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 .
This OA is in response to the amendment filled on 1/14/2026 that has been entered, wherein claims 1-16 and 21-24 are pending and claims 17-20 are canceled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The objection to claims 3, 5-11 and 16 is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendment of 1/14/2026.
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.
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 1, 3-4, 12-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin (US 2002/0053745) of record in view of Koopman et al. (US 5,374,893 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Lin teaches a method of manufacturing a package(Figs. 7-10), wherein the method comprises:
applying a metallic connection structure(112, 122, ¶0021), which comprises a solder(¶0112) or sinter material, on a sacrificial carrier(120, ¶0021);
mounting an electronic component(110, ¶0017) on the metallic connection structure(112, 122, ¶0021);
encapsulating(Fig. 8) at least part of the electronic component(110, ¶0017) and of the metallic connection structure(112, 122, ¶0021) by an encapsulant(110, ¶0022); and
thereafter removing(Fig. 9) the sacrificial carrier(120, ¶0021) to thereby expose at least part of the metallic connection structure(112, 122, ¶0021).
Lin is not relied on to teach the metallic connection structure(112, 122, ¶0021) is applied on the sacrificial carrier(120, ¶0021) prior to mounting the electronic component(110, ¶0017) on the metallic connection structure(112, 122, ¶0021).
Koopman teaches a method of manufacturing a package(Fig. 2) wherein the metallic connection structure(15, col. 8, lines 30-39) is applied on the sacrificial carrier(20, col. 8, lines 30-39) prior to mounting the electronic component(11, col. 8, lines 30-39) on the metallic connection structure(15, col. 8, lines 30-39). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Lin so that the metallic connection structure is applied on the sacrificial carrier prior to mounting the electronic component on the metallic connection structure, as taught by Koopman, in order to allows a manufacturer to use both bumped and unbumped electronic component in the same burn-in/test and packaging process and to allows solder bumps to be placed on electronic components without exposing either the electronic components or next level package to destructive plating channels, subetch bath, cleaning solutions, etc.(col. 9, line 54-col. 10, line 12).
Regarding claim 3, Lin teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises providing the sacrificial carrier(120, ¶0021) as one of the group comprising a strip, a plate(¶0021), and a frame.
Regarding claim 4, Lin teaches the method according to claim 1 wherein the method comprises providing the sacrificial carrier(120, ¶0021) comprising a metal(¶0021) and/or a ceramic.
Regarding claim 12, Lin teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises, before the encapsulating(Fig. 8), forming a dielectric film(124, ¶0019) in an exposed surface region(¶0019, wherein the solder masked is formed and then removed from the exposed area of the metallic connection structure 122) of the metallic connection structure(112, 122, ¶0021).
Regarding claim 13, Lin teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises removing the sacrificial carrier(120, ¶0021) by at least one of the group comprising selective etching(¶0023), grinding, releasing and peeling off.
Regarding claim 15, Lin teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises applying a surface finish(140, ¶0024) selectively to an exposed surface region of the metallic connection structure(112, 122, ¶0021) after the removing(Fig. 9).
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-9, 13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hin et al. (US 2012/0309130 A1) of record in view of Koopman et al. (US 5,374,893 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hin teaches a method of manufacturing a package(Figs. 5-9), wherein the method comprises:
applying a metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037), which comprises a solder(126, ¶0037) or sinter material, on a sacrificial carrier(200, ¶0033);
mounting an electronic component(110, ¶0025, ¶0023) on the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037);
encapsulating at least part of the electronic component(110, ¶0025, ¶0023) and of the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037) by an encapsulant(400, ¶0044); and
thereafter removing(¶0044) the sacrificial carrier(200, ¶0033) to thereby expose(¶0045) at least part of the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037).
Hin is not relied on to teach the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037) is applied on the sacrificial carrier(200, ¶0033) prior to mounting the electronic component(110, ¶0025, ¶0023) on the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037).
Koopman teaches a method of manufacturing a package(Fig. 2) wherein the metallic connection structure(15, col. 8, lines 30-39) is applied on the sacrificial carrier(20, col. 8, lines 30-39) prior to mounting the electronic component(11, col. 8, lines 30-39) on the metallic connection structure(15, col. 8, lines 30-39). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Hin so that the metallic connection structure is applied on the sacrificial carrier prior to mounting the electronic component on the metallic connection structure, as taught by Koopman, in order to allows a manufacturer to use both bumped and unbumped electronic component in the same burn-in/test and packaging process and to allows solder bumps to be placed on electronic components without exposing either the electronic components or next level package to destructive plating channels, subetch bath, cleaning solutions, etc.(col. 9, line 54-col. 10, line 12).
Regarding claim 2, Hin teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises providing the sacrificial carrier(200, ¶0033) to be temperature stable at least up to 300℃(¶0036, wherein the sacrificial carrier is heated to about 350℃ and remains stable).
Regarding claim 4, Hin teaches the method according to claim 1 wherein the method comprises providing the sacrificial carrier(200, ¶0033) comprising a metal(¶0034) and/or a ceramic.
Regarding claim 5, Hin teaches the method according to claim 1, but is not relied on to teach the method comprises applying the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037) by at least one of the group comprising by at least one of the group comprising depositing and printing.
Koopman teaches a method of manufacturing a package(Fig. 2) wherein the method comprises applying the metallic connection structure(15, col. 8, lines 30-39) by at least one of the group comprising by at least one of the group comprising depositing(15, col. 8, lines 30-39) and printing. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Hin so that the method comprises applying the metallic connection structure by at least one of the group comprising by at least one of the group comprising depositing and printing, as taught by Koopman, in order to allows a manufacturer to use both bumped and unbumped electronic component in the same burn-in/test and packaging process and to allows solder bumps to be placed on electronic components without exposing either the electronic components or next level package to destructive plating channels, subetch bath, cleaning solutions, etc.(col. 9, line 54-col. 10, line 12).
Regarding claim 6, Hin teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises mounting the electronic component(110, ¶0025, ¶0023) on the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037) by at least one component contact(122, ¶0027).
Regarding claim 8, Hin teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises re-adjusting a profile(Fig. 5-6), in particular a shape(¶0037, wherein the shape of solder 126 changes after melting), of the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037) after the mounting(Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 9, Hin teaches the method according to claim 8, wherein the method comprises re-adjusting the profile(Fig. 5-6) of the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037) by at least one of a group comprising a curing process, a reflow process, and diffusion bonding(¶0037, wherein the solder 126 is melted and bonds with diffused material of 350).
Regarding claim 13, Hin teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises removing(¶0044) the sacrificial carrier(200, ¶0033) by at least one of a group comprising selective etching, grinding(¶0045), releasing and peeling off.
Regarding claim 15, Hin teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the method comprises applying a surface finish(420, ¶0046) selectively to an exposed surface region of the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037) after the removing(¶0044).
Claims 7 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hin et al. (US 2012/0309130 A1) of record and Koopman et al. (US 5,374,893 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Dias et al. (US 2003/0234277 A1) of record.
Regarding claim 7, Hin, in view of Koopman teaches the method according to claim 6, but is not relied on to teach the method comprises inserting the at least one component contact into the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037), in particular with direct physical contact between at least part of a sidewall of a respective component contact and the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037).
Dias teaches a method of manufacturing a package(Fig. 4) wherein the method comprises inserting the at least one component contact(122, ¶0020) into the metallic connection structure(116, 124, ¶0021), in particular with direct physical contact between at least part of a sidewall of a respective component contact(122, ¶0020) and the metallic connection structure(116, 124, ¶0021). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Hin, so that the method comprises inserting the at least one component contact into the metallic connection structure, in particular with direct physical contact between at least part of a sidewall of a respective component contact and the metallic connection structure, as taught by Dias, so that the at least one component contact is less likely to translate the stresses due to CTE mismatch to the thin films which form at least a portion of the integrated circuitry of the electronic component, which, in turn, substantially reduces or eliminates delamination and cracking of the thin films and to improve joint fatigue resistance due to the interfaces between the solder and the at least one component contact acting as crack arresters(¶0022).
Regarding claim 22, Hin in view of Koopman, teaches the method according to claim 6, wherein the at least one component contact(122, ¶0027) comprises at least one of a group comprising at least one metal pillar(¶0027), at least one metal bump, at least one metal ball, and at least one metal pad.
Hin and Koopman are not relied on to teach the method comprises inserting the at least one component contact into the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037), in particular with direct physical contact between at least part of a sidewall of a respective component contact and the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037).
Dias teaches a method of manufacturing a package(Fig. 4) wherein the method comprises inserting the at least one component contact(122, ¶0020) into the metallic connection structure(116, 124, ¶0021), in particular with direct physical contact between at least part of a sidewall of a respective component contact(122, ¶0020) and the metallic connection structure(116, 124, ¶0021). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Hin, so that the method comprises inserting the at least one component contact into the metallic connection structure, in particular with direct physical contact between at least part of a sidewall of a respective component contact and the metallic connection structure, as taught by Dias, so that the at least one component contact is less likely to translate the stresses due to CTE mismatch to the thin films which form at least a portion of the integrated circuitry of the electronic component, which, in turn, substantially reduces or eliminates delamination and cracking of the thin films and to improve joint fatigue resistance due to the interfaces between the solder and the at least one component contact acting as crack arresters(¶0022).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hin et al. (US 2012/0309130 A1) of record in view of Wu et al. (US 2012/0077054 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hin teaches a method of manufacturing a package(Figs. 5-9), wherein the method comprises:
applying a metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037), which comprises a solder(126, ¶0037) or sinter material, on a sacrificial carrier(200, ¶0033);
mounting an electronic component(110, ¶0025, ¶0023) on the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037);
encapsulating at least part of the electronic component(110, ¶0025, ¶0023) and of the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037) by an encapsulant(400, ¶0044); and
thereafter removing(¶0044) the sacrificial carrier(200, ¶0033) to thereby expose(¶0045) at least part of the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037).
Hi is not relied on to teach wherein the method comprises forming an intermetallic compound in the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037) at an interface to the sacrificial carrier(200, ¶0033).
Wu teaches a method of manufacturing a package(Fig. 5) wherein the method comprises forming an intermetallic compound(intermetallics, not illustrated, ¶0021) in the metallic connection structure(42, ¶0021) at an interface(40, ¶0021) to the sacrificial carrier(46). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Hin, so that the method comprises forming an intermetallic compound in the metallic connection structure at an interface to the sacrificial carrier, as taught by Wu, in order to form high quality solder joints(¶0022).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hin et al. (US 2012/0309130 A1) of record and Koopman et al. (US 5,374,893 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Yamashita et al. (US 2009/0223705 A1) of record.
Regarding claim 21, Hin, in view of Koopman teaches the method according to claim 1, but is not relied on to teach the method comprises applying the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037) by at least one of the group comprising stencil printing, screen printing or inkjet printing.
Yamashita teaches a method of manufacturing a package(Fig. 8) wherein the method comprises applying the metallic connection structure(52, 53, ¶0007) by at least one of the group comprising stencil printing, screen printing(¶0007) or inkjet printing. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Hin, so that the method comprises applying the metallic connection structure by at least one of the group comprising stencil printing, screen printing or inkjet printing, as taught by Yamashita, in order to use a method superior in its productivity(¶0011).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hin et al. (US 2012/0309130 A1) of record and Koopman et al. (US 5,374,893 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Meyer et al. (US 2010/001396 A1)
Regarding claim 16, Hin, in view of Koopman, teaches the method according to claim 1, but is not relied on to teach the method comprises forming a patterned dielectric protection layer for exposing at least one defined surface area of the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037) or of a surface finish(420, ¶0046) on the metallic connection structure(350, 126, ¶0035, ¶0037).
Meyer teaches a method of manufacturing a package(Fig. 3) wherein the method comprises forming a patterned dielectric protection layer(28, ¶0035) for exposing at least one defined surface area of the metallic connection structure(24, ¶0029) or of a surface finish(13, ¶0029) on the metallic connection structure(24, ¶0029). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Hin, so that the method comprises forming a patterned dielectric protection layer, in particular a solder resist, for exposing at least one defined surface area of the metallic connection structure or of a surface finish on the metallic connection structure, as taught by Meyer, in order to prevent solder from bridging between the conductor tracks and creating short circuits(¶0035).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10, 14 and 23 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding independent claim 10, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious the claimed subject matter of the instant application as a whole either taken alone or in combination, in particular, prior art of record does not teach “the method comprises re-adjusting the profile of the metallic connection structure by locally thickening the metallic connection structure selectively in a connection region to the at least one electronic component”.
Claim 23 depends on claim 10 and is allowed.
Claim 14 now has been rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim. Please see the office action of 10/30/2025 for reasons for allowance.
Claim 24 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding dependent claim 24, the prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious the claimed subject matter of the instant application as a whole either taken alone or in combination, in particular, prior art of record does not teach “forming the intermetallic compound comprises forming the intermetallic compound by diffusion or migration of material of the sacrificial carrier into the metallic connection structure.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 LAURA DYKES whose telephone number is (571)270-3161. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 am-5 pm.
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, N. Drew Richards can be reached at 571-272-1736. 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.
/LAURA M DYKES/Examiner, Art Unit 2892
Prosecution Insights