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
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I, claims 6, 13, and 18 in the reply filed on 11/03/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 7-8, 14, 19-20, and 22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 09/04/2025.
Claims 1-6, 9-13, 15-18, and 21 remain pending and are fully examined on the merits.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the plurality of unit supporters (claim 13, line 4) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claims. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the plurality of unit supporters" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation is interpreted as any type of structure.
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.
Claims 1-4 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ho et. al, U.S. Pat. Pub. 2013/0037958, hereafter Ho.
Regarding claim 1, Ho discloses (Fig. 7, upside-down, see annotated version)
PNG
media_image1.png
450
627
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a semiconductor wafer (substrate) comprising: an alignment key structure disposed over a substrate [26];
a contact pattern layer [31] (Fig. 1) disposed on the alignment key structure extending upward of the alignment key structure; and
an insulating layer (ILD [25], par. [0006], [27], [29], Fig. 1) in contact with the alignment key structure and the contact pattern layer over the substrate [26].
Regarding claim 2, Ho further discloses (par. [0014]) wherein the alignment key structure is disposed in a scribe lane region located between a plurality of chip regions [20] of the substrate [26].
Regarding claim 3, Ho further discloses (Fig. 7) wherein the alignment key structure includes a plurality of unit key patterns [40’] disposed over the substrate [26], and wherein the plurality of unit key patterns are disposed to extend in a first direction (e.g., into the drawing in Fig. 7) that is substantially parallel to a surface of the substrate [26].
Regarding claim 4, Ho further discloses (See annotated Fig. 7 above) wherein the plurality of unit key patterns [40’] are arranged in a second direction (Horizontally in Fig. 7) that is substantially perpendicular to the first direction.
Regarding claim 9, Ho further discloses (See Fig. 1 upside-down) further comprising a connection pattern layer [33] disposed over the alignment key structure to cover the contact pattern layer [31].
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, 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 1-6, 9-13, 15-18, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uehling et. al., U.S. Pat. Pub. 2006/0001144, hereafter Uehling.
Regarding claim 1, Uehling disclose (Figs 1-3) a semiconductor wafer comprising: a key structure [52],[54],[56],[58] disposed over a substrate [48]; a contact pattern layer [62] disposed on the key structure extending upward of the key structure; and an insulating layer [50] (par. [0020]) in contact with the key structure [52], [54], [56], [58] and the contact pattern layer [62] over the substrate [48].
Uehling teaches (par. [0015]) the key structure having the purpose of preventing cracks (par. [0015]) and a separate alignment key structure [32] (Fig. 1) for photo alignment.
However, both structures have gratings, and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine the gratings taught by the crack stopping structure [38] of Uehling with the gratings needed for the alignment key structure to perform both alignment and stress management in one structure because a single stricture instead of three structures in the scribe lane of Uehling saves space and assists size reduction for semiconductor dice as processes with lower critical dimensions become available.
PNG
media_image2.png
815
689
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Uehling discloses everything as applied above. Uehling further discloses (Fig. 1) wherein the key structure is disposed in a scribe lane region [20] located between a plurality of chip regions [12], [14], [16], [18] of the substrate [48].
Regarding claim 3, Uehling discloses everything as applied above. Uehling further discloses (Figs 2,3) wherein the key structure [38] includes a plurality of unit key patterns [48], [46] disposed over the substrate [48], and wherein the plurality of unit key patterns are disposed to extend in a first direction (e.g., horizontally in Fig.3) that is substantially parallel to a surface of the substrate [48].
Regarding claim 4, Uehling discloses everything as applied above. Uehling further discloses (Figs 2,3, this only applies to a part of the plurality of grid-like structures in Fig. 3 that extend horizontally, see annotated Figs 2 and 3 above) wherein the plurality of unit key patterns [44],[46] are arranged in a second direction (vertically) that is substantially perpendicular to the first direction (horizontal).
Regarding claim 5, Uehling discloses everything as applied above. Uehling further discloses (Figs 2,3) wherein each of the plurality of unit key patterns has a length along the first direction and a width along the second direction, and wherein the length is greater than the width (see Fig. 3)
Regarding claim 6, Uehling discloses everything as applied above. Uehling further discloses (Figs 2,3, see annotated version above) wherein the contact pattern layer [62] includes pillar structures [62] arranged in the first direction on an upper surface of each of the plurality of unit key patterns [44],[46].
Regarding claim 9, Uehling discloses everything as applied above. Uehling further discloses further comprising a connection pattern layer (lines [60] in Fig. 2) disposed over the alignment key structure to cover the contact pattern layer [62].
Regarding claim 10, Uehling discloses everything as applied above. Uehling further discloses
wherein the connection pattern layer [62] is disposed to overlap with at least a portion of the key structure [44], [46].
Regarding claim 11, Uehling discloses everything as applied above. Uehling fails to explicitly disclose wherein the alignment key structure includes a nitride of a first metal, wherein the contact pattern layer includes the first metal, wherein the connection pattern layer includes a second metal different from the first metal, and wherein the insulating layer includes an oxide.
However, picking a particular metal and metal nitride material for an interconnected metal structure is obvious because silicon oxide and silicon nitride are most commonly used insulators, and
Metals and metal nitrides are most commonly used for interconnects (Uehling, par. [0020]) and because
of the following arguments.
The selection of a known 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) (Claims to a printing ink comprising a solvent having the vapor pressure characteristics of butyl carbitol so that the ink would not dry at room temperature but would dry quickly upon heating were held invalid over a reference teaching a printing ink made with a different solvent that was nonvolatile at room temperature but highly volatile when heated in view of an article which taught the desired boiling point and vapor pressure characteristics of a solvent for printing inks and a catalog teaching the boiling point and vapor pressure characteristics of butyl carbitol.)
See also In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (selection of a known plastic to make a container of a type made of plastics prior to the invention was held to be obvious); Ryco, Inc. v. Ag-Bag Corp., 857 F.2d 1418, 8 USPQ2d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 1988) (Claimed agricultural bagging machine, which differed from a prior art machine only in that the brake means were hydraulically operated rather than mechanically operated, was held to be obvious over the prior art machine in view of references which disclosed hydraulic brakes for performing the same function, albeit in a different environment.).
(MPEP, Latest revision 2144.07)
Regarding claim 12, Uehling discloses everything as applied above. Uehling further discloses
(see annotated Figs 2-3 above) wherein the key structure includes a plurality of unit key patterns disposed over the substrate and extending in the first direction, and wherein the connection pattern layer is disposed to correspond to each of the plurality of unit key patterns.
Regarding claim 13, Uehling discloses everything as applied above. Uehling further discloses
(see annotated Figs 2-3 above) wherein the contact pattern layer includes a pillar structure.
Regarding claim 15, Uehling discloses a semiconductor wafer comprising: a key structure [52], [54], [56], [58] disposed over a substrate [48]; and a stress alleviation structure (par. [0028]) disposed over the key structure (all structure above the key structure preventing cracks), wherein the stress alleviation structure includes: a contact pattern layer extending upward of the key structure over the key structure; and a connection pattern layer covering the contact pattern layer over the key structure (see annotated Figs 2-3 above).
Uehling teaches (par. [0015]) the key structure having the purpose of preventing cracks (par. [0015]) and a separate alignment key structure [32] (Fig. 1) for photo alignment.
However, both structures have gratings, and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to effective filing date of the instant application to combine the gratings taught by the crack stopping structure [38] of Uehling with the gratings needed for the alignment key structure to perform both alignment and stress management in one structure because a single stricture instead of three structures in the scribe lane of Uehling saves space and assists size reduction for semiconductor dice as processes with lower critical dimensions become available.
Regarding claim 16, Uehling discloses everything as applied above. Uehling fails to explicitly disclose wherein the alignment key structure includes nitride of first metal, wherein the contact pattern layer includes the first metal, and wherein the connection pattern layer includes second metal different from the first metal
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to effective date of the instant application to select materials as claimed for the reasons applied in the rejection of claim 11 above.
Regarding claim 17, Uehling discloses everything as applied above. Uehling further discloses
(see annotated Figs 2-3 above) wherein the key structure includes a plurality of unit key patterns, and wherein the plurality of unit key patterns are disposed to extend in a first direction that is substantially parallel to a surface of the substrate.
Regarding claim 18, Uehling discloses everything as applied above. Uehling further discloses
(see annotated Figs 2-3 above) wherein the contact pattern layer includes pillar structures arranged in the first direction on each of the plurality of unit key patterns.
Regarding claim 21, Uehling discloses everything as applied above. Uehling further discloses
(see annotated Figs 2-3 above) wherein the connection pattern layer is disposed to correspond to each of the plurality of unit key patterns.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTOR V BARZYKIN whose telephone number is (571)272-0508. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-5pm.
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, BRITT HANLEY can be reached at (571)270-3042. 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.
/VICTOR V BARZYKIN/Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/Britt Hanley/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893