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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/19/2024. The submission is following the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
Claims 1-6, 9, 10, 14 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coullomb et al (US 2021/0202781 A1) in view of Do et al., (US 2008/0272504 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 17, Coullomb et al., disclose a sensor package comprising:
- an encapsulation body (110, Fig.1 or 410, Fig. 4) having a front side (412) and a back side (414) opposite the front side (412, see Fig. 4);
- an optical sensor die (120B, Fig.4) embedded within the encapsulation body (410) on the front side (412, see Fig.4A) such that an active surface (the surface 124B) of the optical sensor die (120B) is uncovered by the encapsulation body (410, see Figs. 3-4, and [0033], “the substrate further comprises an opening 116B located above region 124B”);
- a conductive via (432, Fig. 5B) that extends from the front side (412) to the back side through the encapsulation body (substrate 410)(see Fig.5B, and [0063], “Electric connections 432 thoroughly cross the substrate… preferably vertically”);
- a topside redistribution layer (434, Fig.5C) arranged on the front side (412), the topside redistribution layer (434) electrically connecting the optical sensor die (120B) to the conductive via (432);
- a connection element (130 on the left side, Fig.5B) arranged on the back side (see Fig. 5) for electrically connecting the sensor package (110/410) to an integrated circuit device ([0035], “metallizations 130 located on lower surface114 of substrate 110. Metallizations 130 enable to electrically couple device 100 to an external circuit”); and
- a backside redistribution layer (layer 130 on the right side, Fig. 5B) arranged on the back side (see Fig.5B), the backside redistribution layer (130) electrically connecting the connection element (the 130 on the left side, Fig.5B) to the conductive vial (432);
- an optical emitter die (120A, Fig. 5) embedded within the encapsulation body (410) on the front side (412) such that an emission surface of the optical emitter die (116, see at least Fig. 1) is uncovered by the encapsulation body ([0032], “Opening 116A is for example empty or may be filled with a gas such as air”), wherein the optical emitter die (120A) and the optical sensor die (120B) are separated by a portion of the substrate (see Figs. 2-5); and
- an electrical interconnection (432) between the optical sensor die (120B) and the optical emitter die (120A, see Fig. 5A),
- wherein a thickness of the sensor package is equal to or less than 0.5 mm ([0037], “A total thickness smaller than 500 μm”).
Although Coullomb et al., disclose the encapsulation body (110, Fig.1 or 410, Fig. 4), Coullomb et al., do not disclose the encapsulation body formed from a mold compound as claimed. Do et al., disclose an encapsulation body formed from a mold compound ([0064]-[0065], an encapsulation body formed by an “organic material”, is deposited around peripheral surface 214 of die; and Fig. 6 and [0071] show a package body with an active top layer and a bottom surface. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Coullomb et al., by utilizing the teaching of Do et al., to improve stackable thin packages (Do et al., [0064]-[0065]).
Regarding claim 2, Coullomb et al., in view of Do et al., as discussed in claim 1, Coullomb et al., disclose (Fig. 5) wherein the encapsulation body (410), the conductive via (432), the topside redistribution layer (434), the backside redistribution layer (130) and the connection element (130) form a land grid array, LGA, package (see Fig.5, the metallizations 130 are flat pads on the bottom surface of the substrate body, rather than protruding pins, and [0035], “Metallizations 130 enable to electrically couple device 100 to an external circuit, not shown, for example, a PCB”).
Regarding claim 3, Coullomb et al., in view of Do et al., as discussed in claim 1, Coullomb et al., do not disclose the mold compound being non-conductive as claimed. Do et al., disclose the mold compound being non-conductive ([0065], “the surrounding encapsulation material 210/602 is an “organic material”, and the organic material can include such materials as benzocyclobutene (BCB), a polyimide (PI) material”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Coullomb et al., by utilizing the teaching of Do et al., to better prevent electrical leakage between dies.
Regarding claim 4, Coullomb et al., in view of Do et al., as discussed in claim 1, Coullomb et al., disclose the mold body being opaque regarding an operation wavelength of the optical sensor die ([0032], “The material of substrate 110 is preferably opaque for these optical signals”).
Regarding claim 5, Coullomb et al., in view of Do et al., as discussed in claim 1, Coullomb et al., disclose the connection element (130) is a lead or a contact pad, in particular a solder pad (see Fig.5B).
Regarding claim 6, Coullomb et al., in view of Do et al., as discussed in claim 1, do not disclose a thickness of the sensor package being equal to or less than 0.25 mm as claimed. However, selecting the thickness of the package toward equal to or less than 0.25mm would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, particularly Coullomb et al., disclose reduced thickness as a desirable design ([0005]. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Coullomb et al., in view of Do et al., accordingly to achieve narrower thickness for compact assemblies such as cell phone (Coullomb et al., [0037]).
Regarding claim 9, Coullomb et al., in view of Do et al., as discussed in claim 1, Coullomb et al., disclose an optical element (150A, Fig. 2), in particular an optical filter or a lens ([0036], “transparent element 150A for example forms an optical lens or a filter”), arranged on the active surface of the optical sensor die (see Fig.2, the lens/filter 150A is positioned over the active optical region to perform its optical function).
Regarding claims 10 and 14, Coullomb et al., in view of Do et al., as discussed in claim 1, Coullomb et al., disclose a back side of the optical sensor die being uncovered by the encapsulation body (see Fig.3D).
Claims 7, 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coullomb et al, in view of Do et al., and further in view of Chen et al., (US 2020/0209729 A1).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Coullomb et al., in view of Do et al., as discussed in claim 1, do not disclose a topside dielectric layer as claimed. Chen et al., disclose a topside dielectric layer (212, Fig. 6) arranged on a front side and encapsulating the topside redistribution layer ([0052], “the conductive traces may form a multi-layer mesh of conductive traces in the layers 212 configured to route electrical signals”). The topside dielectric layer (212, Fig.6) is opaque regarding an operation wavelength of the optical sensor die ([0052], “the conductive traces, or a dielectric that covers the layers 212, may be coated or treated to reduce the reflectivity of the display stack 200, but for the openings to the translucent apertures 218. Such an ink, roughening”). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Coullomb et al., and Do et al., by utilizing the teaching of Chen et al., to reduce optical crosstalk (Chen et al., [0052]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coullomb et al, in view of Do et al., and further in view of Lie et al., (US 2011/0298000 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Coullomb et al., in view of Do et al., as discussed in claim 10, do not disclose the back side of the optical sensor die being covered by a dielectric layer as claimed. Lie et al., disclose a back side of a optical sensor die being covered by a dielectric layer (Fig. 1B and [0025]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Coullomb et al., in view of Do et al., by utilizing the teaching of Lie et al., to optimize the performance of the device.
Allowable Subject Matter
4. Claims 13 and 15 are 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.
Regarding claim 13, the prior art fails to disclose -a further conductive via that extends from the front side through the encapsulation body to the back side; - a further topside redistribution layer arranged on the front side, the further topside redistribution layer electrically connecting the optical emitter die to the further conductive vial; - a further connection element arranged on the back side for electrically connecting the sensor package to an integrated circuit device; and - a further backside redistribution layer arranged on the back side, the further backside redistribution layer electrically connecting the further connection element to the further conductive via.
Regarding claim 15, the prior art fails to disclose further comprising a conductive blind via that extends from the back side through the encapsulation body to a backside contact of the optical emitter die.
Conclusion
5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAI THI NGOC TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272- 3456. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 9:00-5:30pm.
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, GEORGIA EPPS can be reached on (571)272-2328. 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. Visithttps://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.
/M.T.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2878
/GEORGIA Y EPPS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Prosecution Insights