CTFR 18/147,457 CTFR 97485 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 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. Status of the Application Claims 1-21 are pending in this Application . 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 (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. 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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 ( 1)(a ) as being anticipated by Yokoyama et al (US 5549778A) . Re claim 1 Yokoyama teaches, an apparatus (fig 4), comprising: a glass core (12, fig 4) [page 5 para 8] comprising a plurality of through-glass vias (left/right 16, fig 4) [page 7, para 3] (TGVs) substantially filled with a conductive material (copper) [page 7, para 3]; a conductive layer (18, fig 4) [page 7, para 1] on a surface of the glass core (12, fig 4) [page 5, para 8], the conductive layer (18, fig 4) [page 7, para 1] attached to, and extending past a periphery (top portion of 16, fig 4) of, a TGV (left 16, fig 4) of the plurality of TGVs (left/right 16, fig 4); and a conductive anchor (17, fig 4) [page 7, para 3] extending from the conductive layer (18, fig 4) into the glass core (12, fig 4) [page 5, para 3] the conductive anchor (17, fig 4) [page7, para 3] located away from a peripheral edge (away from the top portion of 16, fig 4) of the TGV (left 16, fig 4) of the plurality of TGVs (left/right 16, fig 4). Re claim 2 Yokoyama teaches, the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the conductive material (copper, fig 4) [page 7, para 1], the conductive layer (18, fig 4) [page and the conductive anchor (17, fig 4) [page 7, para 4] comprise a metal [page 7, para 1]. Re claim 3 Yokoyama teaches, the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the conductive material (copper, fig 4) [page 7, para 1], the conductive layer (18, fig 4) [page 7, para 1], and the conductive anchor comprise copper [page 5, para 8]. Re claim 4 Yokoyama teaches, the apparatus of claim 1, wherein individual of the plurality of TGVs (left/right 16, fig 4) [page 7, para 3] comprise a diameter (diameter of 16), a location of the conductive anchor (17, fig 4) [page 7, para 3] is a function of the diameter . 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 (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. 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, 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokoyama in view of Tanaka et al (JP 2009188229A) . Re claim 5 Yokoyama teaches the apparatus of claim 1, Yokoyama do not teach the conductive anchor is located at least 5 microns away from the peripheral edge of the TGV of the plurality of TGVs. Tanaka teach the conductive anchor is located at least 5 microns away from the peripheral edge of the TGV of the plurality of TGVs (diameter of the via Hole 13 is about 30-100 um, diameter of the via pad 16 is about twice of 30-100, hence the conductive anchor 15 is located at least 5 microns away from the peripheral edge of the TSV 13) [0010]. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching taught into the structure of to include as claimed. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Yokoyama based on the teaching of Tanaka in the above manner for the purpose of improving mechanical strength of the device. Furthermore, it has been held that where then general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re All re, 105USPQ 233 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokoyama in view of Lin et al (US20100075448A1) . Re claim 6 Yokoyama teaches the apparatus of claim 1, Yokoyama does not teach the conductive layer has a thickness in a range of about 1 micron to about 30 microns. Lin does teach the conductive layer (32, fig 4B) [0116] has a thickness in a range of about 1 micron to about 30 microns (30microns) [0116]. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching taught by Lin into the structure of Yokoyama to include the conductive layer has a thickness in a range of about 1 micron to about 30 microns as claimed. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Yokoyama based on the teaching of Lin in the above manner for the purpose of improving reliability of the device [0064]. Furthermore, it has been held that where then general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Allre, 105USPQ 233 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokoyama in view of Satou et al (US 20120135199A1) . Re claims 7 and 8 Yokoyama teaches, the apparatus of claim 1, Yokoyama does not teach the glass core comprises silicon and oxygen (claim-6) and the glass core comprises silicon, oxygen, and aluminum, boron, or an alkaline-earth metal (claim 7). Satou does teach the glass core comprises silicon and oxygen [0023] and the glass core comprises silicon, oxygen, and aluminum, boron, [0023] or an alkaline-earth metal. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching taught by Satou into the structure of Yokoyama to include the glass core comprises silicon and oxygen and the glass core comprises silicon, oxygen, and aluminum, boron, or an alkaline-earth metal as claimed. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Yokoyama based on the teaching of Satou for the purpose of improving the stability of the glass [0092]. Furthermore, 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 used matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokoyama in view of Aleksov et al (US 20220406698 A1) . Re claim 9 Yokoyama teaches the apparatus of claim 1, Yokoyama does not teach the glass core has a thickness in a range of about 20 microns to about 1 millimeter. Aleksov does teach the glass core (305, fig 3A) [0041] has a thickness in a range of about 20 microns to about 1 millimeter (50µm and 1000 µm) [0041]. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching taught by Aleksov into the structure of Yokoyama to include the glass core has a thickness in a range of about 20 microns to about 1 millimeter as claimed. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Aleksov based on the teaching of Yokoyama in the above manner for the purpose of improving performance of the device. Furthermore, it has been held that where then general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Allre, 105USPQ 233 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokoyama in view of Murata et al (WO2008053956A1) . Re claim 10 Yokoyama teaches, the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the conductive layer (left 16, fig 4) is a first conductive layer [page 5, para 7] on a first surface (top surface of 12) of the glass core(12, fig 4), attached to the TGV (left 18, fig 4) of the plurality of TGVs (left/right 16) at a first end (top end), the conductive anchor (17, fig 4) is a first conductive anchor (left 17), Yokoyama does not teach, a second conductive layer located on a second surface of the glass core, the second conductive layer attached to a second end of the TGV of the plurality of TGVs; and a second conductive anchor, the second conductive anchor extending from the second conductive layer into the glass core, the second conductive anchor located away from a periphery of the TGV of the plurality of TGVs. Murata does teach a second conductivelayer (bottom 4/6, fig 1) [0038] located on a second surface of the glass core (bottom surface of 1, fig 1) [0041], the second conductive layer attached to a second end of the TGV (a via-hole conductor, fig 1) [0043] of the plurality of TGVs (left/right TGVs, fig 1); and a second conductive anchor (bottom 5, fig 1) [0038], the second conductive anchor (bottom 5, fig 1) [0038] extending from the second conductive layer (bottom 4/6, fig 1) into the glass core (1, fig 1), the second conductive anchor located away from a periphery of the TGV (left via hole conductor, fig 1) of the plurality of TGVs (left/right via hole conductor). bottom a second conductive anchor (bottom 5) [0038], the second conductive anchor extending from the second conductive layer (bottom 4/6, fig 1) into the glass core (1 fig 1), the second conductive anchor located away from a periphery of the TGV (left via hole conductor, fig 1) of the plurality of TGVs (left/right via hole conductor, fig 1) [0038]. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching taught into the structure of Yokoyama to include a second conductive layer located on a second surface of the glass core, the second conductive layer attached to a second end of the TGV of the plurality of TGVs; and a second conductive anchor, the second conductive anchor extending from the second conductive layer into the glass core, the second conductive anchor located away from a periphery of the TGV of the plurality of TGVs as claimed. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Yokoyama based on the teaching of Murata in the above manner for the purpose of improving coupling reliability of the device [0023] . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 11-14, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokoyama in view of Boyapati et al (US 20180019197A1) . Re claim 11 Yokoyama teaches, the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising: one or more dielectric layers (30, fig 6) therein located above the glass core (1/11, fig 6) and on the conductive layer (36a). Yokoyama does not teach the one or more dielectric layers with redistribution layers, and a plurality of conductive contacts located on an upper surface of the one or more the dielectric layers. Boyapati teaches the one or more dielectric layers (top/bottom 106, fig 1) [0027] with redistribution layers (110, 112, 114, fig 1) and a plurality of conductive contacts (118, fig 1) [0036] located on an upper surface of the one or more the dielectric layers (106, fig 1). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching taught by Boyapati into the structure of Yokoyama to include the one or more dielectric layers with redistribution layers, and a plurality of conductive contacts located on an upper surface of the one or more the dielectric layers as claimed. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Yokoyama based on the teaching of Boyapati in the above manner to achieve reduction of insertion loss of high frequency electrical signals transmitted through the package [0013]. Re claim 12 Yokoyama in view of Boyapati teach the apparatus of claim 11 wherein the conductive material (conductive material in 16, fig 3b) [Yokoyama, page 7, para 3], the conductive layer (18, fig 3c) [Yokoyama, page 7, para 3], and the conductive anchor (17, fig 4) comprise a metal [Yokoyama, page 7, para 3]. Re claim 13 Yokoyamai in view of Boyapati teach the apparatus of claim 11, wherein the conductive material, the conductive layer, and the conductive anchor comprise copper. (Copper, fig 4) [Yokoyama, page 7, para 3-4]. Re claim 14 Yokoyama in view of Boyapati teach the apparatus of claim 11, wherein individual of the plurality of TGVs (16, fig 4) [Yokoyama, page 7, para 3] comprise a diameter (diameter of 16, fig 4), a location (periphery of the 16, fig 6) of the conductive anchor (17, fig 4) is a function of the diameter (fig 4) [Yokoyama, page 7, para 3]. Re claim 16 Yokoyama teaches a method, comprising: determining a through-glass via (TGV) (left/right 14, fig 3a-3d) pattern for a plurality of TGVs in a glass core (12 fig 3d) [page 7 para 2] ; creating a modified TGV pattern (fig 3a-3b) [page 7 para 2] with at least one anchor (15, fig 3a) [page 7 para 2] added thereto, the at least one anchor (left 15 fig 3a) located away from a peripheral edge of a TGV (away from the edge of the, page 7, para 2); substantially filling the plurality of TGVs (left/right 15) and the at least one anchor (15, fig 3b) with a conductive material (fig 3b) [Page 7, para 15]; and depositing a conductive layer (thick film pads 18, fig 3c) [Page 7 para 2] on the surface of the glass core (12), the conductive layer attached to a TGV (16) of the plurality of TGVs and the at least one anchor (15, fig 3a-3c). Yokoyama do not teach laser patterning a surface of the glass core with the modified TGV pattern; performing a chemical etch on the surface of the glass core after completing the laser patterning the surface of the glass core; Boyapati does teach laser patterning a surface of the glass core with the modified TGV pattern [0028]; performing a chemical etch (plasma etching) [0058] on the surface of the glass core (104, fig 1) after completing the laser patterning [0054] the surface of the glass core (104, fig 1). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching taught by Boyapati into the structure of Yokoyama to include performing a chemical etch on the surface of the glass core after completing the laser patterning the surface of the glass core as claimed. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Yokoyama based on the teaching of Boyapati in the above manner for the purpose of achieving reduction of insertion loss of high frequency electrical signals transmitted through the package [0013]. Furthermore, since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. V. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 538, 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385,1395 (2007); Sakraida V. AG Pro, Inc., 425 U.S. 273, 282, 189 USPQ 449, 453 (1976); Anderson' s-Black Rock, Inc. V. Pavement Salvage Co., 396 U.S. 57, 62-63, 163 USPQ 673, 675 (1969); Great Atlantic & P. Tea Co. V. Supermarket Equip. Corp., 340 U.S. 147, 152, 87 USPQ 303, 306 (1950). See MPEP § 2143.02. Re claim 17 Yokomaya in view of Boyapati teach the method of claim 16, further comprising adding one or more dielectric layers (106, fig 1) [Boyapati, 0029] with redistribution layers (top bottom 110, 114, 118 fig 1) [0029] therein over the conductive layer (top bottom 112, fig 1) [Boyapati, 0029], to thereby create a substrate (102, fig. 1) [Boyapati, 0026] . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokoyama modified by Boyapati as applied to claims 1, 11, and further in view of Tanaka et al (JP2009188229A) . Re claim 15 Yokoyama in view of Boyapati teach the apparatus of claim 11, Yokoyama and Boyapati do not teach the conductive anchor is located at least 5 microns away from the peripheral edge of the TGV of the plurality of TGVs. Tanaka teach the conductive anchor is located at least 5 microns away from the peripheral edge of the TGV of the plurality of TGVs. (diameter of the via hole 13 is about 30-100 µm, diameter of the via pad 16 is about twice of 30-100, hence the conductive anchor 15 is located at least 5 microns away from the peripheral edge of the TSV 13) [0010]. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching taught by Tanaka into the structure of Murata and Boyapati to include the conductive anchor is located at least 5 microns away from the peripheral edge of the TGV of the plurality of TGVs as claimed. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Yokoyama and Boyapati based on the teaching of Tanaka in the above manner for the purpose of improving mechanical strength of the device. Furthermore, it has been held that where then general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Allre, 105USPQ 233 . 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokomaya modified by Boyapati as applied to claim 16 above and further in view of Chen et al (US 20200391343A1) . Re claim 18 Yokomaya in view of Boyapati teach the method of claim 17, Murata and Boyapati do not teach comprising planarizing an upper surface of the substrate to reveal conductive contacts. Chen teaches comprising planarizing [0019-0020] an upper surface of the substrate (110) [0019] to reveal conductive contacts (105, fig 2)[0020]. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching taught by Chen into the structure of Yokomaya and Boyapati to include comprising planarizing an upper surface of the substrate to reveal conductive contacts as claimed. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Yokomaya and Boyapati based on the teaching of Chen in the above manner for the purpose of reducing topographical defects, improved profile uniformity, improved planarity, and improved substrate finish. [0041]. Furthermore, since all the claimed elements were known in the prior art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, the combination would have yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. V. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 538, 416, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395 (2007); Sakraida V. AG Pro, Inc., 425 U.S. 273, 282, 189 USPQ 449, 453 (1976); Anderson' s-Black Rock, Inc. V. Pavement Salvage Co., 396 U.S. 57, 62-63, 163 USPQ 673, 675 (1969); Great Atlantic & P. Tea Co. V. Supermarket Equip. Corp., 340 U.S. 147, 152, 87 USPQ 303, 306 (1950). See MPEP § 2143.02. Re claim 19 Yokomaya in view of Boyapati and Chen teach the method of claim 18, further comprising depositing a solder material (126/120, fig 1) [0026] on the conductive contacts (118, fig 1) [Boyapati, 0026]. Re claim 20 Yokomaya in view of Boyapati and Chen teach the method of claim 19, further comprising attaching an integrated circuit die (116, fig 1) [Boyapati, 0035] to the substrate (102, fig 1) via the solder material (126/120) [0026] . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokoyama et al (US 5549778A) in view of Hu et al (US20150334823A1) . Re claim 21 Yokoyama teaches the apparatus of claim 1, Yokoyama does not teach the glass core essentially of glass. Hu does teach the glass core (110, fig 1E) [0021] essentially of glass [0021]. It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching taught by Hu into the structure of Yokoyama to include the glass core essentially of glass as claimed. The ordinary artisan would have to motivated to modify Yokoyama based on the teaching of Hu in the above manner for expanding the capability of the next generation packaging [0005] . Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed 04/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant submit “ Yokoyama does not disclose a glass core within the meaning of Claim 1. Yokoyama discloses a manufacturing method for a multilayer ceramic substrate. The substrate is fabricated from glass-ceramics green sheets, which Yokoyama describes as having a composition of “ 30 wt % of alumina having a particle size of 4 to 5 μm ,30 wt % of silica glass having a particle size of 5 to 6 μm, 30 wt % of borosilicate glass having a particle size of 5 to 6 μm, 8 wt % of acrylic resin, and 2 wt % of dibutyl phthalate.” Yokoyama at 3:45-50 “ Pages 2-3 The Examiner respectfully disagrees , In the reference Yokoyama Col 2 lines 45-50 clearly teaches green sheet containing glass having a low softening point such as borosilicate glass, is used as the glass-ceramic green sheet. Further in Col 3 and lines 40-50 explain the glass-ceramic green sheet has almost 60% of glass (silicate glass and Borosilicate glass). Hence the core 12 is predominantly glass-forming materials therefore it is reasonably characterized as a glass core. Additionally, the claim does not expressly limit “glass core” to a pure/essentially fully amorphous glass. Under its broadest reasonable interpretation, the term encompasses glass predominant core material where the material function as a structural dielectric core of the package with vertical conductive interconnection in it. Conclusion 07-39 AIA 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 PRATIKSHA J LOHAKARE whose telephone number is (571)270-1920. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7.30 am-4.30 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, EVA MONTALVO can be reached at 571-270-3829. 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. /PRATIKSHA JAYANT LOHAKARE/ Examiner, Art Unit 2818 /DUY T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818 5/14/26 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 2 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 3 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 4 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 5 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 6 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 7 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 8 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 9 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 10 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 11 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 12 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 13 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 14 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 15 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 16 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 17 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/147,457 Page 18 Art Unit: 2818
Prosecution Insights