Non-Final Rejection
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . By preliminary amendment, the specification and claims 1, 5, and 22-24 are amended, claims 4, 6-16, and 20 are cancelled, and claim 25 added. Claims 1-3, 5, 17-19, and 21-25 are pending.
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 1, 2, 5, 21, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2018/0310397 (“Noguchi”) in view of JP 2001-284388A (“JP ‘388”), and further in view of US 2001/0026991 (“Ichikawa”), and further in view of US 2020/0118909 (“Kainuma”).
Regarding claim 1, Noguchi describes in Fig. 4 and discussion thereof an optical communication module ([0002]) comprising:
a plate-shaped stem 113;
a plurality of leads 111 penetrating through the stem via insulating members;
Noguchi shows wire bonds connected to the top surface of the leads, but does not show a conductive member for connection formed on either a top surface or a side surface of at least one lead among the plurality of leads. JP ‘388 teaches that when wire bonding, it is useful to first form a bump, i.e. a conductive member for connection, to bond the wire. [0002]-[0004]. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to do this as it improves the bonding strength, as taught by JP ‘388.
Noguchi further discloses:
a heat sink block 114 (heat radiator, [0039]) provided on the stem;
a sub-mount 115 which is fixed to the heat sink block and is provided with a metal pattern 117 on a flat surface thereof;
a semiconductor light emitting element 116 which is fixed to the metal pattern and emits laser light ([0041]); and
wire bonds 118 between the leads and the metal pattern.
Noguchi does not describe that a metal ball is formed at an end of the wire and is bonded to the pattern. Ichikawa shows a wire bonding process for a similar device, and shows that when forming the bond a metal ball is formed at the tip of the wire. [0012]-[0017]. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that there will be such metal balls as this is a conventional way in which wire bonding is done. At the very least this would have been as a simple substitution of one known process for another to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143 I.B. Noguchi does not get into the wire bonding specifics, but Ichikawa shows a conventional manner of wire bonding that does produce metal balls as claimed. The result would have been predictable because in either case you just end up with wire bonded elements.
Noguchi discloses the wires are connected to the top surface of the leads, but does not disclose that the top surface of the at least one lead among the plurality of leads has a spherical surface. Kainuma shows a similar device in which the leads 20 have a spherical surface 21a on the tip. Fig. 1, [0022]. It would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art to shape the top of the leads this way as it makes it easier to insert the other parts into the device without getting caught on the edge of the lead, as taught by Kainuma. [0003]-[0004], [0035]-[0026].
Regarding claim 2, JP ‘388 teaches the conductive member is a bump.
Regarding claim 5, Noguchi shows a plurality of the wires 118 are bonded to the at least one lead 111.
Regarding claim 21: A method for manufacturing an optical communication module comprising:
fixing a sub-mount having a metal pattern formed on a flat surface thereof to a heat sink block provided on a plate-shaped stem;
fixing a semiconductor light emitting element to the metal pattern;
processing a top surface of a tip end of at least one lead among a plurality of leads penetrating through the stem into a hemispherical spherical surface;
forming a conductive member for connection on the spherical surface;
bonding a metal ball formed at one end of a wire to the metal pattern
The above is all shown as in the rejection of claim 1 above. The steps are incidental to the formation of the device of claim 1.
from a direction perpendicular to the metal pattern by using a capillary which supports the wire by a wire insertion hole provided along a central axis thereof and extends in a tapered shape from a tip end of the capillary along the central axis; and
rotating the stem until the conductive member for connection is positioned in a descending direction of the capillary, and bonding the other end of the wire to the at least one lead through bonding to the conductive member for connection.
Ichikawa Figs. 4-5 shows a capillary 71 having a central axis and tapered tip that supports the wire by an insertion hole, and bonding starts perpendicular to the metal pattern on submount 160. As seen in Fig. 7 the stem 100 is then rotated until the lead 123 is positioned in a descending direction of the capillary and bonding is then done. See Figs. 7-11. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to use this bonding method as a simple substitution for the same reasons described above as to claim 1.
Regarding claim 22, Noguchi shows a plurality of the wires 118 are bonded to the at least one lead 111.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noguchi, JP ‘388, Ichikawa, and Kainuma as applied to claim 1, and futher in view of US 2004/0164128 (“Mii”)
Regarding claim 3, JP ‘388 teaches the conductive member is a bump, but not a double bump. Mii teaches that when wire bonding a two-stage bump may be used for the conductive member. Fig. 1, [0030]-[0031], fig. 3, [0043]. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill to do this as a simple substitution of one known element for another to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143 I.B. The combination applied to claim 1 shows a single bump conductive member, not a double bump, but this is also known in the art as in Mii. It would have been obvious to use the double bump instead and the result of the substitution would have been predictable because the bumps will do similar things, i.e. they are the spot for the wire bond, and Mii tells us how it can be made so there is no unpredictability in the process.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noguchi in view of JP ‘388, and further in view of Ichikawa, and further in view of JP H11-67810 A (“JP ‘810”).
25. An optical communication module comprising:
a plate-shaped stem;
a plurality of leads penetrating through the stem via insulating members;
a conductive member for connection provided on a tapered surface, the tapered surface inclined toward the tip end of at least one lead among the plurality of leads being provided at the tip end thereof;
a heat sink block provided on the stem;
a sub-mount which is fixed to the heat sink block and is provided with a metal pattern on a flat surface thereof;
a semiconductor light emitting element which is fixed to the metal pattern and emits laser light; and
a wire in which a metal ball formed at one end thereof is bonded to the metal pattern and the other end thereof is bonded to the at least one lead among the plurality of leads through bonding to the conductive member for connection.
These features are all taught by the references as in the above rejection of claim 1 except for the bolded, i.e. it is not shown that the connection of the wire and conductive member at the tip of the lead is on a tapered surface as claimed. JP ‘810 shows a similar device in which a stem having a semiconductor device is wire bonded to leads, and the tip of the leads has an inclined i.e. tapered surface 2a. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill that there may be a tapered surface as a simple substitution of one known element for another to yield predictable results. MPEP 2143 I.B. The combination applied above shows flat tops to the leads and not a tapered surface, but this is shown in JP ‘810. It would have been obvious to use the tapered surface instead and the result of the substitution would have been predictable because JP ‘810 explains how to do wire bonding while accounting for the taper so that it occurs properly. The tapering seems to be incidental to the manufacturing process.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-19 and 23-24 are allowed. The following is the examiner’s reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 17, there is not taught or disclosed in the prior art a method for manufacturing an optical communication module as claimed, comprising, inter alia, bonding a metal ball formed at one end of a wire to the metal pattern in a state where a flat surface of the stem is inclined at an angle of 90°−θ.sub.t with respect to a reference surface, the reference surface being a surface perpendicular to an axial direction of a capillary, the capillary having a tapered shape expanding at a taper angle θt from a tip end thereof and supporting the wire by a wire insertion hole provided along a central axis, and bonding the other end of the wire to the at least one lead through bonding to the conductive member for connection in a state in which the flat surface of the stem is inclined at the taper angle θt with respect to the reference surface. While Ichikawa shows that a capillary can be inclined similar to that claimed, it is not shown that the incline is related to the taper angle of the capillary as claimed.
Regarding claim 19, there is not taught or disclosed in the prior art a method for manufacturing an optical communication module as claimed, comprising, inter alia, bonding a metal ball formed at one end of a wire to the metal pattern in a direction perpendicular to the metal pattern using a capillary having a tapered portion extending from a tip end of the capillary along a central axis, a flat portion having one end connected to the tapered portion, and a stepped portion connected to the other end of the flat portion, the capillary supporting the wire by a wire insertion hole provided along the central axis, a length from the tip end of the capillary to the stepped portion thereof being longer than a length of the sub-mount in the axial direction; and rotating the stem until the flat portion of the capillary and the flat surface of the sub-mount are opposed to each other, and bonding the other end of the wire to a top surface or a side surface of the at least one lead among the plurality of leads provided so as to penetrate through the stem.
Claims 18, 23, and 24 are allowed as they depend from the above.
Conclusion
JP H11-330136 A also shows a wire bonding capillary at an incline, but not inclined at 90 degrees minus the taper angle of the capillary.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James Menefee whose telephone number is (571)272-1944. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-4.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, MinSun Harvey can be reached at (571) 272-1835. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of applications may be obtained from Patent Center. See: 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.
/JAMES A MENEFEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2828
Prosecution Insights