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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on 07/14/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 2, 4-5, 7-14, 17-20, 58-59 and newly added claims 60-62 remain pending in the application, out of which claims 3, 7-13 and 58 have been withdrawn. Claims 6, 15-16 and 21-57 have been cancelled.
Applicants’ amendments have overcome every 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 04/16/2026.
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.
Claim 62 is 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.
Claim 62 recites the limitation “the coolant chamber”. There is no antecedent basis for this limitation. For the purpose of examination and in light of the written description, claim 62 will be interpreted as: A device package comprising: a semiconductor device; a manifold attached to a backside of the semiconductor device; and a sonic transducer attached to the manifold, wherein: the manifold comprises a top portion, a waveguide extending downwardly from the top portion, and a coolant chamber volume; the coolant chamber volume is configured to receive coolant so that the coolant directly contacts the backside of the semiconductor device; the sonic transducer is attached to the top portion; and sonic vibrations generated by the sonic transducer affect the coolant directly contacting the backside of the semiconductor device.
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, 4, 17, 18, 20 and 62 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over disclosed prior art, Glezer et al., (United States Patent Application Publication Number, US 2006/0060331 A1) hereinafter referenced as Glezer, in view of disclosed prior art of Chiu et al., (United States Patent Application Publication Number, US 2022/0130734 A1) hereinafter referenced as Chiu.
Regarding claim 1, Glezer teaches a device package comprising: an integrated cooling assembly (structure of Fig.1) comprising a semiconductor device (Fig.1, element #28, paragraph [0047], row 3), a manifold attached to the semiconductor device (Fig.1, formed by elements #13, #14, #15 and #16), and a sonic transducer attached to the manifold (Fig.1, element #22, paragraph [0054], rows 5-6), wherein: the manifold comprises a top portion (Fig.1, elements #14), and a waveguide extending downwardly from the top portion (Fig.1, formed by elements #15 and #16); the sonic transducer is attached to the top portion (Fig.1, element #22 is attached to element #14); the top portion, the waveguide, and a side of the semiconductor device collectively define a coolant chamber volume therebetween (a side of the semiconductor device can form the bottom side of the chamber, paragraph [0050], rows 1-3; and together with elements #14, #15 and #16 forms a coolant chamber).
Glezer does not specify which side of the semiconductor device forms the chamber. Therefore, Glezer does not teach that the side of the semiconductor device forming the chamber is a backside of the semiconductor device. Chiu teaches the top portion, the waveguide, and a backside of the semiconductor device collectively define a coolant chamber volume therebetween (Fig.3, element #110b is the backside of the semiconductor device, element #110, paragraph [0057], rows 8-12, and defines the bottom of the cooling chamber). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Chiu and disclose the top portion, the waveguide, and a backside of the semiconductor device collectively define a coolant chamber volume therebetween. This allows direct cooling of the semiconductor device (Gezer, paragraph [0050]) with increased heat dissipation as compared to having other elements in between the device and the coolant. Having the backside of the semiconductor device directly exposed to the coolant of the chamber is compatible with flip chip technology with the front side of the device being electrically connected to a substrate (Chiu, paragraph [0051] rows 1-5).
Glezer further teaches the coolant chamber volume is configured to receive coolant so that the coolant directly contacts a side of the semiconductor device (a side of the semiconductor device can form the bottom side of the chamber, paragraph [0050], rows 1-3, and therefore is in direct contact with the coolant). As noted above, the combination of Glezer and Chiu teaches the side in direct contact with the coolant is the backside of the semiconductor device. Therefore, the combination of Glezer and Chiu teaches the coolant chamber volume is configured to receive coolant so that the coolant directly contacts the backside of the semiconductor device.
Glezer further teaches the sonic transducer is configured to generate sonic vibrations that affect the coolant directly contacting the backside of the semiconductor device (Fig.1, the vibrations of the sonic transducer affect the coolant directly contacting the bottom wall of the chamber, paragraph [0013], rows 7-9, which, as noted above, is the backside of the semiconductor device.
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Glezer and Chiu teaches the device package of claim 1 as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Glezer further teaches the device package of claim 1, wherein the manifold comprises a polymer material (paragraph [0048], rows 6-9).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Glezer and Chiu teaches the device package of claim 1 as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Glezer further teaches wherein the sonic transducer is configured to transmit sonic energy at a frequency from about 200 kHz to about 5 MHz (paragraph [0054], rows 3-5).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Glezer and Chiu teaches the device package of claim 1 as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Glezer further teaches wherein the sonic transducer comprises an actuator that generates the sonic vibrations (Fig.2, piezoelectric element #26 generates the sonic vibrations) and the waveguide directs the sonic vibrations through the coolant chamber volume towards the semiconductor device (paragraph [0026], rows 1-2, the chamber is made of aluminum, which reflect sonic vibrations, and paragraph [0028], rows 1-2, the chamber may be manufactured in any shape, so waves can reach the sidewall before the bottom side and reflect the waves towards the device).
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Glezer and Chiu teaches the device package of claim 1 as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Glezer does not teach the device package of claim 1, further comprising a package substrate, wherein: the manifold is disposed on the package substrate, and the semiconductor device is attached to the package substrate. Chiu teaches the package further comprising a package substrate (Fig.3, element 100), wherein: the manifold is disposed on the package substrate (Fig.3, the manifold is attached to the substrate using adhesive layer, element #301), and the semiconductor device is attached to the package substrate (Fig.3, element #110 is attached to element #100 using connecting element #112).
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Chiu and disclose the device package further comprising a package substrate, wherein: the manifold is disposed on the package substrate, and the semiconductor device is attached to the package substrate. As disclosed by Chiu, the substrate may comprise electrical connections that allow power/signals to be delivered to the device (column [0050], rows 6-11). Furthermore, attaching the manifold to the substrate increases the mechanical reliability and stability of the package.
Regarding claim 62, Glezer teaches a device package comprising: a semiconductor device (Fig.1, element #28, paragraph [0047], row 3); a manifold (Fig.1, formed by elements #13, #14, #15 and #16), attached to a side of the semiconductor device (a side of the semiconductor device can form the bottom side of the chamber, paragraph [0050], rows 1-3).
Glezer does not specify which side of the semiconductor is attached to the manifold. Therefore, Glezer does not teach that the manifold is attached to the backside of the semiconductor device. Chiu teaches that the manifold is attached to the backside of the semiconductor device (Fig.3, element #110b is the backside of the semiconductor device, element #110, paragraph [0057], rows 8-12, attached with adhesive #302). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Chiu and disclose the manifold is attached to the backside of the semiconductor device. This allows direct cooling of the semiconductor device (Gezer, paragraph [0050]) with increased heat dissipation as compared to having other elements in between the device and the coolant. Having the backside of the semiconductor device directly exposed to the coolant of the chamber is compatible with flip chip technology with the front side of the device being electrically connected to a substrate (Chiu, paragraph [0051] rows 1-5).
Glezer further teaches a sonic transducer attached to the manifold (Fig.1, element #22 is attached to element #14), wherein: the manifold comprises a top portion (Fig.1, elements #14), a waveguide extending downwardly from the top portion (Fig.1, formed by elements #15 and #16), and a coolant chamber volume (a side of the semiconductor device can form the bottom side of the chamber, paragraph [0050], rows 1-3; and together with elements #14, #15 and #16 forms a coolant chamber); the coolant chamber volume is configured to receive coolant so that the coolant directly contacts a side of the semiconductor device (a side of the semiconductor device can form the bottom side of the chamber, paragraph [0050], rows 1-3, and therefore is in direct contact with the coolant). As noted above, the combination of Glezer and Chiu teaches the side in direct contact with the coolant is the backside of the semiconductor device. Therefore, the combination of Glezer and Chiu teaches the coolant chamber volume is configured to receive coolant so that the coolant directly contacts the backside of the semiconductor device.
Glezer further teaches the sonic transducer is attached to the top portion (Fig.1, element #22 is attached to element #14); and sonic vibrations generated by the sonic transducer affect the coolant directly contacting the backside of the semiconductor device
(Fig.1, the vibrations of the sonic transducer affect the coolant directly contacting the bottom wall of the chamber, paragraph [0013], rows 7-9, which, as noted above, is the backside of the semiconductor device.
Claims 2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over disclosed prior art, Glezer in view of Chiu and in view of Ling et al., (Chinese Patent Number, CN 115666079 A) hereinafter referenced as Ling.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Glezer and Chiu teaches the device package of claim 1 as set forth in the obviousness rejection. The combination of Glezer and Chiu does not teach the device package of claim 1, wherein the top portion of the manifold comprises: a package cover, the package cover having an inlet opening and an outlet opening disposed therethrough, and wherein: the coolant chamber volume is in fluid communication with the inlet opening and the outlet opening. Ling teaches the top portion of the manifold (structure showed in Fig.2, rotated vertically with 180 degrees) comprises: a package cover (Fig.1, rotated vertically with 180 degrees, element #10), the package cover having an inlet opening and an outlet opening disposed therethrough (Fig.1, rotated vertically with 180 degrees, element #12 and #13), and wherein: the coolant chamber volume (Fig.2, rotated vertically with 180 degrees, formed between layers #3011,and #3012) is in fluid communication with the inlet opening and the outlet opening (Fig.2, rotated vertically with 180 degrees, fluid communicates between element #12 and #24 and 13 and #25, respectively). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Ling and disclose wherein the top portion of the manifold comprises: a package cover, the package cover having an inlet opening and an outlet opening disposed therethrough, and wherein: the coolant chamber volume is in fluid communication with the inlet opening and the outlet opening. The package cover protects the package and its’ components from damage due to environmental factors, while the inlet and the outlet allow the circulation of the cooling fluid to and from the parts of the device that generates heat, therefore increasing heat dissipation.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Glezer and Chiu teaches the device package of claim 1 as set forth in the obviousness rejection, and the combination of Glezer, Chiu, and Ling teaches the device package of claim 2 as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Glezer further teaches the device package of claim 2, wherein: the top portion of the manifold comprises a first side facing towards the semiconductor device (Fig.1, bottom side of the upper wall, element #14) and a second side opposite the first side (Fig.1, topside of the upper wall, element #14), and the sonic transducer is attached to the first side (Fig.1, transducer, element #22, is attached to the bottom side of the upper wall, element #14).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glezer in view of Chiu, Ling and in view of Ganti et al., (United States Patent Number US 10,788,034 B2) hereinafter referenced as Ganti.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Glezer and Chiu teaches the device package of claim 1 as set forth in the obviousness rejection, and the combination of Glezer, Chiu, and Ling teaches the device package of claim 2 as set forth in the obviousness rejection. The combination of Glezer, Chiu, and Ling does not teach the device package of claim 2, wherein the manifold comprises a shower plate disposed inside the coolant chamber volume between the top portion of the manifold and the semiconductor device, wherein the shower plate has a plurality of openings disposed therethrough. Ganti teaches wherein the manifold comprises a shower plate disposed inside the coolant chamber volume between the top portion of the manifold and the semiconductor device, wherein the shower plate has a plurality of openings disposed therethrough (Fig.2A, shower plate, element #220 is disposed inside the chamber, between the top portion, element #250, and the semiconductor device, element #230, and has a plurality of openings, element #222). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Ganti and disclose wherein the manifold comprises a shower plate disposed inside the coolant chamber volume between the top portion of the manifold and the semiconductor device, wherein the shower plate has a plurality of openings disposed therethrough. As disclosed by Ganti, the shower plate and the openings in the shower plate allow projecting the coolant towards the device at high speeds and distributing the coolant towards the device in different directions, which enhances the performance of the cooling system (Fig.12A-12D and 13A-13D).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glezer in view of Chiu, and in view of Buvid et al., (United States Patent Number US 9,220,183 B1) hereinafter referenced as Buvid.
Regarding claim 19, the combination of Glezer and Chiu teaches the device package of claim 1 as set forth in the obviousness rejection. The combination of Glezer and Chiu does not teach the device package of claim 1, wherein the integrated cooling assembly comprises a corrosion protective layer disposed on the backside of the semiconductor device. Buvid teaches the integrated cooling assembly comprises a corrosion protective layer disposed on the backside of the semiconductor device (column 7, rows 38-40 and 43-46). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Buvid and disclose the integrated cooling assembly comprises a corrosion protective layer disposed on the backside of the semiconductor device. As disclosed by Buvid, the corrosion protective layer prevents the coolant from penetrating the semiconductor device where materials could be vulnerable to corrosion, electrical crosstalk, power loss and electrical shorting (column 7, row 43-47), which will impede the correct functionality of the device.
Claim 59 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over disclosed prior art, Glezer in view of Chiu and in view of Hsiao et al., (United States Patent Application Publication Number, US 2022/0037231 A1) hereinafter referenced as Hsiao.
Regarding claim 59, the combination of Glezer and Chiu teaches the device package of claim 1 as set forth in the obviousness rejection. The combination of Glezer and Chiu does not teach the device package of claim 1, wherein the manifold is attached to the semiconductor device by direct dielectric bonds. Hsiao teaches wherein the manifold is attached to the semiconductor device by direct dielectric bonds (Fig.13A, manifold #140 is attached to the semiconductor device by direct dielectric bonds, paragraph [0009], rows 1-6). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Hsiao and disclose wherein the manifold is attached to the semiconductor device by direct dielectric bonds. As disclosed by Hsiao, the direct dielectric bonds improve the thermal conductivity between the manifold and the device, which further improves the cooling capacity of the manifold (paragraph [0009], rows 1-7).
Claims 1, 60 and 61 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable, over Yufeng, (Chinese Patent Number CN-109887898A), hereinafter referenced as Yufeng in view of Chiu.
Regarding claim 1, Yufeng teaches a device package comprising: an integrated cooling assembly comprising a semiconductor device (Fig.4, rotated vertically by 180 degrees, element #12), a manifold attached to the semiconductor device (Fig.4, rotated vertically by 180 degrees , all elements other than elements #11 and #12), and a sonic transducer attached to the manifold (Fig.4, rotated vertically by 180 degrees, element #11), wherein: the manifold comprises a top portion (Fig.4, rotated vertically by 180 degrees, element #15) and a waveguide extending downwardly from the top portion (Fig.4 rotated vertically by 180 degrees, elements on the left and right side element #15 and #14); the sonic transducer is attached to the top portion (Fig.4, rotated vertically by 180 degrees, element #11 is attached to element #15); the top portion, the waveguide, and a side of the semiconductor device collectively define a coolant chamber volume therebetween (Fig.1, the semiconductor device, element #12 may be located inside the chamber).
Yufeng does not specify which side of the semiconductor device forms the chamber and is in direct contact with the coolant. Therefore, Yufeng does not teach that the side of the semiconductor device forming the chamber is a backside of the semiconductor device. Chiu teaches the top portion, the waveguide, and a backside of the semiconductor device collectively define a coolant chamber volume therebetween (Fig.3, element #110b is the backside of the semiconductor device, element #110, paragraph [0057], rows 8-12, and defines the bottom of the cooling chamber). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skilled in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the teachings of Chiu and disclose the top portion, the waveguide, and a backside of the semiconductor device collectively define a coolant chamber volume therebetween. This allows direct cooling of the semiconductor device with increased heat dissipation as compared to having other elements in between the device and the coolant. Having the backside of the semiconductor device directly exposed to the coolant of the chamber is compatible with flip chip technology with the front side of the device being electrically connected to a substrate (Chiu, paragraph [0051] rows 1-5).
Yufeng further teaches the sonic transducer is configured to generate sonic vibrations that affect the coolant directly contacting the backside of the semiconductor device (Fig.1, the transducer, element #11 generates ultrasonic vibrations that affect the coolant on the side of semiconductor device, element #12, machine translation, paragraph [16] rows 25-27, the coolant contacts the side of the semiconductor device, and the side can be the backside, as noted in the above rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 60, the combination of Yufeng and Chiu teaches the device package of claim 1 as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Yufeng further teaches the device package of claim 1, wherein the sonic vibrations introduce turbulence into the coolant (attached machine translation, abstract, paragraph 20, rows 5-8) while the coolant directly contacts the backside of the semiconductor device (Fig.1, the coolant contacts a side of the semiconductor device, and the side can be the backside, as noted in the above rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 61, the combination of Yufeng and Chiu teaches the device package of claim 1 as set forth in the obviousness rejection. Yufeng further teaches the device package of claim 1, wherein the coolant chamber volume is configured to circulate the coolant as a single-phase coolant (attached machine translation, abstract, paragraph 20, rows 5-8).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 07/14/2026 have been fully considered but they
are not persuasive. As noted in the obviousness rejection of claim 1, as set forth in the Non-Final Rejection office action filed on 04/16/2026, Glezer teaches forming a chamber using a side of the semiconductor device (paragraph [0050], rows 1-3) and Chiu teaches the top portion, the waveguide, and a backside of the semiconductor device collectively define a coolant chamber volume therebetween (Fig.3, element #110b is the backside of the semiconductor device, element #110, paragraph [0057], rows 8-12, and defines the bottom of the cooling chamber). In the Applicant Argument/Remarks document filed on 07/14/2026, the applicant fails to address the teachings of Chiu and makes no arguments/remarks regarding the obviousness of the combination of Gezel and Chiu. Therefore, applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but they are not considered persuasive.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CRISTIAN A TIVARUS whose telephone number is (703)756-4688. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00 AM-5:00 PM EST.
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, Dale Page can be reached at (571)270-7877. 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.
/CRISTIAN A TIVARUS/Examiner, Art Unit 2899 /DALE E PAGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights