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 .
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) 1-16, 23-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RODRIGUEZ (USPGPUB DOCUMENT: 2021/0265245, hereinafter RODRIGUEZ) in view of Yabuta (USPGPUB DOCUMENT: 2020/0251423, hereinafter Yabuta) and Poddar (USPGPUB DOCUMENT: 2009/0072367, hereinafter Poddar).
Re claim 1 Rodriguez discloses a method for sintering a die(11) to a substrate(16)[0037], the method comprising: forming a plurality of locking features(18) in a metal layer of the substrate(16)[0037]; laminating(since 26 overlays or covers 11 this may be interpreted as laminating) a die-transfer film(26) to the die(11); placing the die(11) and the die-transfer film(26) on the substrate(16)[0037] to form a stack-up including the die-transfer film(26) directly between the metal layer and the die(11);
Rodriguez does not disclose adhering the stack-up to form a tacked-stack-up; and sintering the tacked-stack-up so that the die(11) is bond[0038 of Poddar]ed to the substrate(16)[0037]; the plurality of locking features each having a depth; the die-transfer film having a thickness that is greater than the depth; placing the die and the die-transfer film on the substrate so that the die-transfer film conforms to the plurality of locking features at a first side facing the metal layer and does not conform to the plurality of locking features on a second side facing the die;
Yabuta disclose adhering the stack-up to form a tacked-stack-up[0045,0056]; and sintering the tacked-stack-up so that the die(3) is bond[0038 of Poddar]ed to the substrate (1)[0057].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to apply the teachings of Yabuta to the teachings of Rodriguez in order to have an improved bond[0038 of Poddar]ing strength as well as an improved product life [0026, Yabuta].
Rodriguez and Yabuta does not disclose the plurality of locking features each having a depth; the die-transfer film having a thickness that is greater than the depth; placing the die and the die-transfer film on the substrate so that the die-transfer film conforms to the plurality of locking features at a first side facing the metal layer and does not conform to the plurality of locking features on a second side facing the die;
Poddar disclose the plurality of locking features(212) each having a depth(z3-z2); placing the die(204) and the die-transfer film(206) on the substrate so that the die-transfer film conforms to the plurality of locking features at a first side facing the metal layer(202) and does not conform to the plurality of locking features on a second side facing the die;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to apply the teachings of Poddar to the teachings of Rodriguez in order to facilitate stress reduction in and around an attached die [0002, Poddar].
Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar does not disclose the die-transfer film having a thickness that is greater than the depth;
Although the combination of Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar does not disclose the die-transfer film having a thickness that is greater than the depth, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to disclose the die-transfer film having a thickness that is greater than the depth as the result effective variable meet the claims as varied through routine experimentation in order to optimize the functionality of the device and when the prior art discloses the general conditions of the claimed invention, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only ordinary skill in the art to optimize stress reduction in and around an attached die [0002, Poddar]. See MPEP 2144.05.
Further, the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed invention or any unexpected results arising therefrom. The law is replete with cases in which the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is some range or other variable within the claims. In such a situation, the applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art range. In reWoodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)
Re claim 2 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of locking features(18) make a bond[0038 of Poddar] strength of the tacked-stack-up thatis stronger than without the plurality of locking features(18).
Re claim 3 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method according to claim 2, further comprising:transporting the tacked-stack-up before sintering, wherein the transportation transporting causes a force on the tacked-stack-up, the bond[0038 of Poddar] strength being stronger than the force.
Re claim 4 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein:the substrate(16)[0037] is a direct bond[0038 of Poddar]ed copper (DBC) substrate(16)[0037] including a ceramic layer in between a first copper layer[0057 of Yabuta] and a second copper layer[0057 of Yabuta]; andthe metal layer is the first copper layer[0057 of Yabuta].
Re claim 5 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein:the substrate(16)[0037] is an active matrix brazing (AMB) substrate(16)[0037] including a ceramic layer in between a first copper layer[0057 of Yabuta] and a second copper layer[0057 of Yabuta]; andthe metal layer is the first copper layer[0057 of Yabuta].
Re claim 6 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein:the metal layer is silver plated; and the die-transfer film(26) includes silver nanoparticles[0057 of Yabuta] in an adhesive matrix.
Re claim 7 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein forming the plurality of locking features(18) in the metal layer includes:stamping the metal layer to form the plurality of locking features(18).
Re claim 8 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein forming the plurality of locking features(18) in the metal layer includes:laser[0024,0025 of Yabuta] etching the metal layer to form the plurality of locking features(18).
Re claim 9 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of locking features(18) are arranged on the metal layer of the substrate(16)[0037] in a repeating pattern.
Re claim 10 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of locking features(18) includes a plurality of cavities in the metal layer.
Re claim 11 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method according to claim 10, wherein each cavity of the plurality of cavities has a depth[0118 of Yabuta] in a range of 10 to 20 microns.
Re claim 12 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method according to claim 10, wherein each cavity of the plurality of cavities has an edge that is raised above a surface of the metal layer by a height[0118 of Yabuta] that is less than 10 microns.
Re claim 13 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of locking features(18) includes a plurality of slots[Fig 3,10 of Yabuta] in a first direction and in a second direction, the first direction at an angle with the second direction so that the plurality of slots[Fig 3,10 of Yabuta] form a crosshatch pattern[Fig 3,10 of Yabuta] over the metal layer of the substrate(16)[0037].
Re claim 14 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method according to claim 13, wherein the crosshatch pattern[Fig 3,10 of Yabuta] has a first period in the first direction of approximately 1000 microns and a second period in the second direction of approximately 1000 microns.
Re claim 15 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method according to claim 13, wherein each slot of the plurality of slots[Fig 3,10 of Yabuta] includes has a width[0084 of Yabuta] in a first range of 10 to 20 microns and a depth[0118 of Yabuta] in a second range of 10 to 20 microns.
Re claim 16 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method according to claim 13, wherein each slot of the plurality of slots[Fig 3,10 of Yabuta] has an edge that is raised above a surface the metal layer by a height[0118 of Yabuta] that is less than 10 microns to prevent cracking the die(11) during the sintering.
Re claim 23 Rodriguez discloses a method for tacking a die(11) to a substrate(16)[0037], the method comprising: forming a plurality of locking features(18) in a metal layer of the substrate(16)[0037];laminating(since 26 overlays or covers 11 this may be interpreted as laminating) a die-transfer film(26) to the die(11);placing the die(11) and the die-transfer film(26) on the substrate(16)[0037] to form a stack-up including the die-transfer film(26) directly between the metal layer and the die(11);
Rodriguez does not disclose applying a force to the die(11) so that the stack-up is pressed together for a hot-tack period; and heating the substrate(16)[0037] so that a temperature of the stack-up is raised during the hot-tack period, the die(11) tacked to the substrate(16)[0037] to form a tacked-stack-up at a conclusion of the hot-tack period; wherein each locking feature of the plurality of locking features has a depth; wherein the die-transfer film has a thickness that is greater than the depth; placing the die and the die-transfer film on the substrate so that the die-transfer film conforms to the plurality of locking features at a first side facing the metal layer and does not conform to the plurality of locking features on a second side facing the die;
Yabuta disclose applying a force to the die(3) so that the stack-up is pressed together for a hot-tack period[0058-0065]; and heating the substrate so that a temperature of the stack-up is raised during the hot-tack period[0058-0065], the die(3) tacked to the substrate(1)[0057] to form a tacked-stack-up at a conclusion of the hot-tack period[0045,0056].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to apply the teachings of Yabuta to the teachings of Rodriguez in order to have an improved bond[0038 of Poddar]ing strength as well as an improved product life [0026, Yabuta].
Rodriguez and Yabuta does not disclose wherein each locking feature of the plurality of locking features has a depth; wherein the die-transfer film has a thickness that is greater than the depth; placing the die and the die-transfer film on the substrate so that the die-transfer film conforms to the plurality of locking features at a first side facing the metal layer and does not conform to the plurality of locking features on a second side facing the die;
Poddar disclose wherein each locking feature(212) of the plurality of locking features has a depth(z3-z2); placing the die(204) and the die-transfer film on the substrate so that the die-transfer film conforms to the plurality of locking features at a first side facing the metal layer(202) and does not conform to the plurality of locking features on a second side facing the die;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to apply the teachings of Poddar to the teachings of Rodriguez in order to facilitate stress reduction in and around an attached die [0002, Poddar].
Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar does not disclose wherein the die-transfer film has a thickness that is greater than the depth;
Although the combination of Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar does not disclose wherein the die-transfer film has a thickness that is greater than the depth;, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to disclose wherein the die-transfer film has a thickness that is greater than the depth as the result effective variable meet the claims as varied through routine experimentation in order to optimize the functionality of the device and when the prior art discloses the general conditions of the claimed invention, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only ordinary skill in the art to optimize stress reduction in and around an attached die [0002, Poddar]. See MPEP 2144.05.
Further, the specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed invention or any unexpected results arising therefrom. The law is replete with cases in which the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is some range or other variable within the claims. In such a situation, the applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art range. In reWoodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990)
Re claim 24 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method for tacking the die(11) to substrate(16)[0037] according to claim 23, further comprising:transporting the tacked-stack-up, wherein the plurality of locking features(18) result in a bond[0038 of Poddar] strength of the tacked-stack-up that is sufficient to hold the stack-up in tact while transporting the die(11) tacked to the substrate(16)[0037].
Re claim 25 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method for tacking the die(11) to the substrate(16)[0037] according to claim 23, wherein:the substrate(16)[0037] is a direct bond[0038 of Poddar]ed copper (DBC) substrate(16)[0037] including a ceramic layer in between a first copper layer[0057 of Yabuta] and a second copper layer[0057 of Yabuta]; andthe metal layer is the first copper layer[0057 of Yabuta].
Re claim 26 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method for tacking the die(11) to the substrate(16)[0037] according to claim 23, wherein: the substrate(16)[0037] is an active matrix brazing (AMB) substrate(16)[0037] including a ceramic layer in between a first copper layer[0057 of Yabuta] and a second copper layer[0057 of Yabuta]; andthe metal layer is the first copper layer[0057 of Yabuta].
Re claim 27 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method for tacking the die(11) to the substrate(16)[0037] according to claim 23, wherein:the metal layer is silver plated; andthe die-transfer film(26) includes silver nanoparticles[0057 of Yabuta] in an adhesive matrix.
Re claim 28 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method for tacking the die(11) to the substrate(16)[0037] according to claim 23, wherein the plurality of locking features(18) are arranged on the metal layer of the substrate(16)[0037] in a repeating pattern.
Re claim 29 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method for tacking the die(11) to the substrate(16)[0037] according to claim 23, wherein:the plurality of locking features(18) includes a plurality of cavities in the metal layer;each cavity of the plurality of cavities has a depth[0118 of Yabuta] in a range of 10 to 20 microns; and each cavity in the plurality of cavities has an edge that is raised above a surface of the metal layer by a height[0118 of Yabuta] that is less than 10 microns.
Re claim 30 Rodriguez and Yabuta and Poddar disclose the method for tacking the die(11) to the substrate(16)[0037] according to claim 23, wherein:the plurality of locking features(18) includes a plurality of slots[Fig 3,10 of Yabuta] in a first direction and in a second direction, the first direction at an angle with the second direction so that the plurality of slots[Fig 3,10 of Yabuta] form a crosshatch pattern[Fig 3,10 of Yabuta] over the metal layer of the substrate(16)[0037];the crosshatch pattern[Fig 3,10 of Yabuta] has a first period in the first direction of approximately 1000 microns and a second period in the second direction of approximately 1000 microns;each slot of the plurality of slots[Fig 3,10 of Yabuta] has a width[0084 of Yabuta] in a first range of 10 to 20 microns and a depth[0118 of Yabuta] in a second range of 10 to 20 microns; andeach slot of the plurality of slots[Fig 3,10 of Yabuta] has an edge that is raised above a surface of the metal layer by a height[0118 of Yabuta] that is less than 10 microns.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1-16, 23-30 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references being used in the current rejection.
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 PATRICIA D VALENZUELA whose telephone number is (571)272-9242. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am-6pm 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, William Partridge can be reached at 571-270-1402. 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.
/PATRICIA D VALENZUELA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights