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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/01/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 20-24 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.
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.
The limitation of claim 23 “wherein a width of a bottom surface of the groove is the same as a width of a second side of the semiconductor chip, and a width of the groove at the first side of the glass substrate is greater than a width of a first side of the semiconductor chip” in combination with “wherein at least a portion of the first redistribution structure extends along a side surface and a bottom surface of the glass substrate to the inside the groove, and wherein the semiconductor chip is positioned on the at least a portion of the first redistribution structure on the bottom surface of the groove” cited in claim 20, is not shown in any of the figures.
Therefore, the limitation cited in claims 20 and 23 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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 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.
Claim 23 is 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.
Claim 23 recites “The semiconductor package of claim 20, wherein a width of a bottom surface of the groove is the same as a width of a second side of the semiconductor chip, and a width of the groove at the first side of the glass substrate is greater than a width of a first side of the semiconductor chip”, which is shown in the embodiment of figs. 4A-4I.
However, the currently amended claim 20, upon which claim 23 depends, recites “wherein at least a portion of the first redistribution structure extends along a side surface and a bottom surface of the glass substrate to the inside the groove, and wherein the semiconductor chip is positioned on the at least a portion of the first redistribution structure on the bottom surface of the groove”, which is shown in the embodiment of figs. 3A-3I. Figs. 3A-3I does not show “wherein a width of a bottom surface of the groove is the same as a width of a second side of the semiconductor chip”. Instead, it shows wherein a width of a bottom surface of the groove is the greater than a width of a second side of the semiconductor chip.
Therefore, claim 23 fails to comply with the written description requirement and rejected under 112(a).
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Rho et al. (US 20230307304 A1; hereinafter “Rho”).
In re claim 20, Rho discloses in figs. 1, 3-4, a semiconductor package comprising:
a glass substrate 21 (¶54) having a first side 214 (e.g., lower side; hereinafter “S1”) and a second side 213 (e.g., upper side; hereinafter “S2”) opposite to the first side,
the glass substrate including a groove 28 recessed from the first side S1 and a plurality of holes 231 extending from the first side S1 to the second side S2 of the glass substrate and positioned around the groove 28 (¶54, 68);
a semiconductor chip 40 (¶132) positioned inside the groove 28 on the glass substrate and attached to the glass substrate 21;
a plurality of conductive connection members 241 positioned inside the plurality of holes of the glass substrate, respectively (¶98);
a first redistribution structure 283a, 292 (¶128, 139) positioned on the first side S1 of the glass substrate and connected to the semiconductor chip 40 and the plurality of conductive connection members 241;
a connection member 52 (fig. 1; Table described below ¶170) positioned on the first redistribution structure 283a, 292; and
a second redistribution structure 251, 252, 271 (¶103, 109, Table described below ¶170) positioned on the second side S2 of the glass substrate and connected to the plurality of conductive connection members 241,
wherein at least a portion of the first redistribution structure 283a extends along a side surface and a bottom surface of the glass substrate 21 to the inside the groove 28 (¶128), and
wherein the semiconductor chip 40 is positioned on the at least a portion of the first redistribution structure 283a, 292 on the bottom surface 214 of the groove 28.
In re claim 21, Rho discloses in figs. 1, 3-4, the semiconductor package of claim 20, wherein the first redistribution structure includes
a first wiring layer (e.g., a via layer above the lower layer of 292; fig. 4(b)) that directly contacts each of the plurality of conductive connection members 241 and an electrode (the conductive layer portions of 292 which is directly on the chip 40) of the semiconductor chip 40, and
a second wiring layer (lower layer of 292; fig. 4(b)) on the first wiring layer.
In re claim 22, Rho discloses in figs. 1, 3-4, the semiconductor package of claim 20, wherein at least one of the plurality of conductive connection members 241 and the at least a portion of the first redistribution structure 292 are electrically connected to each other and integrally formed.
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.
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rho, as applied to claim 20 above.
In re claim 24, Rho discloses in figs. 1, 3-4, the semiconductor package of claim 20 outlined above.
Rho further discloses in figs. 1, 3-4,
wherein a depth of each of the plurality of holes 211 is between 350 µm and 700 µm (¶83), which overlaps the claimed range of between 300 µm and 500 µm;
wherein a width of each of the plurality of holes 231 is between 40 µm to 200 µm (¶90), which teaches the claimed range of between 20 µm and 200 µm,
wherein a thickness of a portion of the glass substrate 211 adjacent to the plurality of holes 231 is between 350 µm and 700 µm (¶83), which overlaps the claimed range of between 300 µm and 500 µm; and
wherein a thickness of a portion of the glass substrate below the groove 212 is between 100 µm to 350 µm (¶84), which overlaps the claimed range of between 50 µm and 100 µm.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Rho and arrive at claimed ranges for the substrate thickness, depths of the through holes and depth of the cavity.
One would have been motivated to do as Rho discloses although applying a thinner packaging substrate is advantageous in that electrical signal transmission can be made more efficient, but the packaging substrate also should function as a supporting body of packaging, so it is preferable to apply a glass substrate 21 having the above thickness (¶83). Furthermore, Rho discloses motivation for modifying a thickness of the glass substrate under the groove as when applying a glass substrate of a second portion in such a thickness, it is possible to form a cavity structure more efficiently and stably (¶84).
In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). “[A] prior art reference that discloses a range encompassing a somewhat narrower claimed range is sufficient to establish a prima facie case of obviousness." In re Peterson, 315 F.3d 1325, 1330, 65 USPQ2d 1379, 1382-83 (Fed. Cir. 2003). See MPEP § 2144.05, Obviousness of Ranges
Referring to MPEP § 2144.05, “…the applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results over the prior art range.” (See also MPEP § 716.02 for a discussion of criticality and unexpected results.)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-2, 4-13, 15-16, 19 are allowed.
None of the closest prior art, alone or in combination, discloses all the method steps including after providing the glass substrate including the groove and the hole, attaching a carrier substrate to the glass substrate; and separating the carrier substrate from the glass substrate after forming the first redistribution structure, wherein the second redistribution structure is formed after separating the carrier substrate from the glass substrate, in combination with all other limitations of claim 1.
Claims 2, 4-13 are indicated allowable based on their dependency on claim 1.
None of the closest prior art, alone or in combination, discloses all the method steps including attaching a carrier substrate to the glass substrate; separating the carrier substrate from the glass substrate; forming a conductive connection member to fill the inside of the hole of the glass substrate using an electroplating process; wherein the forming the conductive connection member and the forming at least a part of the first distribution structure are carried out in a single process, wherein the semiconductor chip is attached after the forming the at least the part of the first distribution structure, in combination with all other limitations of claim 15.
Claims 16 and 19 are indicated allowable based on their dependency on claim 15.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NILUFA RAHIM whose telephone number is (571)272-8926. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5:30pm EST.
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, Yara J. Green can be reached at (571) 270-3035. 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.
/NILUFA RAHIM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights