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 .
Election/Restrictions
The 6/17/2026 "Reply" elects with traverse species A1 and identifies as reading on claims 1-8, 10-11, and 14-20.
In the restriction requirement Examiner has set forth why the restriction requirement is proper. Applicant contends that “because the Examiner has not identified any claims that are directed to the alleged species, there cannot be any reasoning as to how the claims recite ‘mutually exclusive characteristics of such species’ as alleged in the Restriction Requirement.” This argument is not persuasive. The Office action identifies the species by figure and identifies mutually exclusive features of each species in accordance with MPEP §809.02(a). Accordingly, the restriction requirement is maintained and Examiner has withdrawn claims 9 and 12-13 from further consideration as being drawn to a non-elected invention. See, for example, 37 CFR § 1.142(b).
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities: “at least one of the integrated circuit dies” should be “the integrated circuit die.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 10-11 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bhatia (US Patent No. 6,094,919).
Regarding claim 10, in FIGs. 2-6, Bhatia discloses an integrated circuit package comprising: a package substrate (97); a plurality of integrated circuit dies (93 and 94) coupled to a top side of the package substrate; and a heat spreader (everything above 93 and 94) coupled to the top side of the package substrate and encapsulating the plurality of integrated circuit dies, the heat spreader comprising a Peltier element (91/92, col. 4, line 59 and col. 1, lines 44-60) above at least one of the integrated circuit dies.
Regarding claim 11, in FIGs. 2-6, Bhatia discloses that the heat spreader comprises a Peltier element above all of the integrated circuit dies (93 and 94).
Regarding claim 14, in FIGs. 2-6, Bhatia discloses that the Peltier element comprises p-type (P) and n-type (N) semiconductor elements between a first thermally conductive layer (32) and a second thermally conductive layer (33).
Regarding claim 15, in FIGs. 2-6, Bhatia discloses that the heat spreader comprises a top portion above the integrated circuit dies and sidewalls that surround the integrated circuit dies, the heat spreader coupled to the package substrate via the sidewalls, the Peltier element in the top portion of the heat spreader (see FIG. 6).
Regarding claim 16, in FIGs. 2-6, Bhatia discloses an electrical trace (36/37) on (or overlapping with) an inner wall of the heat spreader, the electrical trace electrically coupling an electrical connector of the package substrate and an electrical connector of the Peltier element.
Regarding claim 17, in FIGs. 2-6, Bhatia discloses a system comprising: a circuit board (40); and an integrated circuit package coupled to the circuit board, the integrated circuit package comprising: a package substrate (41); an integrated circuit die (42) coupled to a top surface the package substrate; a heat spreader (everything above 42) coupled to the integrated circuit die and the top surface of the package substrate, the heat spreader comprising a Peltier element (35) above at least one of the integrated circuit dies; and a heatsink (31) coupled to the heat spreader.
Regarding claim 18, in FIGs. 2-6, Bhatia discloses that the Peltier element comprises p-type and n-type semiconductor elements between a first thermally conductive layer (32) and a second thermally conductive layer (33).
Regarding claim 19, in FIGs. 2-6, Bhatia discloses that the heat spreader comprises a top portion above the integrated circuit die and sidewalls that surround the integrated circuit die, the heat spreader coupled to the package substrate via the sidewalls, the Peltier element in the top portion of the heat spreader, and the integrated circuit package further comprises an electrical trace (36/37) on (or overlapping with) an inner wall of at least one sidewall of the heat spreader, the electrical trace electrically coupling an electrical connector of the package substrate and an electrical connector of the Peltier element.
Regarding claim 20, in FIGs. 2-6, Bhatia discloses a power source coupled to the circuit board, wherein the Peltier element is coupled to the voltage source through (wires must pass through) the main board and the package substrate (col. 3, lines 26-37).
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 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chrysler (US Pub. No. 2006/0243315) in view of Mansuria (US Patent No. 5,032,897).
Regarding claim 1, in FIG. 1, Chrysler discloses an integrated circuit package comprising: a package substrate (4); an integrated circuit die (2) coupled to the package substrate; and a heat spreader (everything above die 2) coupled to the package substrate and the integrated circuit die, the heat spreader comprising a top portion above the integrated circuit die, the top portion comprising: a first thermally conductive layer (20); a second thermally conductive layer (10); first semiconductor elements (p-type layer 14) between the first thermally conductive layer and the second thermally conductive layer, and second semiconductor elements (n-type layer 16) between the first thermally conductive layer and the second thermally conductive layer.
Chrysler appears not to explicitly disclose that the heat spreader comprises a top portion above the integrated circuit die and sidewalls that surround the integrated circuit die; the first semiconductor elements comprising silicon and at least one of boron, aluminum, gallium, and germanium; the second semiconductor elements comprising silicon and at least one of phosphorous, arsenic, and antimony.
The art however well recognized a heat spreader that comprises a top portion above an integrated circuit die and sidewalls that surround the integrated circuit die to be suitable for use as a heat spreader. See, for example, Mansuria, FIG. 1, elements 20/12/30/28.
According to well-established patent law precedents (see, for example, M.P.E.P. § 2144.07), therefore, it 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 to have formed the Chrysler disclosed heat spreader such that it comprises a top portion above the integrated circuit die and sidewalls that surround the integrated circuit die for its recognized suitability as a heat spreader.
Chrysler as modified appears not to explicitly disclose that the first semiconductor elements comprising silicon and at least one of boron, aluminum, gallium, and germanium; the second semiconductor elements comprising silicon and at least one of phosphorous, arsenic, and antimony.
The art however well recognized silicon doped with at least one of boron, aluminum, gallium, and germanium to be suitable for forming a p-type semiconductor and silicon doped with at least one of phosphorous, arsenic, and antimony to be suitable for forming a n-type semiconductor.
According to well-established patent law precedents (see, for example, M.P.E.P. § 2144.07), therefore, it 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 to have formed the Chrysler disclosed first and second semiconductor elements such that it comprises silicon doped with at least one of boron, aluminum, gallium, and germanium and silicon doped with at least one of phosphorous, arsenic, and antimony for its recognized suitability in forming a p-type semiconductor and an n-type semiconductor.
Regarding claim 2, in FIG. 1, Chrysler discloses electrically conductive material (12/18, paragraph [0012]) coupled to the first semiconductor elements and the second semiconductor elements, and arranged to cause current to flow through the first semiconductor elements and the second semiconductor elements in series, alternating between the first and the second semiconductor elements.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Chrysler and Mansuria discloses (see Masuria, FIG. 2) that the sidewalls of the heat spreader comprise a metal outer portion and a dielectric portion inside the metal outer portions (col. 3, lines 60-61).
Claims 3, 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chrysler (US Pub. No. 2006/0243315) in view of Mansuria (US Patent No. 5,032,897) as applied to claim 1, and further in view of Bhatia (US Pub. No. 6,094,919).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Chrysler and Mansuria appears not to explicitly disclose an electrical trace on an inner wall of at least one sidewall, the electrical trace electrically coupling an electrical connector of the package substrate and an electrical connector of the top portion connected to the first and second semiconductor elements.
However, in FIGs. 2-4, Bhatia discloses a similar device wherein an electrical trace (36/37) is on (or overlapping with) an inner wall of at least one sidewall (34), the electrical trace electrically coupling an electrical connector of a package substrate (40) and an electrical connector of the top portion connected to the first and second semiconductor elements (see FIG. 4) to supply power to cool the device.
To cool the device it 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 to have an electrical trace on an inner wall of at least one sidewall, the electrical trace electrically coupling an electrical connector of the package substrate and an electrical connector of the top portion connected to the first and second semiconductor elements, as disclosed by Bhatia.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of Chrysler and Mansuria appears not to explicitly disclose that the first thermally conductive layer comprises a ceramic and the second thermally conductive layer comprises a ceramic.
The art however well recognized a first thermally conductive layer comprising a ceramic and a second thermally conductive layer comprising a ceramic, sandwiching a TEM layer, to be suitable for use as insulators above and below a TEM layer. See, for example, Bhatia, FIG. 2, elements 32 and 33.
According to well-established patent law precedents (see, for example, M.P.E.P. § 2144.07), therefore, it 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 to have formed the Chrysler disclosed first thermally conductive layer such that it comprises a ceramic and the second thermally conductive layer such that it comprises a ceramic for its recognized suitability as insulators above and below a TEM layer.
Regarding claim 8, Chrysler and Mansuria discloses that at least a portion of a top surface of the heat spreader comprises the first thermally conductive layer (20) .
The combination of Chrysler and Mansuria appears not to explicitly disclose that the second thermally conductive layer is coupled to the integrated circuit die via a thermal interface material.
However, in FIG. 2, Bhatia discloses a similar device wherein a second thermally conductive layer (33) is coupled to an integrated circuit die (42) via a thermal interface material (36) to (col. 3, line 30) to establish adequate thermal contact between the integrated circuit die and second thermally conductive layer.
To establish adequate thermal contact between the integrated circuit die and second thermally conductive layer it 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 to couple the second thermally conductive layer to the integrated circuit die via a thermal interface material.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art failed to disclose or reasonably suggest the claimed integrated circuit package particularly characterized by a second electrical connection material coupling the electrical trace and the electrical connector of the top portion connected to the first and second semiconductor elements.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUCKER J WRIGHT whose telephone number is (571)270-3234. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:00pm.
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.
/TUCKER J WRIGHT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2891
Prosecution Insights