the first edge (left edge of 1c), the inner portion of the at least one of the plurality of second leads (comprised in first low density lead region as labelled in Fig. 9) has a second end facing the first edge (left edge of 1c), a first distance between the first end and the die paddle 1c along a second direction (direction from left to right of Fig. 9) perpendicular to the first direction is less than a second distance between the second end and the die paddle 1c along the second direction (Fig. 9), and a side of the outer portion (portion of leads furthest from 1c) of the at least one of the plurality of first leads is substantially aligned with a side of the at least one of the plurality of second leads along the first direction (Fig. 9 – outer portions of all leads in first lead region are substantially aligned).
PNG
media_image3.png
758
814
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding independent claim 10, Ishida (Fig. 9 – annotated above) discloses a package structure, comprising:
a die paddle 1c (¶ 0041);
a first lead region (labelled in Fig. 9; ¶ 0094) located at a first side of the die paddle 1c, wherein the first lead region comprises a first inner region (portion of leads closest to 1c) and a first outer region (portion of leads furthest from 1c), and the first inner region is closer to the die paddle than the first outer region is (Fig. 9);
a plurality of first leads (labelled in Fig. 9) disposed within the first lead region and extending from the first outer region to the first inner region (Fig. 9), wherein each of the plurality of first leads within the first outer region is parallel to each other (Fig. 9),
and wherein a pitch of the plurality of first leads in the first outer region (portion of leads furthest from 1c) is greater than a pitch of the plurality of first leads in the first inner region (portion of leads closest to 1c); and
a plurality of second leads (labelled in Fig. 9) disposed within the first lead region and extending from the first outer region to the first inner region, wherein the pitch of the plurality of first leads in the first inner region is less than a pitch of the plurality of second leads in the first inner region (Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 22, Ishida (Fig. 9 – annotated above) discloses the package structure of claim 10, wherein each of the plurality of first leads (labelled in Fig. 9) has an inner portion within the first inner region (portion of leads closest to 1c), each of the inner portion has a turning point (Fig. 9 - bend in first leads), and the each of the turning points are arranged along a direction oblique to an edge of a die bonding region of the die paddle 1c from a top view (Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 23, Ishida (Fig. 9 – annotated above) discloses the package structure of claim 22, wherein each of the plurality of first leads (labelled in Fig. 9) has an outer portion within the first outer region (portion of leads furthest from 1c), and the outer portion is connected to and nonparallel to the inner portion (portion of leads closest to 1c; Fig. 9).
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.
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.
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.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishida.
Regarding claim 24, Ishida (Fig. 9 – annotated below) discloses the package structure of claim 3, further comprising: a die paddle 1c (¶ 0041) within the die bonding region, wherein the inner portion (portion closest to 1c) of the at least one of the plurality of first leads (comprised in first high density lead region as labelled in Fig. 9) has a first width along the first direction (direction from top to bottom of Fig. 9), an inner portion (portion closest to 1c) of at least one of the plurality of second leads (comprised in first low density lead region as labelled in Fig. 9) has a second width along the first direction, the first width is less than the second width (Fig. 9), an end of the inner portion (portion closest to 1c) of the at least one of the plurality of first leads (comprised in first high density lead region as labelled in Fig. 9) and the die paddle 1c have a first distance therebetween along a second direction (direction from left to right of Fig. 9) perpendicular to the first direction, an end of the inner portion (portion closest to 1c) of the at least one of the plurality of second leads (comprised in first low density lead region as labelled in Fig. 9) and the die paddle 1c have a second distance therebetween along the second direction, the first distance is less than the second distance (Fig. 9), and a portion of the plurality of first leads is disposed between the plurality of second leads and the die paddle 1c (Fig. 9).
PNG
media_image1.png
758
814
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Ishida fails to expressly disclose: a ratio between the first width and the second width ranges from 0.85 to 0.95. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the recited width range ratio, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F .2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Here, the width of leads and the width ratio are considered result effective variables because they affect the size and footprint of the package. Thus, the ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify the lead widths for the purpose of adjusting the size and footprint of the package while also providing the desired electrical interconnections.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the 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 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 Candice Y. Chan whose telephone number is (571)272-9013. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am - 5 pm ET.
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, Steven B. Gauthier can be reached at 571-270-0373. 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.
CANDICE Y. CHAN
Examiner
Art Unit 2813
30 September 2026
/STEVEN B GAUTHIER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Prosecution Insights