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 .
Response to Arguments made in Amendment
Applicant’s arguments and amendment, see Page 5 of “Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment”, filed 02/02/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claim 4 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The amended claim 1 makes clear location of the adhesion promoter layer/s in claim 4. The 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection of claim 4 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103 rejections of claim(s) 1, 11, and their dependent claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection by previously cited Lee now in view of United States Patent Application Publication by Sax et al. (US 20090065912 A1; Sax) after claim amendment which moves some limitations from claim 3 or 13 respectively into claims 1 or 11 respectively, as well as introduces the new limitation of having the second layer of the promotor layer being “dendritic AlOOH” instead of just “AlOOH”.
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.
(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 22, 23, and 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipate by United States Patent Application Publication by Lee et al. (US 20070074900 A1; Lee)
Regarding Claim 22, Lee discloses an electronic device module, comprising:
a core layer (10) comprising an opening (16, Fig. 3);
an electronic device (20) disposed in the opening (Fig. 3, Where device 20 is disposed in opening 16), the electronic device being at least partially covered by an adhesion promoter layer (Aluminum oxide layer 12 covers substrate 10, Where improved adhesion is found at Para 63, lines 4-7); and
an encapsulant layer (A multilayer PCB is formed over the core layer which contains dielectric layers and encapsulating the core layer and electronic device Figs. 5/6),
wherein the core layer and the electronic device are embedded in the encapsulant layer such that the core layer and the electronic device are disposed on a lower horizontal layer of the encapsulant layer, an upper horizontal layer of the encapsulant layer is disposed on upper surfaces of the core layer and the electronic device (Lee: See annotated Fig. 4 below, where the core layer 10 and the electronic device 20 are embedded in the encapsulating layers of a multi-layer PCB and not in the upper layer, which could be considered a lower layer),
PNG
media_image1.png
222
564
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Annotated Fig. 4 of the Lee reference.
and vertical layers of the encapsulant layer are filled in intermediate spaces between side walls of the core layer and side walls of the electronic device within the opening of the core layer (Lee: See annotated Fig. 4 below, Where the encapsulate of the PCB appears to fill intermediate space between side walls of the core layer and side walls of the electronic device).
PNG
media_image2.png
230
497
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Figure 2: second Annotated Fig. 4 of the Lee reference.
Regarding claim 23, Lee discloses the electronic device module of claim 22, and further wherein the adhesion promoter layer comprises an Al203 layer (Para. 34, where the result of anodizing is aluminum oxide Al203, and Para. 52, where the adhesion promoter layer 12 is anodized).
Regarding claim 26, Lee discloses the electronic device module of claim 22, wherein the electronic device comprises a die carrier (18) and a semiconductor die (20) attached to the die carrier (“Die carrier” is a broad term that is related to the physical support structure that holds/surrounds the die during assembly and operation. Under broadest reasonable interpretation is can be interpreted that the chip bond adhesive could be considered a die carrier as it provides structural support to the die).
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.
Claims 1, 11, 14, 20-21, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious over Lee in view of United States Patent Application Publication by Sax et al. (US 20210375792 A1; Sax).
Regarding Claim 1, Lee discloses an electronic device module (Whole Module in Fig. 5), comprising:
a core layer (10) comprising an opening (16, Fig. 3);
an electronic device (20) disposed in the opening (Fig. 3, Where device 20 is disposed in opening 16), the electronic device being at least partially covered by an adhesion promoter layer (Aluminum oxide layer 12 covers substrate 10, Where improved adhesion is found at Para 63, lines 4-7); and
an encapsulant layer embedding the core layer and the electronic device (A multilayer PCB is formed over the core layer which contains dielectric layers and encapsulating the core layer and electronic device Figs. 5/6), wherein the adhesion promoter layer (12) comprises an Al203 layer (Para. 34, the result of anodizing is aluminum oxide [(Alsub2 Osub3)], and Para. 53 where it describes that adhesion promoter layer 12 is anodized).
However, Lee fails to disclose where the adhesion promotor layer further comprises a second layer of dendritic AlOOH disposed on the first layer.
In a similar field of endeavor, Sax uses an encapsulation layer in which adhesion promotor layer made of aluminum oxide AL2O3 (Sax: Para. 19) and then put against AlOOH dendrites (Sax: Para 21). Accordingly, before the effective filling date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to select a known adhesion promoter layer materials such as Aluminum Oxide and aluminum oxyhydroxide as shown by Sax, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the base of its suitability, for its intended use involves only ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.07 (citing In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197 (C.C.P.A. 1960)). One would be motivated to choose Aluminum Oxide and/or aluminum oxyhydroxide over other materials depending on manufacturing considerations such as cost of materials or time it takes to process the layer.
Regarding Claim 11, Lee discloses a device module (Module in whole in Fig. 5), comprising:
a core layer (10) at least partially covered by an adhesion promoter layer (Aluminum oxide layer 12 covers substrate 10, Where improved adhesion is found at Para 63, lines 4-7); and
an encapsulant layer embedding the core layer (A multilayer PCB is formed over the core layer which contains dielectric layers and encapsulating the core layer Figs. 5/6) wherein the adhesion promoter layer (12) comprises an Al203 layer (Para. 34, the result of anodizing is aluminum oxide [(Alsub2 Osub3)], and Para. 53 where it describes that adhesion promoter layer 12 is anodized).
However, Lee fails to disclose where the adhesion promotor layer further comprises a second layer of dendritic AlOOH disposed on the first layer.
In a similar field of endeavor, Sax uses an encapsulation layer in which adhesion promotor layer made of aluminum oxide AL2O3 (Sax: Para. 19) and then put against AlOOH dendrites (Sax: Para 21). Accordingly, before the effective filling date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to select a known adhesion promoter layer materials such as Aluminum Oxide and aluminum oxyhydroxide as shown by Sax, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the base of its suitability, for its intended use involves only ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.07 (citing In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197 (C.C.P.A. 1960)). One would be motivated to choose Aluminum Oxide and/or aluminum oxyhydroxide over other materials depending on manufacturing considerations such as cost of materials or time it takes to process the layer.
Regarding Claim 14, Lee and Sax discloses the device module of claim 11, further comprising:
an electronic device (Lee: 20) disposed in an opening (Lee: 16, Fig. 3) of the core layer (Lee: Fig. 3, Where device 20 is disposed in opening 16).
Regarding Claim 20, Lee and Sax discloses the device module of claim 14, and further wherein the core layer and the electronic device are embedded in the encapsulant layer such that the core layer and the electronic device are disposed on a lower horizontal layer of the encapsulant layer, an upper horizontal layer of the encapsulant layer is disposed on upper surfaces of the core layer and the electronic device (Lee: See annotated Fig. 4 in above claim 22 rejection, where the core layer 10 and the electronic device 20 are embedded in the encapsulating layers of a multi-layer PCB and not in the upper layer, which could be considered a lower layer),
and vertical layers of the encapsulant layer are filled in intermediate spaces between side walls of the core layer and side walls of the electronic device within the opening of the core layer (Lee: See annotated Fig. 4 in above claim 22 rejection, Where the encapsulate of the PCB appears to fill intermediate space between side walls of the core layer and side walls of the electronic device).
Regarding Claim 21, Lee and Sax disclose the device module of claim 11, wherein the core layer is embedded in the encapsulant layer such that the core layer is disposed on a lower horizontal layer of the encapsulant layer and an upper horizontal layer of the encapsulant layer is disposed on an upper surface of the core layer (Lee: See annotated Fig. 4 in above claim 22 rejection, where the core layer 10 and the electronic device 20 are embedded in the encapsulating layers of a multi-layer PCB and not in the upper layer, which could be considered a lower layer).
Regarding claim 24, Lee discloses the electronic device module of claim 22, wherein the adhesion promoter layer comprises a first layer of Al203 (Para. 34, the result of anodizing is aluminum oxide [(Alsub2 Osub3)], and Para. 53 where it describes that adhesion promoter layer 12 is anodized)
However, Lee fails to disclose where the adhesion promotor layer further comprises a second layer of dendritic AlOOH disposed on the first layer.
In a similar field of endeavor, Sax uses an encapsulation layer in which adhesion promotor layer made of aluminum oxide AL2O3 (Sax: Para. 19) and then put against AlOOH dendrites (Sax: Para 21). Accordingly, before the effective filling date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to select a known adhesion promoter layer materials such as Aluminum Oxide and aluminum oxyhydroxide as shown by Sax, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the base of its suitability, for its intended use involves only ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP § 2144.07 (citing In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197 (C.C.P.A. 1960)). One would be motivated to choose Aluminum Oxide and/or aluminum oxyhydroxide over other materials depending on manufacturing considerations such as cost of materials or time it takes to process the layer.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious over Lee in view of United States Patent Application Publication by Park et al. (US 20190252306 A1; Park).
Regarding claim 25, Lee discloses the electronic device module of claim 22, however,
Lee fails to disclose wherein the core layer is covered by a further adhesion promoter layer.
In a similar field of endeavor, Park discloses a similar device (Park: 200) with electronic devices (22a) disposed and a core layer (10) but does not dispose the electronic devices inside an opening on the core layer. However, in regard to disposing the adhesion promoter layer/s, it is unimportant if the electronic component is buried as the adhesion promoter layer/s can cover the core layers as well. Lee does disclose the using of multiple adhesion promoter layer as an upper and lower adhesion promoter layer (Para. 44, “The upper conductive patterns 22a may thus be prevented from delamination from the top surface 10a of the substrate body 10. The first upper adhesion promoter pattern 12ap may be, for example, an aluminum oxide layer. A second upper adhesion promoter layer 24a [or, i.e., a first or second adhesion promoter layer] may be interposed between the upper passivation layer 26a and the upper conductive patterns 22a). Then followed by an encapsulate which encapsulates the core layer, electronic component, and the adhesion promoter layer (Fig. 4).
In view of the disclosure of Park, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to apply the disclosure of Park to Lee at the time the instant application was filed to incorporate a further second adhesion promotor layer different from the first. Accordingly, one would have been motivated to make the modification because one of ordinary skill in the art would understand the advantages that having additional adhesion promotor layers in order to further increase the adhesion between the core layer (substrate) and other conductive patterns (Para. 46).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable as obvious over the combination of Lee and Sax, and further in view of Park.
Regarding Claim 4, Lee and Sax discloses the electronic device module of claim 1, however Lee and Sax fails to disclose wherein the core layer is covered by a further adhesion promoter layer.
In a similar field of endeavor, Park discloses a similar device (Park: 200) with electronic devices (22a) disposed and a core layer (10) but does not dispose the electronic devices inside an opening on the core layer. However, in regard to disposing the adhesion promoter layer/s, it is unimportant if the electronic component is buried as the adhesion promoter layer/s can cover the core layers as well. Lee does disclose the using of multiple adhesion promoter layer as an upper and lower adhesion promoter layer (Para. 44, “The upper conductive patterns 22a may thus be prevented from delamination from the top surface 10a of the substrate body 10. The first upper adhesion promoter pattern 12ap may be, for example, an aluminum oxide layer. A second upper adhesion promoter layer 24a [or, i.e., a first or second adhesion promoter layer] may be interposed between the upper passivation layer 26a and the upper conductive patterns 22a). Then followed by an encapsulate which encapsulates the core layer, electronic component, and the adhesion promoter layer (Fig. 4).
In view of the disclosure of Park, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to apply the disclosure of Park to the combination of Lee and Sax at the time the instant application was filed to incorporate a further second adhesion promotor layer different from the first. Accordingly, one would have been motivated to make the modification because one of ordinary skill in the art would understand the advantages that having additional adhesion promotor layers in order to further increase the adhesion between the core layer (substrate) and other conductive patterns (Para. 46).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 DANIEL J HIBBERT whose telephone number is (703)756-1562. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am-5pm EST.
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, Zandra Smith can be reached at (571) 272-2429. 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.
/DANIEL J HIBBERT/Examiner, Art Unit 2899
/ZANDRA V SMITH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights