CTNF 18/129,879 CTNF 90440 DETAILED ACTION 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-12-aia AIA (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim s 11-12, 15-17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Noguchi (U.S. PGPub 2024/0113030) . Regarding claim 11 , Noguchi teaches an electronic package (Fig. 5, [0123]-[0124]), comprising: a core, wherein the core comprises glass ([0048], 112), a buildup layer over the core (114, [0047]), a bridge embedded in the buildup layer (101, [0123]), and through substrate vias (TSVs) through the bridge (501, [0123]). Regarding claim 12 , Noguchi teaches pads below the bridge, wherein the pads are electrically coupled to the TSVs (Fig. 5, depicted at top of 112a, [0123]). Regarding claim 15 , Noguchi teaches a first die over the buildup layer and a second die over the buildup layer, wherein the first die is communicatively coupled to the second die through the bridge (201a/202a, [0124]). Regarding claim 16 , Noguchi teaches wherein the first die and the second die are configured to receive power through the TSVs ([0124]). Regarding claim 17 , Noguchi teaches an electronic system (Fig. 5, [0123]-[0124]), comprising: a board and package substrate coupled to the board ([0123], solder bumps 110c is board side of the package substrate; [0053], solder bumps 110c bonded to a PCB), wherein the package substrate comprises: a core, wherein the core comprises glass ([0048], 112), buildup layers over and under the core (114/116, [0047]), a bridge embedded in the package substrate, wherein the bridge comprises through substrate vias (TSVs) (101, [0123]; 501, [0123]), and a first die over the buildup layer and a second die over the buildup layer, wherein the first die is communicatively coupled to the second die through the bridge (201a/202a, [0124]). Regarding claim 19 , Noguchi teaches wherein the bridge is embedded in the buildup layers (Fig. 5) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 5, and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akkinepally (U.S. PGPub 2021/0305163) in view of Rho (U.S. PGPub 2023/0307304) . Regarding claim 1 , Akkinepally teaches an electronic package (Fig. 6) comprising: a package substrate (202, [0052]), a cavity in the package substrate (see Fig. 4C, [0044]), a bridge in the cavity, wherein the bridge comprises through substrate vias (TSVs) (100, 561, [0052]), and pads at a bottom of the cavity, wherein the TSVs are electrically coupled to the pads (656, [0052]). Akkinepally does not explicitly teach wherein the package comprises a core which comprises glass. Rho teaches wherein a package substrate comprising a cavity comprises a glass core (Fig. 2, [0054]-[0055]). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Rho with Akkinepally such that the package comprises a core which comprises glass for the purpose of allowing increased miniaturization and improved electrical properties (Rho, [0005]-[0006], [0069]). Regarding claim 5 , the combination of Akkinepally and Rho teaches vias through the core, wherein the vias are electrically coupled to the pads at the bottom of the cavity (Rho, Figs. 2-3, 232, [0068]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Akkinepally and Rho for the purpose of providing a direct connection (Rho, [0134]-[0135]). Regarding claim 8 , the combination of Akkinepally and Rho teaches a buildup layer over the core and vias through the buildup layer that are coupled to the TSVs (Akkinepally, 163, [0051]; Rho, Fig. 4b, 29, [0136]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Akkinepally and Rho for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1. Regarding claim 9 , the combination of Akkinepally and Rho teaches a first die over the buildup layer, and a second die over the buildup layer, wherein the first die and the second die are coupled to the bridge through the vias (Akkinepally, 114-1, 114-2, [0027], [0052]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Akkinepally and Rho for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1. Regarding claim 10 , the combination of Akkinepally and Rho teaches wherein a seed layer is provided between the pads and the bottom of the cavity (Rho, [0157]-[0161]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Akkinepally and Rho for the purpose of improving pad adhesion to glass (Rho, [0157]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akkinepally (U.S. PGPub 2021/0305163) in view of Rho (U.S. PGPub 2023/0307304) and Mahajan (U.S. PGPub 2020/0286814) . Regarding claim 2 , the combination of Akkinepally and Rho does not explicitly teach wherein a liner lines sidewalls of the cavity and the bottom of the cavity. Mahajan teaches a package substrate having a cavity and a die in the cavity (Fig. 5D, 515, 520, [0092]-[0096]), wherein a liner lines sidewalls of the cavity and bottom of the cavity ([0096]). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Mahajan with Akkinepally and Rho such that a liner lines sidewalls of the cavity and the bottom of the cavity because the prior art teaches every element, a person of ordinary skill could have combined them as claimed and in combination each element performs the same function as it does separately, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of the invention. See MPEP 2143(I)A. Regarding claim 4 , the combination of Akkinepally, Rho, and Mahajan teaches wherein the liner comprises silicon and nitrogen (Majajan, [0096]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further combine the teachings of Akkinepally, Rho, and Mahajan for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 2 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akkinepally (U.S. PGPub 2021/0305163) in view of Rho (U.S. PGPub 2023/0307304), Mahajan (U.S. PGPub 2020/0286814), Nie (U.S. PGPub 2020/0312771), and Choi (U.S. PGPub 2022/0037261) . Regarding claims 6 and 7 , the combination of Akkinepally, Rho, and Mahajan does not explicitly teach wherein a photoimageable dielectric (PID) is provided over the liner at the bottom of the cavity, and wherein a die attach film (DAF) is provided between the bridge and the PID, and wherein the DAF surrounds the pads. Nie teaches a die with pads (Fig. 5A, 501, 507, [0034]), a die attach film provided surrounding the pads (Fig. 5F, 511, [0038]), and a dielectric layer provided over the die attach film, where the die attach film is provided between the die and the dielectric layer (Fig. 5L, 517 , [0041]). Nie is silent on the material or properties of the dielectric layer. Choi teaches wherein a dielectric layer formed to surround a pad bonded to a die pad is formed of a photoimageable dielectric (Fig. 12, 40, [0077], [0024]). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Nie and Choi with Akkinepally, Rho, and Mahajan such that a photoimageable dielectric (PID) is provided over the liner at the bottom of the cavity, and wherein a die attach film (DAF) is provided between the bridge and the PID, and wherein the DAF surrounds the pads for the purpose of providing die attach films for an embedded TSV die (Nie, [0003], [0023]-[0024]) with a known appropriate material for the dielectric layer (Choi, [0024]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akkinepally (U.S. PGPub 2021/0305163) in view of Rho (U.S. PGPub 2023/0307304), Mahajan (U.S. PGPub 2020/0286814) and May (U.S. PGPub 2021/0134727) . Regarding claim 3 , the combination of Akkinepally, Rho, and Mahajan does not explicitly teach wherein a photoimageable dielectric (PID) is provided over the liner at the bottom of the cavity. May teaches wherein a photoimageable dielectric is provided over chip pads (Fig. 1I, 124, [0030]-[0035]). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date to combine the teachings of May with Akkinepally, Rho, and Mahajan such that a photoimageable dielectric (PID) is provided over the liner at the bottom of the cavity for the purpose of providing reduced bump pitch (May, [0010]-[0012]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noguchi (U.S. PGPub 2024/0113030) in view of Alur (U.S. PGPub 2021/0257303) . Regarding claim 13 , Noguchi does not explicitly teach wherein the TSVs are electrically coupled to the pads by solder. Alur teaches a package comprising a bridge embedded in a buildup layer (Fig. 1A, 110, [0020]), TSVs through the bridge (Fig. 6, [0071]-[0073]), pads below the bridge, wherein the pads are electrically coupled to the TSVs (622, [0072]), wherein the TSVs are electrically coupled to the pads by solder (641, [0072]). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Alur with Noguchi such that the TSVs are electrically coupled to the pads by solder for the purpose of connecting the pads and TSVs (Alur, [0072]-[0073]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noguchi (U.S. PGPub 2024/0113030) in view of Zhou (U.S. PGPub 2020/0335443) . Regarding claim 14 , Noguchi does not explicitly teach wherein the device comprises conductive portions outside a footprint of the bridge, wherein the conductive portions are not electrically coupled to circuitry of the electronic package. Zhou teaches an electronic package comprising a buildup layer (Fig. 5B, 532/530, [0056]), a bridge embedded in the buildup layer (Fig. 5D, 540, [0058]), wherein the device comprises conductive portions outside a footprint of the bridge, wherein the conductive portions are not electrically coupled to circuitry of the electronic package (Figs. 5C-5D, 510, [0054], [0057]). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Zhou with Noguchi such that the device comprises conductive portions outside a footprint of the bridge, wherein the conductive portions are not electrically coupled to circuitry of the electronic package for the purpose of providing etch stop layers during cavity formation (Zhou, [0032]-[0033]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noguchi (U.S. PGPub 2024/0113030) in view of Lee (U.S. PGPub 2023/0026293) . Regarding claim 18 , Noguchi does not explicitly teach wherein the bridge is embedded in the core. Lee teaches wherein a bridge die is embedded in a buildup layer over a core (Fig. 1, 200, 500, 110, [0026]-[0029]) or embedded in the core layer (Fig. 6, [0134]-[0138]). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Lee with Noguchi such that the bridge is embedded in the core for the purpose of making the package thin and light ([Lee, [0144]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noguchi (U.S. PGPub 2024/0113030) in view of Sankman (U.S. PGPub 2020/0303309) . Regarding claim 20 , Noguchi does not explicitly teach wherein the electronic system is part of a personal computer, a server, a mobile device, a tablet, or an automobile. Sankman teaches wherein a package comprising a bridge die connected to first and second chips is part of a personal computer, server, or mobile device ([0062], Fig. 1A). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Sankman with Noguchi such that the electronic system is part of a personal computer, a server, a mobile device, a tablet, or an automobile for the purpose of utilizing the electronic system in a computer system (Sankman, [0062]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALIA SABUR whose telephone number is (571)270-7219. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-5:30. 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, Christine S. Kim can be reached at 571-272-8458. 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. /ALIA SABUR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812 Application/Control Number: 18/129,879 Page 2 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 18/129,879 Page 3 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 18/129,879 Page 4 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 18/129,879 Page 5 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 18/129,879 Page 6 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 18/129,879 Page 7 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 18/129,879 Page 8 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 18/129,879 Page 9 Art Unit: 2812 Application/Control Number: 18/129,879 Page 10 Art Unit: 2812
Prosecution Insights