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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: Electronic device having a chip and a switch element.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitations “an element layer, disposed adjacent to the active surface” on line 4 and “a redistribution structure layer, disposed adjacent to the active surface” on line 7. The metes and bounds of the claimed limitation cannot be determined for the following reasons: Note that, the claim recited that both the element layer and the redistribution structure layer to be adjacent to the active surface of the chip. However, as shown in fig. 1 of Applicant’s disclosure, the redistribution layer is disposed between the chip 10 and the element layer 11 so that the element layer is not adjacent to the active surface of the chip. Thus, only one of the element layer or the redistribution structure layer can be adjacent to the chip. Clarification is respectfully requested. Claims 2-12 depend directly or indirectly from claim 1 and inherit these deficiencies.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 7, 10, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (U.S. Pub. 2022/0139880).
In re claim 1, Lee discloses an electronic device, comprising: a chip 200, having an active surface and a plurality of contacts disposed on the active surface (see paragraph [0035] and fig. 6A); an element structure layer (layers in semiconductor chip 100 contains FET structures) (see paragraph [0025] and fig. 6A), disposed adjacent to the active surface and having a switch element ID1 (FET structures of the semiconductor chip 100), wherein the switch element is electrically connected to the chip 200 through at least one of the contacts (see fig. 6A); a redistribution structure layer (upper layers of the semiconductor chip 100), disposed adjacent to the active surface and electrically connected to the chip (see paragraphs [0056], [0059] and fig. 6A) through at least one of the contacts; and a protective layer 310, comprising a first portion (portion adjacent to the chip 200) and a second portion (lower portion next to the semiconductor chip 100), wherein the first portion surrounds the chip 200, and the second portion surrounds the element structure layer and the redistribution structure layer (see paragraph [0058] and fig. 6A).
PNG
media_image1.png
564
766
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In re claim 2, as applied to claim 1 above, Lee discloses wherein the first portion contacts a side surface of the chip 200, and the second portion contacts the element structure layer and the redistribution structure layer (see paragraph [0058] and fig. 6A).
In re claim 7, as applied to claim 1 above, Lee discloses wherein the electronic device further comprising: a buffer layer 131, wherein the element structure layer is disposed between the buffer layer 131 and the redistribution structure layer; and an insulating layer, wherein the buffer layer 131 is disposed between the insulating layer and the element structure layer (see paragraph [0028] and fig. 6A).
In re claim 10, as applied to claim 7 above, Lee discloses wherein the element structure layer, the redistribution structure layer, and the buffer layer 131 are disposed between the chip 200 and the insulating layer (see paragraph [0028] and fig. 6A).
In re claim 11, as applied to claim 7 above, Lee discloses wherein the element structure layer, the buffer layer 131, and the insulating layer are disposed between the chip 200 and the redistribution structure layer (see paragraphs [0028], [0056] and fig. 6A).
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) 3, 5, 6, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Lee et al. (U.S. Pub. 2022/0139880).
In re claim 3, as applied to claim 1 above, Lee discloses wherein the element structure layer comprises at least one first insulating layer (insulating layer surrounding the semiconductor chip 100), the redistribution structure layer comprises at least one second insulating layer (see paragraph [0025] and fig. 6A) but is silent to wherein a thickness of the at least one first insulating layer is less than a thickness of the at least one second insulating layer.
However, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to optimize the thickness of the at least one first insulating layer to be less than the thickness of the at least one second insulating layer during routine experimentation 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. “It is not inventive to discover optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation”, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233, 235. Additionally, it is respectfully submitted that, the configuration regarding about the shape of the at least one first insulating layer and the at least one second insulating layer was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration was significant (In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)). Furthermore, a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Rose, 220 F.2d 459, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955), Gardner v. TEC Systems, Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), and MPEP 2144.04.
In re claim 5, as applied to claim 3 above, Lee discloses wherein the electronic device further comprising: a via structure (between the semiconductor chip 100 and chip 200), penetrating the at least one first insulating layer and the at least one second insulating layer (see paragraphs [0022], [0056] and fig. 6A).
In re claim 6, as applied to claim 5 above, Lee discloses wherein the via structure has a stepped profile (see paragraphs [0022], [0056] and fig. 6A).
In re claim 12, as applied to claim 1 above, Lee is silent to wherein the electronic device further comprising: an underfill, disposed between the chip and the redistribution structure layer, wherein the first portion further surrounds the underfill.
However, Lee discloses in paragraph [0071] that an underfill can be surrounding the connection bump 42 and may be disposed between the semiconductor chip 100 and the lower redistribution layer 300 (see paragraph [0071] and fig. 10B).
Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to be motivated to apply the technique as taught in paragraph [0071] and fig. 10B above in Lee, to form an underfill to be between the chip and the distribution structure layer in the electronic device of Lee in order to protect the interconnection between the chip and the redistribution structure layer and the first portion of protective layer would be surrounding the underfill.
Claim(s) 4, 8, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Lee et al. (U.S. Pub. 2022/0139880) in view of Wu et al. (U.S. Pub. 2020/0006249).
In re claim 4, as applied to claim 3 above, Lee is silent to wherein the at least one first insulating layer comprises an inorganic material, and the at least one second insulating layer comprises an organic material.
However, Wu discloses in a same field of endeavor, an electronic device including, inter-alia, wherein the at least one first insulating layer comprises an inorganic material, and the at least one second insulating layer comprises an organic material (see paragraph [0024] and fig. 7).
Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to be motivated to incorporate the technique as taught by Wu into the electronic device of Lee in order to enable wherein the at least one first insulating layer comprises an inorganic material, and the at least one second insulating layer comprises an organic material in Lee to be formed because it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
In re claims 8 and 9 as applied to clam 7 above, Lee is silent to wherein the buffer layer comprises an inorganic material and wherein the insulating layer comprises an organic material.
However, Wu discloses in a same field of endeavor, an electronic device, including, inter-alia, wherein the buffer layer comprises an inorganic material and wherein the insulating layer comprises an organic material (see paragraph [0024] and fig. 7).
Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to be motivated to incorporate the technique as taught by Wu into the electronic device of Lee in order to enable wherein the buffer layer comprises an inorganic material and wherein the insulating layer comprises an organic material in Lee to be formed because it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Response to Applicant’s Amendment and Arguments
Applicant's response filed December 23rd, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to the response filed on December 23rd, 2025, Applicant neither provide any argument to the 112(b) rejection of claims 1-12 or to the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 1, 2, 7, 10, and 11 over Lee et al. (U.S. Pub. 2022/0139880). Therefore, the rejections are being maintained in the office action.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHIEM D NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1865. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 AM - 6:00 PM.
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, N. Drew Richards can be reached at (571) 272-1736. 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.
/KHIEM D NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892