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 § 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)(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.
Claims 1 – 10, 13 – 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Gavagnin (US 2023/0319989).
Regarding claim 1, Gavagnin teaches (FIG. 5):
An interposer structure, comprising:
a conductive portion (40) having a first surface and a second surface opposite to the first surface;
a dielectric layer (27, [0050] – [0051]) encapsulating the conductive portion and exposing the first surface and the second surface;
a plurality of first wires (18) formed on the first surface; and
a plurality of second wires (24) disposed over the second surface.
Regarding claim 2, Gavagnin teaches (FIG. 5):
The interposer structure as claimed in claim 1, wherein, in a cross-section view, a pitch of the plurality of first wires is different from a pitch of the plurality of second wires.
Regarding claim 3, Gavagnin teaches growing the nanowire from a conductive surface that may be different from the conductive layer structure ([0023]) and controlling the nanowire distribution by growing from a porous layer ([0038]), which are functionally analogous with a “seed” layer:
The interposer structure as claimed in claim 1, further comprising a seed layer between the conductive portion and the plurality of second wires.
Regarding claim 4, Gavagnin teaches tapered structures ([0018]):
The interposer structure as claimed in claim 3, wherein, in a cross-section view, the conductive portion tapers toward the seed layer.
Regarding claim 5, Gavagnin teaches (FIG. 5):
The interposer structure as claimed in claim 4, wherein a portion of the plurality of first wires is not vertically overlapped by the plurality of second wires.
Regarding claim 6, Gavagnin teaches ([0023]):
The interposer structure as claimed in claim 4, wherein the conductive portion and the plurality of first wires are continuously formed.
Regarding claim 7, Gavagnin teaches (FIG. 4):
A package structure, comprising:
a first substrate (16b);
a second substrate (16a) over the first substrate; and
an interposer (15) between the first substrate and the second substrate, the interposer comprising:
a network portion (26) electrically connecting the first substrate and the second substrate; and
a dielectric layer (28) at least partially encapsulating the network portion and bonding the first substrate and the second substrate.
Regarding claim 8, Gavagnin teaches:
The package structure as claimed in claim 7, wherein the interposer further comprises a via portion interposed by the network portion (40).
Regarding claim 9, Gavagnin teaches (FIG. 4):
The package structure as claimed in claim 8, wherein the via portion is spaced apart from the first substrate or the second substrate.
Regarding claim 10, Gavagnin teaches (FIG. 4):
The package structure as claimed in claim 7, wherein the dielectric layer horizontally overlaps the network portion.
Regarding claim 13, Gavagnin teaches (FIG. 4 – 5):
A package structure, comprising:
a first substrate (16b);
a second substrate (16a) over the first substrate; and
an interposer (15) between the first substrate and the second substrate, the interposer comprising a conductive structure (26) electrically connecting the first substrate and the second substrate, wherein the conductive structure comprises an upper portion (18), a lower portion (24), and a seed layer between the upper portion and the lower portion (growing the nanowire from a conductive surface that may be different from the conductive layer structure ([0023]) and controlling the nanowire distribution by growing from a porous layer ([0038]), which are functionally analogous with a “seed” layer), a first void is formed within the upper portion, and a second void is formed within the lower portion (FIG. 5, [0040]).
Regarding claim 14, Gavagnin teaches (FIG. 5 – growth layer is part of interposer 15):
The package structure as claimed in claim 13, wherein the first substrate has an top surface facing the second substrate, the second substrate has a bottom surface facing the first substrate, and an elevation of the seed layer is between an elevation of the top surface of the first substrate and an elevation of the bottom surface of the second substrate.
Regarding claim 15, Gavagnin teaches:
The package structure as claimed in claim 14, wherein the interposer further comprises a dielectric layer encapsulating the conductive structure (27), and the dielectric layer horizontally overlaps the seed layer (FIG. 5).
Regarding claim 16, Gavagnin teaches (FIG. 5):
The package structure as claimed in claim 15, wherein the dielectric layer horizontally overlaps the first substrate or the second substrate.
Regarding claim 17, Gavagnin teaches (FIG. 5, [0018]):
The package structure as claimed in claim 14, wherein the conductive structure further comprises a via portion (40) between the lower portion and the seed layer, and the via portion tapers toward the seed layer.
Regarding claim 18, Gavagnin teaches (FIG. 5):
The package structure as claimed in claim 17, wherein the via portion is between the elevation of the top surface of the first substrate and the elevation of the bottom surface of the second substrate.
Regarding claim 20, Gavagnin teaches (FIG. 4):
The package structure as claimed in claim 14, wherein the first substrate comprises a first dielectric layer defining a first opening, and the lower portion extends into the first opening, wherein a portion of the lower portion does not contact an inner sidewall of the first opening.
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 11, 12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gavagnin (US 2023/0319989).
Regarding claim 11, Gavagnin teaches:
The package structure as claimed in claim 7, wherein the network portion comprises a first network (24) proximal to the first substrate and a second network (18) proximal to the second substrate, and.
Gavagnin fails to expressly disclose a wire density of the first network is different from a wire density of the second network.
However, Gavagnin does expressly teach varying the distribution area, sizes, and shapes of the nanowires for ease of manufacturing and enhancing connections between conductive structures and for connecting substrates of differing technologies ([0014], [0037] – [0042]).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to form the nanowires on either side of the interposer of whatever density was necessary or expedient for connection to differing upper and lower substrates, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 12, Gavagnin teaches:
The package structure as claimed in claim 11, wherein the second substrate comprises a die ([0042]), and.
Gavagnin fails to expressly disclose the wire density of the second network is greater than the wire density of the first network.
However, Gavagnin does expressly teach varying the distribution area, sizes, and shapes of the nanowires for ease of manufacturing and enhancing connections between conductive structures and for connecting substrates of differing technologies ([0014], [0037] – [0042]).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to form the nanowires on either side of the interposer of whatever density was necessary or expedient for connection to differing upper and lower substrates, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 19, Gavagnin teaches connection structures having voids, but fails to expressly disclose:
The package structure as claimed in claim 17, wherein from a cross-section view, a size of the first void is larger than a size of the second void.
However, Gavagnin does expressly teach varying the distribution area, sizes, and shapes of the nanowires for ease of manufacturing and enhancing connections between conductive structures and for connecting substrates of differing technologies ([0014], [0037] – [0042]).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to form the nanowires on either side of the interposer of whatever density was necessary or expedient for connection to differing upper and lower substrates, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CORY W ESKRIDGE whose telephone number is (571)272-0543. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 9 - 5.
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, Jerry O'Connor can be reached at (571) 272-6787. 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.
/CORY W ESKRIDGE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3624