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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 7, 12-14, 19-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The terms “die-level substrate”, “die-level interconnect member”, “die-level metal shield”, “die-level electronic package” in claims 1, 7, 12-14, 19-32 introduce new matter in the Application because they have not supported by Specification or claims as originally filed.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 6, 14, 15, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huesgen (US 2022/0285286) in view of Feng (US 2023/0091182), Meyer (US 2018/0315737), and Chang (US 2021/0302050).
Regarding claim 1, Huesgen discloses an electronics package for use in a module of an electronic device comprising: a die (Fig.2, numeral 204); a die-level substrate (202) disposed under and attached to the die (204), the die-level substrate including one or more redistribution layers (221); a plurality of die-level interconnect members (230) disposed under and attached to the die-level substrate (202), the plurality of die-level interconnect members (230) electrically connected to the die (204) via one or more the redistribution layers (221) in the die-level substrate (202) ([0028]); a conductive seal ring that extends along an outer boundary of the die; and a die-level metal shield (210) ([0034]) disposed over the die (204), the die-level metal shield (210) in contact with a peripheral boundary of the substrate (202) and connected to ground via the plurality of interconnect members (230) ([0101]; [0034]), the die-level metal shield (210) configured to shield the die from stray power and electromagnetic radiation to provide individual shielding of the die ([0034]; note: shield (210) shields dies (204), (208), (206)).
Huesgen does not explicitly disclose (1) that the metal shield connected to ground via the plurality of interconnect members; (2) a plurality of die-level interconnect members is configured for connection of the die to a printed circuit board; (3) a conductive seal ring that extends along an outer boundary of the die.
Regarding element (1), Feng however discloses that that the metal shield (Fig.2, numeral 142) connected to ground via the plurality of interconnect members (Fig.2, numeral 144) ([0029]).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was field to modify Huesgen with Feng to connect metal shield to ground via the plurality of interconnect members for the purpose grounding the metal shield layer.
Regarding element (2), Meyer discloses a plurality of die-level interconnect members (Fig.1, numeral 128) is configured for connection of the die to a printed circuit board (116).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Feng with Meyer to have a plurality of die-level interconnect members configured for connection of the die to a printed circuit board for the purpose fabrication an integrated circuit (Meyer, [0022]).
Regarding element (3), Chang discloses a conductive seal ring that extends along an outer boundary of the die ([0027]- [[0028]).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Feng with Change to have a conductive seal ring that extends along an outer boundary of the die for the purpose of protection an interconnect structure from physical damage (Chang, [0027]).
Regarding claim 14, Huesgen discloses a wireless electronic device comprising an antenna ([0037]); and a front end module ([0027]) including one or more die-level electronic packages, each electronic package (200) of the one or more die-level electronic packages including a die (Fig.2, numeral 204), a die-level substrate disposed (202) under and attached to the die (204), the die-level substrate (202) including one or more redistribution layers (221), a plurality of die-level interconnect members (230) disposed under and attached to the die-level substrate (202), the die-level interconnect members (230) electrically connected to the die via (204) the redistribution layers (221) in the die-level substrate (202) ([0028]) , and a die-level metal shield (210) disposed over the die (204), the die-level metal shield (210) in contact with a peripheral boundary of the substrate (202) and connected to ground ([0031]), the die-level metal shield configured to shield the die from stray power and electromagnetic radiation to provide individual shield of the die ([0031]; [0034]; note: shield (210) shields dies (204), (208), (206 ).
Huesgen does not disclose that (1) the metal shield connected to ground via the plurality of interconnect members; (2) a plurality of die-level interconnect members is configured for connection of the die to a printed circuit board; (3) a conductive seal ring that extends along an outer boundary of the die.
Regarding element (1), Feng however discloses that that the metal shield (Fig.2, numeral 142) connected to ground via the plurality of interconnect members (Fig.2, numeral 144) ([0029]).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was field to modify Huesgen with Feng to connect metal shield to ground via the plurality of interconnect members for the purpose grounding the metal shield layer.
Regarding element (2), Meyer discloses a plurality of die-level interconnect members (Fig.1, numeral 128) is configured for connection of the die to a printed circuit board (116).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Feng with Meyer to have a plurality of die-level interconnect members configured for connection of the die to a printed circuit board for the purpose fabrication an integrated circuit (Meyer, [0022]).
Regarding element (3), Chang discloses a conductive seal ring that extends along an outer boundary of the die ([0027]- [[0028]).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Feng with Change to have a conductive seal ring that extends along an outer boundary of the die for the purpose of protection an interconnect structure from physical damage (Chang, [0027]).
Regarding claims 6 and 19, Huesgen discloses wherein the die (Fig. 2, numeral 204) is covered by a mold (209) disposed between the die (204) and the die-level metal shield (210), at least a portion of the mold (209) extending between the diel-level substrate (202) and the die-level metal shield (210).
Regarding claim 20, Huesgen discloses wherein the mold (209) is completely enclosed between the die-metal shield (210) and the die-level substrate (202).
Regarding claim 29 and 21, Huesgen discloses wherein the die-level metal shield (Fig.2, numeral 210) extends over the peripheral boundary of the die (204) and the peripheral boundary of the die-level substrate (202).
Regarding claim 22 and 30, Huesgen discloses wherein the die (204) extends along an area that substantially coincides with an area of the die-level substrate (202).
Regarding claim 23 and 31, Chang discloses wherein the conductive seal ring extends along an outer boundary of the die-level substrate ([0027]), the conductive seal ring connected to ground via foundry metal in the die-level substrate and the plurality of die-level interconnect members ([0057]).
Regarding claims 24 and 32, Huesgen discloses wherein the die-level metal shield (210) is in contact with a top surface of the die (204) (Fig.2).
Claims 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huesgen in view of Feng, Chang, and Patten (US 2020/0098698).
Regarding claim 7, Huesgen discloses a module for an electronic device comprising:; a die-level electronics package (200) mounted on the package substrate, the die-level electronics package including a die (Fig.2, numeral 204), a die-level substrate disposed (202) under and attached to the die (204), the die-level substrate (202) including one or more redistribution layers (221), a plurality of die-level interconnect members (230) disposed under and attached to the substrate (202), the die-level interconnect members (230) electrically connected to the die via (204) the redistribution layers (221) in the die-level substrate (202) ([0028]) , and a die-level metal shield (210) disposed over the die (204), the die-level metal shield (210) in contact with a peripheral boundary of the die-level substrate (202) and connected to ground ([0031]), the die-level metal shield configured to shield the die from stray power and electromagnetic radiation ([0031]).
Huesgen does not disclose (1) a package substrate and the die-level electronics package mounted to the package substrate via the die-level interconnect members; and additional circuitry, the di-level electronics package and the additional circuitry disposed on the package substrate; (2) that the die-level metal shield connected to ground via the plurality of die-level interconnect member; (3) a conductive seal ring that extends along an outer boundary of the die.
Regarding elements (1), Patten discloses package substrate (Fig. 7, numeral 702) and the die-level electronics package (712) mounted to the package substrate via the die-level interconnect members (726); and additional circuitry (714), the die-level electronics package (712) and the additional circuitry (714) disposed on the package substrate (702).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Huesgen with Patten to have a package substrate and the die-level electronics package mounted to the package substrate via the die-level interconnect members; and additional circuitry, the die-level electronics package and the additional circuitry disposed on the package substrate for the purpose of fabrication wafer level chip scale packages (Patten, Abstract).
Regarding elements (2), Feng however discloses that that the die-level metal shield (Fig.2, numeral 142) connected to ground via the plurality of die-level interconnect members (Fig.2, numeral 144) ([0029]).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was field to modify Huesgen with Feng to connect die-level metal shield to ground via the plurality of die-level interconnect members for the purpose grounding the die-level metal shield layer.
Regarding element (3), Chang discloses a conductive seal ring that extends along an outer boundary of the die ([0027]- [[0028]).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Feng with Change to have a conductive seal ring that extends along an outer boundary of the die for the purpose of protection an interconnect structure from physical damage (Chang, [0027]).
Regarding claim 12, Huesgen discloses wherein the die (Fig.2, numeral 204) is covered by a mold (209) disposed between the die (204) and the di-level metal shield (210), at least a portion of the mold (209) extending between the die-level substrate (202) and the die-level metal shield (210).
Regarding claim 13, Huesgen discloses wherein the mold (209) is completely enclosed between the die-level metal shield (210) and the die-level substrate (202).
Regarding claim 25, Huesgen discloses wherein the die-level metal shield (Fig.2, numeral 210) extends over the peripheral boundary of the die (204) and the peripheral boundary of the die-level substrate (202).
Regarding claim 26, Huesgen discloses wherein the die (204) extends along an area that substantially coincides with an area of the die-level substrate (202).
Regarding claim 27, Chang discloses wherein the conductive seal ring extends along an outer boundary of the die-level substrate ([0027]), the conductive seal ring connected to ground via foundry metal in the die-level substrate and the plurality of die-level interconnect members ([0057]).
Regarding claim 28, Huesgen discloses wherein the die-level metal shield (210) is in contact with a top surface of the die (204) (Fig.2).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 6, 7, 12-14, 19-32 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 JULIA SLUTSKER whose telephone number is (571)270-3849. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9 am-6 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, Matthew Landau can be reached at 571-272-1731. 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.
/JULIA SLUTSKER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2891