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 .
Status of Claims
Applicant’s amendment of claims 1 and 4, cancellation of claims 15-26, and submission of new claims 27-32 in “Claims - 12/11/2025” is acknowledged.
In view of the above, considers claims 1-14 and 27-32 are thus pending for further prosecution.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Notes: when present, semicolon separated fields within the parenthesis (; ;) represent, for example, as 3000; Fig 30; [0089]) = (element 3000; Figure No. 30; Paragraph No. [0089]). For brevity, the texts “Element”, “Figure No.” and “Paragraph No.” shall be excluded, though; additional clarification notes may be added within each field. The number of fields may be fewer or more than three indicated above. These conventions are used throughout this document.
Claims 1-3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Chu; Chia-Hua et al. (US 20210047175 A1, of record) hereinafter Chu
1. Chu teaches a method (3000) of manufacturing a semiconductor device, the method comprising (see the entire document fig 30, [0089] and relevant Figs and description, specifically, as cited below) :
PNG
media_image1.png
404
384
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Chu Fig 30
bonding a mask substrate to a first microelectromechanical system (MEMS) device;
after the bonding (step 3006; Fig 23; [0092]), patterning the mask substrate to form a first opening ( construed from step 3008; from [003]: an etching process is performed on the MEMS substrate, thereby defining a plurality of pillars in the MEMS substrate);
adding material into the first opening to form a first conductive pillar (step 3008; Fig 24; [0093] one from plurality) within the mask substrate;
forming a second conductive pillar (step 3008; Fig 24; [0093] another from plurality) within the mask substrate, the second conductive pillar having a different height from the first conductive pillar; and
removing the mask substrate (construed from [0088]: a removal process is performed to remove the lower and upper masking layers (802, 804 of FIG. 28 ).
2. The method of claim 1, Chu further teaches, (the method) further comprising planarizing (step 3016; construed from thinning by CMP [0097]) the second conductive pillar but not the first conductive pillar prior to the removing the mask substrate.
3. (Original) The method of claim 2, Chu further teaches, (the method) further comprising ([0018]) protecting the first conductive pillar prior to the planarizing the second conductive pillar.
7. (Original) The method of claim 1, Chu further teaches, wherein the forming the first conductive pillar plates gold ([0046]) within the mask substrate.
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 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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu; Chia-Hua et al. (US 20210047175 A1, of record) hereinafter Chu; in view of Kim; Kieun et al. (US 20150108002 A1, of record) hereinafter Kim.
4. Chu as applied to the method of claim 3, is silent on, wherein after the planarizing the second conductive pillar --,-- the second conductive pillar has a top surface with a different shape from a top surface of the first conductive pillar”.
However, in the analogous art, Kim teaches electrochemical fabrication processes for making microprobe tips ([0002]), where in (Fig 19n; [0069]) illustrates the second conductive pillar (taller one) has a top surface with a different shape from a top surface of the first conductive pillar (shorter ones) as disclosed as a process for forming an array of probe elements according to a thirteenth embodiment of the invention where some probe elements have different heights and different tip configurations and where the probe tip elements are formed using the embossing tools produced according to FIGS. 14A-14D and FIG. 15A-15D.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to select kim’s configuration for top surfaces of first and second conductive pillars, and thereby the combination of (Kaelberer and Stojanovic) will have the claimed shape .,
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Kaelberer in the manner set forth above for, at least, the purpose of utilizing known dimension to ensure successful component, on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice In re Leshin, 227 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). The selection of a known configuration or material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v.Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945) see MPEP §2144.07.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu; Chia-Hua et al. (US 20210047175 A1, of record) hereinafter Chu; in view of Uzoh; Cyprian Emeka (US 20170047307 A1, of record) hereinafter Uzoh.
5. Chu as applied to the method of claim 1, does not expressly disclose further comprising:
forming a first seed layer on the first MEMS device prior to the bonding the mask substrate; and forming a first seed layer separator prior to the bonding the mask substrate.
However, in the analogous art, Uzoh teaches METHODS FOR LOW TEMPERATURE BONDING (title), wherein (Fig 2A-2C; [0076-0077]) a continuous metal seed layer 140 (e.g., copper) may be deposited onto the major surface 112 of the first substrate 110, or onto a dielectric layer overlying the major surface if the substrate comprises an electrically conductive material or a semiconductor material. The seed layer 140 can be deposited by various methods, including atomic layer deposition (ALD), physical vapor deposition (PVD), or electroless or electrolytic deposition methods, or combinations thereof. The seed layer can comprise copper, for example. The seed layer can also include an adhesion layer, a barrier layer, or both.[0077] After the seed layer 140 is deposited onto the major surface 112, photoimageable layer such as a photoresist layer 142, can be deposited and patterned to cover only portions of the major surface 112. The photoresist layer 142 may have openings 144 at locations along the major surface 112 where it is desired to form columns 130..
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Chu’s method and thereby the combination of (Chu and Uzoh) comprises step of forming a first seed layer on the first MEMS device prior to the bonding the mask substrate; and forming a first seed layer separator prior to the bonding the mask substrate”, since this modification, at least, will enhance the conductive pillar formation subsequently.
6. The method of claim 5, the combination of (Chu and Uzoh) further teaches, (the method) further comprising removing the first seed layer separator after the removing the mask substrate (Chu).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-14 and 27-32 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance, which paraphrases and summarizes the claimed invention without intending to be limiting, wherein the legally defined scope of the claimed invention is defined by the allowed claims themselves in view of the written description under 35 USC 112. . The statement is not intended to necessarily state all the reasons for allowance or all the details why claims are allowed and should not be written to specifically or impliedly state that all the reasons for allowance are set forth (MPEP 1302.14).
Regarding independent claims 8, 27. the references of the Prior Art of record and considered pertinent to the applicant's disclosure and to the examiner’s knowledge does not teach or render obvious, at least to the skilled artisan, the instant invention regarding: the process steps and sequences with the implied structures of the method of manufacturing the semiconductor device as recited in claims 8 and 27.
The most relevant prior art references as cited in claim rejection 1-7, in section II-IV, supra) teaches some aspects the limitations of the claims 8 and or 27
However, none of the prior art of references indicated above or found in the searches, disclose all the limitations of claims 8 and 27 (the individual limitations may be found just not in combination). Because no reference alone, nor is there any motivation to combine the details over the prior art to create such limitations in this independent claim, the claim 8 is deemed patentable over the prior art.
Regarding claim 9-14, and 28-32 these are allowed because these inherit the allowable subject matter from claims 8 and 27 respectively.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments in “Remarks - 12/11/2025 - Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment”, with the “Amendment/Req. Reconsideration-After Non-Final Reject - 12/11/2025 ", have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive, because of the following:
Applicant’s amendment of claim 1 and submission of new claim 27-32 in “Claims - 12/11/2025” necessitated the shift in new grounds of rejection detailed above in section I, supra. The shift in grounds of rejection renders Applicant’s arguments moot.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Moazzam Hossain whose telephone number is (571)270-7960. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon to Friday 8.30 A.M -5.00 P.M.
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, Julio J. Maldonado can be reached on 571-272-1864. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR to register user only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MOAZZAM HOSSAIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898 February 25, 2026