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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot in grounds of the new rejection.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the inductor further comprises first and second wafers, the first and second wafers including the first and second substrates, respectively must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Regarding claim 22, the limitations ”.. and the inductor further comprises first and second wafers, the first and second wafers including the first and second substrates, respectively, ..” is vague and indefinite.
Para 0054 of the applicant pgpub discloses the core substrate 140 is included in a wafer. Where in the drawings/ specifications discloses features wherein inductor further comprises first and second wafers, the first and second wafers including the first and second substrates?
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
1. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuo et al. (US 20130075860) in view of Kroener (US 8,072,042)
Regarding claim 5, Kuo et al.(figures 1a-2p and para 0010-0013) discloses a core substrate (170) having opposing first and second sides, first and second substrates (see figures 1p/2p) attached to the first and second sides of the core substrate, respectively(see figures 1p/2p); a conductive coil (see figures 1p/2p and para 0010) disposed around the vertically-laminated magnetic core (164) and the conductive coil including first and second metal wire segments formed in the first and second substrates, respectively (see figures 1p/2p).
Kuo et al. does not expressly disclose the substrate comprising ferromagnetic material disposed in the patterned voids to form vertically-oriented magnetic layers that extend from the first side to the second side wherein a substrate material is disposed between adjacent patterned voids.
Kroener (figures 1a-2f and Col 4, lines 1-67- Col 9, lines 1-20) discloses disclose the substrate (10) comprising ferromagnetic material disposed in the patterned voids to form vertically-oriented magnetic layers(see figures 2a-2f and Col 3, lines 41-51 disclosing material combinations that are ferromagnetic) that extend from the first side to the second side wherein a substrate material is disposed between adjacent patterned voids (see figures 2a-2f).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant claimed invention to design wherein the substrate comprising ferromagnetic material disposed in the patterned voids to form vertically-oriented magnetic layers that extend from the first side to the second side wherein a substrate material is disposed between adjacent patterned voids as taught by Kroener to the inductive device of Kuo et al. so as to effectively eliminate lateral electromagnetic crosstalk and parasitic coupling while also reducing eddy currents while also providing the inductive device with strong electromagnetic shielding
2. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuo et al. (US 20160307991) in view of Kroener (US 8,072,042)
Regarding claim 5, Kuo et al.(figures 1a-1b and para 0011-0040) discloses a core substrate (140) having opposing first and second sides, first and second substrates (160/130) attached to the first and second sides of the core substrate, respectively; a conductive coil (see figures 1a-1b and para 0011) disposed around the vertically-laminated magnetic core(see figures 1a-1b and para 0011) and the conductive coil including first and second metal wire segments formed in the first and second substrates, respectively (see figure 1b).
Kuo et al. does not expressly disclose the substrate comprising ferromagnetic material disposed in the patterned voids to form vertically-oriented magnetic layers that extend from the first side to the second side wherein a substrate material is disposed between adjacent patterned voids.
Kroener (figures 1a-2f and Col 4, lines 1-67- Col 9, lines 1-20) discloses disclose the substrate (10) comprising ferromagnetic material disposed in the patterned voids to form vertically-oriented magnetic layers(see figures 2a-2f and Col 3, lines 41-51 disclosing material combinations that are ferromagnetic) that extend from the first side to the second side wherein a substrate material is disposed between adjacent patterned voids (see figures 2a-2f).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant claimed invention to design wherein the substrate comprising ferromagnetic material disposed in the patterned voids to form vertically-oriented magnetic layers that extend from the first side to the second side wherein a substrate material is disposed between adjacent patterned voids as taught by Kroener to the inductive device of Kuo et al. so as to effectively eliminate lateral electromagnetic crosstalk and parasitic coupling while also reducing eddy currents while also providing the inductive device with strong electromagnetic shielding.
3 Claims 5, 8-9 and 12-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuo et al. (US 20160307991) in view of Zhang et al. (US 20190272936) and Sturcken et al. (US 20180182530).
Regarding claim 5, Kuo et al.(figures 1a-1b and para 0011-0040) discloses a core substrate (140) having opposing first and second sides, first and second substrates (160/130) attached to the first and second sides of the core substrate, respectively; a conductive coil (see figures 1a-1b and para 0011) disposed around the vertically-laminated magnetic core(see figures 1a-1b and para 0011) and the conductive coil including first and second metal wire segments formed in the first and second substrates, respectively (see figure 1b).
Kuo et al. does not expressly disclose the substrate comprising ferromagnetic material disposed in the patterned voids to form vertically-oriented magnetic layers that extend from the first side to the second side wherein a substrate material is disposed between adjacent patterned voids.
Zhang et al. (figures 2a-2b and para 0034-0042) discloses a teaching wherein the substrate comprising magnetic material disposed in the patterned voids to form vertically-oriented magnetic layers (see para 0039) that extend from the first side to the second side (see figure 2b), wherein a substrate material is disposed between adjacent patterned voids (see figure 2b). but does not expressly disclose wherein the magnetic material is a ferromagnetic material.
Sturcken et al.(figures 7b/8 and para 0058) discloses a teaching wherein a ferromagnetic material is disposed in the patterned voids to form vertically-oriented ferromagnetic layers.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant claimed invention to design wherein the substrate comprising ferromagnetic material disposed in the patterned voids to form vertically-oriented magnetic layers that extend from the first side to the second side wherein a substrate material is disposed between adjacent patterned voids as taught by Zhang et al to the inductive device of Kuo et al. so as to effectively eliminate lateral electromagnetic crosstalk and parasitic coupling while also reducing eddy currents.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant claimed invention to design wherein a ferromagnetic material is disposed in the patterned voids to form vertically-oriented ferromagnetic layers as taught by Sturcken et al. to the inductive device of Kuo et al. so as to allow the inductive device to have to strong electromagnetic shielding and have the ability to become a permanent magnet.
Regarding claim 8, Zhang et al.(figure 2b) discloses first and second VIAs (212) formed in the core substrate, the vertically-oriented magnetic layers disposed between the first and second VIAs.
Regarding claim 9, Zhang et al.(figure 2b) discloses wherein the first and second VIAs are each electrically coupled to the first and second metal wire segments to form the conductive coil.
Regarding claim 12, Sturcken et al.(figures 7b/8 and para 0058) discloses wherein each vertically-oriented ferromagnetic layer has a width of about 5 nm to about 50 μm, the width determined with respect to a width axis that is parallel to a plane defined by the first side of the substrate.
Regarding claim 13, Sturcken et al.(figures 7b/8 and para 0058) discloses wherein each vertically-oriented ferromagnetic layer has a height of about 100 μm to about 800 μm, the height determined with respect to a height axis that is orthogonal to the plane defined by the first side of the substrate.
Regarding claim 14, Sturcken et al.(figures 7b/8 and para 0058) discloses wherein each vertically-oriented ferromagnetic layer has an aspect ratio in a range of about 2:1 to about 160,000:1, the aspect ratio determined by dividing the height by the width.
Regarding claim 15, the modified inductive device of Kuo et al in view of Strurcken/Zhang) combined has similar structural features that allows for each vertically-oriented ferromagnetic layer having an induced easy axis of magnetization that is parallel to a vertical axis, the vertical axis orthogonal to the first and second sides of the core substrate. (see Sturcken et al. para 0017/0047/0074-0076)
Regarding claim 16, the modified inductive device of Kuo et al in view of Strurchen/Zhang) combined has similar structural features wherein the induced easy axis of magnetization is a permanently induced easy axis of magnetization. (see Sturcken et al. para 0017/0047/0074-0076)
Regarding claim 17, the modified inductive device of Kuo et al in view of Strurchen/Zhang) combined has similar structural features wherein each vertically-oriented ferromagnetic layer has an induced hard axis of magnetization that is orthogonal to the vertical axis and parallel to the first and second sides of the core substrate. (see Sturcken et al. para 0017/0047/0074-0076)
Regarding claim 18, the modified inductive device of Kuo et al in view of Strurchen/Zhang) combined has similar structural features wherein the induced hard axis of magnetization is a permanently induced hard axis of magnetization. (see Sturcken et al. para 0017/0047/0074-0076)
Regarding claim 19, Sturcken et al.(para 0056) discloses wherein the ferromagnetic material comprises cobalt, nickel, and/or iron.
Regarding claim 20, Sturcken et al.(para 0047) discloses wherein the ferromagnetic material comprises an oxide of cobalt, an oxide of nickel, and/or an oxide of iron.
4. Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuo et al. (US 20160307991) in view of Zhang et al. (US 20190272936) and Sturcken et al. (US 20180182530) in further view of Ahn et al. (US 20050093669)
Regarding claim 21, the modified inductive device of Kuo et al. discloses all the limitations as noted above but does not expressly disclose a wafer, the wafer including the core substrate.
Ahn et al. (figure 1a-1c and claims 4/23) discloses a teaching wherein a wafer, the wafer including the core substrate (110)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant claimed invention to design wherein disclose a wafer, the wafer including the core substrate as taught by Ahn et al.. to the modified inductive device of Kuo et al. so as to provides enhanced mechanical rigidity, improved thermal stability, and better structural support for high-density semiconductor packaging.
Regarding claim 22, designing wafer is a core wafer, and the inductor further comprises first and second wafers, the first and second wafers including the first and second substrates would have been an obvious design consideration based on intended application/environment use Such as to reduces parasitic resistance and improves inductor efficiency while also maximizing inductance while reducing electromagnetic interference (EMI) with neighboring circuits. Please note that in the instant application, the applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
5. Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuo et al. (US 20160307991) in view of Zhang et al. (US 20190272936) and Sturcken et al. (US 20180182530) in further view of Askarinya et al. (US 20130335937)
Regarding claim 21, the modified inductive device of Kuo et al. discloses all the limitations as noted above but does not expressly disclose a wafer, the wafer including the core substrate.
Askarinya et al. (figure 8a-8c and para 0022/0030-0033) discloses a teaching wherein a wafer (WLP), the wafer including the core substrate (340/815)
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant claimed invention to design wherein disclose a wafer, the wafer including the core substrate as taught by Askarinya et al.. to the modified inductive device of Kuo et al. so as to provides enhanced mechanical rigidity, improved thermal stability, and better structural support for high-density semiconductor packaging.
Regarding claim 22, designing wafer is a core wafer, and the inductor further comprises first and second wafers, the first and second wafers including the first and second substrates would have been an obvious design consideration based on intended application/environment use Such as to reduces parasitic resistance and improves inductor efficiency while also maximizing inductance while reducing electromagnetic interference (EMI) with neighboring circuits. Please note that in the instant application, the applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
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 RONALD HINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7915. The examiner can normally be reached M to F; 8 -5.
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, Shawki Ismail can be reached at 571-272-3985. 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.
/RONALD HINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights