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 of Group I, including claims 1-2, 4-5 and 7-11 in the reply filed on 4/2/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claim Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The Examiner suggests the following amendment to correct an apparent typographic error.
4. (Currently Amended) The film-shaped adhesive according to .
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 7 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozaki et al. (Foreign Patent No. JP 2012-253278 A, machine translation provided) in view of Sugo et al. (PG Pub. No. US 2014/0231983 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ozaki teaches a film-shaped adhesive (¶ 0023 & fig. 3 among others: 2) comprising particles (¶ 0042: inorganic filler), wherein the film-shaped adhesive has a shear viscosity at 100 °C to 120 °C of 30000 Pa-s or less (¶ 0012: shear viscosity of the die bonding film at 100 to 120 °C not more than 5000 Pa-s).
Ozaki does not teach the shear viscosity of 30000 Pa-s or less at 110 °C, or the inorganic filler comprises metal.
However, it has been held that 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). In the instant case, the claimed shear viscosity temperature of 110 °C lies inside the range disclosed by Ozaki (100 to 120 °C).
Furthermore, Sugo teaches a film-shaped adhesive comprising metal filler particles (¶¶ 0055, 0071: film adhesive 3 comprises metal particles).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the particles of Ozaki with metal, as a means to optimize thermal conductivity and/or a heat-releasing property of the film-shaped adhesive, avoiding a deterioration in electrical conductivity (Sugo, ¶ 0035) and warping of a semiconductor wafer (Sugo, ¶ 0012).
Regarding claim 7, Ozaki in view of Sugo teaches the film-shaped adhesive according to claim 1, wherein the metal particles are conductive particles (Sugo, ¶ 0071: particles comprise metal, and therefore is electrically and/or thermally conductive).
Regarding claim 9, Ozaki in view of Sugo teaches an integrated film comprising the film-shaped adhesive according to claim 1 (Ozaki: 24, as modified by Sugo).
Ozaki in view of Sugo as applied to claim 1 does not teach a dicing-die bonding integrated film comprising, in the following order:
a base material layer;
a pressure-sensitive adhesive layer; and
a bonding adhesive layer formed from the film-shaped adhesive according to claim 1.
However, Sugo teaches a dicing-die bonding integrated film (¶ 0071 & fig. 1: 11) comprising, in the following order:
a base material layer (¶ 0072: 1);
a pressure-sensitive adhesive layer (¶ 0075: 2); and
a bonding adhesive layer (¶ 0082: 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the integrated film of Ozaki in view of Sugo in a dicing-die bonding integrated film, as a means to provide a film suitable for fixing semiconductor components to metal lead frames (Sugo, ¶ 0004).
Regarding claim 10, Ozaki in view of Sugo teaches film-shaped adhesive (Ozaki: 24, as modified by Sugo) according to claim 1.
Ozaki in view of Sugo as applied to claim 1 above fails to teach a semiconductor device comprising:
a semiconductor chip;
a support member having the semiconductor chip mounted thereon; and
a bonding adhesive member provided between the semiconductor chip and the support member and adhering the semiconductor chip and the support member, wherein the bonding adhesive member is a cured product of the.
However, Sugo teaches a semiconductor device (fig. 3) comprising:
a semiconductor chip (¶ 0104: 5);
a support member (¶ 0107: 6) having the semiconductor chip mounted thereon (fig. 3); and
a bonding adhesive member (¶ 0071: 3) provided between the semiconductor chip and the support member and adhering the semiconductor chip and the support member (fig. 3: 3 provided between 5 and 11, and adheres 5 and 11), wherein the bonding adhesive member is a cured product of a film-shaped adhesive (¶ 0083).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the adhesive member of Ozaki in view of Sugo in a semiconductor device, as a means to provide a film suitable for fixing semiconductor components to metal lead frames (Sugo, ¶ 0004).
Regarding claim 11, Ozaki in view of Sugo teaches method for manufacturing a semiconductor device (Sugo, fig. 3), the method comprising:
sticking a semiconductor wafer (Sugo, ¶ 0102 & fig. 1: 4) to the bonding adhesive layer (Sugo, 3) of the dicing-die bonding integrated film according to claim 9 (Campbell, 24 as modified by Sugo);
producing a plurality of singulated adhesive piece-attached semiconductor chips (Sugo, fig. 3: semiconductor chip 5 attached to adhesive film 3) by dicing the semiconductor wafer with the bonding adhesive layer stuck thereto (Sugo, ¶ 0096: 5/3 formed by dicing wafer 4 attached to film 3); and
adhering the adhesive piece-attached semiconductor chips on a support member (Sugo, ¶ 0107 & fig. 3: 5/3 adhered to adherend 6), with the adhesive piece interposed therebetween (Sugo, fig. 3: 3 interposed between 5 and 6).
Claims 4-5, 8 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozaki in view of Sugo as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sugo et al. (Foreign patent No. TW 201533215 A, machine translation provided, hereinafter referenced as ‘Sugo-215’).
Regarding claims 4-5, Ozaki in view of Sugo teaches the film-shaped adhesive according to
Ozaki in view of Sugo does not teach wherein the film-shaped adhesive further comprises a thermosetting resin, a curing agent, and an elastomer, and a content of the metal particles is 70.0% by mass or more and/or 20.0% by volume or more based on a total amount of the metal particles, the thermosetting resin, the curing agent, and the elastomer.
Sugo-215 teaches a film-shaped adhesive (¶ 0100 & fig. 2: 10) comprising a thermosetting resin (¶ 0056), a curing agent (¶ 0063), and an elastomer (¶¶ 0105, 0115), and a content of the metal particles is 70.0% by mass or more and/or 20.0% by volume or more based on a total amount of the metal particles, the thermosetting resin, the curing agent, and the elastomer (¶¶ 0063, 0082).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the film-shaped adhesive of Ozaki in view of Sugo with the composition of Sugo, as a means to optimize properties such as electrical conductivity and adhesion (Sugo-215, ¶¶ 0062-0063).
Regarding claim 8, Ozaki in view of Sugo teaches the film-shaped adhesive according to claim 1, comprising metal particles (Ozaki, 24 as modified by Sugo).
Ozaki in view of Sugo does not teach wherein the metal particles are silver particles.
Sugo-215 teaches a film-shaped adhesive (¶ 0100 & fig. 2: 10) including silver particles (¶ 0065).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to configure the film-shaped adhesive of Ozaki in view of Sugo to include silver particles, as means to provide a film suitable for fixing semiconductor components to metal lead frames (Sugo-215, ¶¶ 0002-0003).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is 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 fails to teach or clearly suggest the limitations stating:
“the film-shaped adhesive has a loss modulus at 110°C of 200 kPa or less” as recited in claim 2.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Campbell et al. (US 2018/0118982 A1) teaches a film-shaped adhesive (¶¶ 0053, 0071: 24) comprising metal particles (¶ 0038), wherein the film-shaped adhesive has a shear viscosity at 110°C of 30000 Pa-s or less (¶ 0007: 5000 Pa-s between 35 and 120C) as recited in claim 1, and metal particles are conductive particles (¶ 0039: particles comprise metal, and therefore is electrically and/or thermally conductive) as recited in claim 7.
Takayama (JP 2005-276925 A, machine translation attached) teaches a film-shaped adhesive comprising metal particles (¶ 0020), a thermosetting resin (¶ 0028), a curing agent (¶ 0028), and an elastomer (¶ 0013).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN TURNER whose telephone number is (571)270-5411. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-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, Eva Montalvo can be reached at 571-270-3829. 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.
/BRIAN TURNER/Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights