DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement(s)
The Information Disclosure Statement(s) filed on March 20, 2026 was considered by the Examiner.
Response to Arguments
RE: the rejections of claims 1-4, 7-8 under 35 USC 112(b), Applicant’s amendments and arguments have been considered and resolve the issues of indefiniteness in these claims. Accordingly, the rejection of claims 1-4, 7-8 under 35 USC 112(b) is withdrawn.
RE: the rejection of claims under 35 USC 103, Applicant argues Dobashi merely discloses providing a rust preventive layer on metal- containing "particles" as a bonding layer material prior to bonding, and does not disclose forming a rust preventive film on a bonding layer. Furthermore, Dobashi does not disclose the problem to be solved by the present application, prevention of corrosion after assembly and manufacturing of a semiconductor device.
However, Dobashi discloses The rustproof film is preferably chemically bound to the metal section or the metal film. The rustproof film is preferably chemically bound to the insulating substance. The rustproof film is more preferably chemically bound to the metal section or the metal film and the insulating substance. By the presence of the reactive functional group and the chemical binding, the rustproof film is less likely to peel off, and as a result, the metal section or the metal film is further less likely to rust, [0317]. Accordingly, the rustproof film would be chemically bound to the outer surface of the metal particle 1, preventing it from peeling off, and therefore at least some if not all portions of the rustproof film would remain after assembly and manufacture.
Further, “exposed surface” in claim 1 is broad terminology. Exposed surface can refer to the exposed surface of the bonding material or to any other exposed surface.
Further, Applicant argues there would be no motivation for one skilled in the art to apply Dobashi to Sekino because Dobashi and Sekino share no common technical problems.
In U.S. practice, there is no need for all the references to explicitly recognize the same technical problems. Sekino teaches a bonding material containing solder. Dobashi teaches an improved bonding material having metal particles containing solder and silver. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to apply the teachings of Dobashi to that of Sekino in order to improve Sekino’s bonding material by enhancing the melt-bonding property due to the protrusions and effectively enhancing the connection reliability, see Dobashi [0103].
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.
The factual inquiries 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.
Claims 1-3, 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US20180122927A1 (Sekino) in view of US20200269315A1 (Dobashi).
RE: Claim 1, Sekino discloses A semiconductor joining (joining in 1 In FIG. 1) comprising:
at least two constituent members of a semiconductor device (10a and 33 or 10a and 32); and
a bonding material layer (20a) that bonds the semiconductor constituent members.
Sekino does not explicitly disclose:
the bonding material layer (20a) is a silver-containing bonding material.
Sekino discloses that 20a is solder, [0022] and solder is a bonding material, [0028].
However, in the same field of endeavor, Dobashi discloses The metal-containing particle according to the present invention can be used for the connection of two connection target members since the tip of the protrusion in the metal-containing particle can be melt-bonded at a relatively low temperature. By melt-bonding two connection target members to each other at the tip of the protrusion in the metal-containing particle, it is possible to form a connection section exerting firm connection and to enhance the connection reliability, [0089].
Dobashi further discloses The metal-containing particle according to the present invention is equipped with the above configuration and thus can be bonded to another particle or another member by melting the tips of the protrusions in the metal-containing particle at a relatively low temperature and solidifying the melt after melting, enhance the connection reliability, suppress the ion migration phenomenon, and enhance the insulation reliability, [0052].
Dobashi further discloses In a specific aspect of the metal-containing particle according to the present invention, a material of the metal section contains silver, [0044].
Dobashi further discloses It is preferable that the protrusions of the metal section contain solder from the viewpoint of still further enhancing the melt-bonding property due to the protrusions and effectively enhancing the connection reliability, [0103].
Dobashi further discloses metal-containing particles can be bonded to another particle or another member by melting the tip of the protrusions in the metal-containing particle at a relatively low temperature and solidifying the melt after melting, [0081].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use metal-containing particles as the bonding material 20a to melt-bond the semiconductor element 10a to the circuit board 32 as taught by Dobashi to enhance the melt-bonding property due to the protrusions and enhance connection reliability.
Modified Sekino does not explicitly disclose:
wherein a corrosion inhibitor coating layer is provided in contact with the silver-containing bonding material layer;
the silver-containing bonding material layer is covered with the corrosion inhibitor on an exposed surface.
However, Dobashi discloses The outer surface of the metal film may be rustproofed. The metal-containing particle may have a rustproof film on the outer surface of the metal film, [0310].
Dobashi further discloses it is preferable that the outer surface of the metal section or metal film is subjected to an anti-sulfurization treatment by a layer formed using any of a sulfur-containing compound containing a sulfide compound or a thiol compound as a main component, a benzotriazole compound, or a polyoxyethylene ether surfactant. A rustproofing film can be formed on the outer surface of the metal section or metal film by the anti-sulfurization treatment, [0323]. The rustproofing film is considered a corrosion inhibitor layer as it would prevent corrosion or rust.
FIG. 1 shows the metal film 5 is the outermost surface of the metal particle 1.
Dobashi further discloses The rustproof film is preferably chemically bound to the metal section or the metal film. The rustproof film is preferably chemically bound to the insulating substance. The rustproof film is more preferably chemically bound to the metal section or the metal film and the insulating substance. By the presence of the reactive functional group and the chemical binding, the rustproof film is less likely to peel off, and as a result, the metal section or the metal film is further less likely to rust, [0317]. Accordingly, the rustproof film would be chemically bound to the outer surface of the metal particle 1, preventing it from peeling off, and therefore at least some if not all portions of the rustproof film would remain after assembly and manufacture.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to contact the outermost surface of the metal film of the metal-containing particles with an anti-sulfurization treatment to form a corrosion inhibitor layer using a benzotriazole compound as taught by Dobashi in order to suppress the corrosion of the metal-containing particles. As a result, the metal-containing particles would be covered with a benzotriazole compound on an exposed outermost surface of the metal-containing particles. Even after manufacture, this benzotriazole compound would remain on an exposed surface of the metal-containing particles and/or on an exposed surface of Sekino’s circuit board 32.
RE: Claim 2, modified Sekino discloses The semiconductor joining according to claim 1, wherein the corrosion inhibitor is benzotriazole or a derivative thereof, or an amine carboxylate or nitrite (As modified above, the corrosion inhibitor layer is a benzotriazole compound).
RE: Claim 3, modified Sekino discloses The semiconductor joining according to claim 1, wherein the silver-containing bonding material layer contains a brazing material, a sintered material, or a soldering material (Dobashi discloses It is preferable that the protrusions of the metal section contain solder from the viewpoint of still further enhancing the melt-bonding property due to the protrusions and effectively enhancing the connection reliability, [0103]; Accordingly it would have been obvious to include soldering material in the metal particles bonding material as taught by Dobashi to enhance the melt-bonding property and enhance connection reliability).
RE: Claim 5, modified Sekino discloses The semiconductor joining according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the constituent members is a member containing copper or copper alloy, and the corrosion inhibitor coating layer covers the copper or copper alloy (Sekino discloses 32 includes copper circuit patterns, 20a covers the copper circuit patterns of 32, [0026]).
RE: Claim 6, modified Sekino discloses The semiconductor joining according to claim 1, wherein the at least two constituent members are selected from an insulating substrate and a conductive plate, a conductive plate and a semiconductor element (Sekino discloses 33 is a metal plate, [0024]; 10a is a semiconductor element, [0022]), a conductive plate and a heat sink plate, or a semiconductor element and a conductive connecting member (Sekino discloses 10a is a semiconductor element, [0022]; 32 is a circuit board formed of copper having good conductivity, [0026]).
RE: Claim 7, modified Sekino discloses A semiconductor device (1 in FIG. 1 of Sekino as modified above for claim 1) comprising:
a semiconductor element (10b) mounted on a laminated substrate (30 and/or 31 and 33) including an insulating substrate (31) and a conductive plate (33);
a sealing material (90) that seals the semiconductor element; and
the semiconductor joining according to claim 1 (As modified above, device 1 in FIG. 1 of Sekino includes the semiconductor joining according to claim 1).
RE: Claim 8, modified Sekino discloses The semiconductor device according to claim 7, wherein the sealing material contains silicone gel (Sekino discloses 90 is silicone gel, [0036]).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sekino in view of Dobashi as applied to claim 1 and further in view of US20030108766A1 (Nagai).
RE: Claim 4, modified Sekino does not explicitly disclose The semiconductor joining according to claim 1, wherein the corrosion inhibitor coating layer has a thickness of 1 nm to 10 nm.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Nagai discloses an anticorrosive coating less than 5 nm thick for a copper alloy containing silver (Ag), [0012].
Nagai further discloses Anticorrosive coating: Tarnishing of pure copper and copper alloys commonly is prevented by using an organic material containing nitrogen (e.g., benzotriazole, imidazole) to form a chelate with the copper on the surface, thereby forming an anticorrosive coating, [0018].
Nagai further discloses by limiting the anticorrosive coating thickness to less than 5 nm, it becomes possible to achieve a uniform varnish coating thickness, [0018].
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to limit the thickness of the corrosion inhibitor layer to less than 5nm such as 4nm as taught by Nagai to achieve a uniform varnish coating thickness.
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 MICHAEL ANGUIANO whose telephone number is (703)756-1226. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday.
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, Brent Fairbanks can be reached at (408) 918-7532. 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.
/MICHAEL ANGUIANO/Examiner, Art Unit 2899
/DALE E PAGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights