Attorney’s Docket Number: 1072878/596053
Filing Date: 07/10/2023
Claimed Foreign Priority Date: N/A
Applicant: Boufnichel
Examiner: Aneesa Baig
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 .
Acknowledgement
The Amendment filed on 01/23/2026, responding to the Office action mailed on 10/28/2025, has been entered. The present Office action is made with all the suggested amendments being fully considered. Accordingly, pending in this application are claims 1-20.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome the claim rejections under U.S.C. 112, as previously formulated in the same Office action. Additional rejections are below.
Applicants’ amendments to the claims have overcome some the previous rejections under U.S.C. 102 and U.S.C. 103, however, some of the previously presented prior art remains relevant, and new grounds for rejection are presented below, as necessitated by Applicant’s amendments.
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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, regards as the invention.
Claim 20 recites “performing a material removal operation, wherein the material removal operation lifts portions of the one or more layers formed on the top surface of the second layer off of the top surface” It is unclear if the second recitation of “the top surface ” is directed to the top surface of the second or first layer. For the purpose of examination, the claim will be construed as reciting -- forming one or more layers on a top surface of the second layer, on at least a portion of the at least one sidewall of the void, and on the exposed portion of the top surface of the second layer.--, as best understood by the examiner in view of the original disclosure, until further clarifications are provided by the applicant.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1,2,6, 11, 12, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as anticipated by Lu et al (US 20200273827 A1, Hereinafter Lu-3827).
Regarding Claim 1, Lu-3827 (e.g., Fig 1A-1K [0001]-[0033])shows all aspects of the invention, including, A method comprising:
forming a first layer comprising a first material (contacts 102), wherein a top surface of the first layer extends along a first direction and a second direction, the first direction parallel to a width of the first layer and the second direction parallel to a depth of the first layer ( e.g., Fig 1A);
forming, on at least the top surface of the first layer, a second layer comprising a second material (e.g., 110 and 104);
forming a void (S2 Fig 1B) in the second layer, wherein forming the void exposes a portion of the top surface of the first layer, and wherein the void comprises at least one sidewall formed by the second layer (sidewall formed along 110 and 114);
forming one or more layers on a top surface of the second layer (112 and 114 Fig 1C), on at least a portion of the at least one sidewall of the void, and on the exposed portion of the top surface of the first layer; and
performing a material removal operation (Fig 1F [0022]-[0023]), wherein the material removal operation lifts portions of the one or more layers formed on the top surface of the second layer off of the top surface of the second layer and at least a portion of the one or more layers formed on the at least one sidewall of the void (112 and 114 are removed from the top and sidewall of 110).
Regarding Claim 2, Lu-3827 (1A-1K) shows a third layer (112), a fourth layer (114) and a fifth layer (130).
Regarding Claim 6, Lu-3827 (Fig 1J) shows a sixth material (130) on top of the one or more layers , where the sixth material is not in contact with the second layer .
Regarding Claim 11, Lu-3827 (Fig 1J) shows a UBM layer (112 and 114 which become 115a and 113a after processing)
Regarding Claim 12, Lu-3827 (e.g., Fig 1A-1K [0001]-[0033])shows all aspects of the invention, including, an apparatus comprising:
a first layer comprising a first material (102), wherein the first layer has a width parallel to a first direction, a depth parallel to a second direction, and a height parallel to a third direction;
a second layer comprising a second material (104 or 110) formed on at least a top surface of the first layer, the top surface of the first layer extending along the first direction and the second direction;
a void formed in the second layer (104 or 110), wherein extents of the void comprise sidewalls of the second layer and a portion of the top surface of the first layer, wherein the sidewalls of the second layer are parallel to the third direction; and
one or more layers formed on at least a portion of the sidewalls of the second layer and on the portion of the top surface of the first layer, the one or more layers for coupling the first layer with a bonding material (112 and 114, where 112 is a bonding enhancement material);
wherein the one or more layers have been removed from a top surface and at least a portion of the sidewalls of the second layer (112 and 114 are removed from sidewall of 110).
Regarding Claim 19, Lu-3827 (Fig 1J) shows a UBM layer (112 and 114 which become 115a and 113a after processing)
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as anticipated by Cheng et al (US 20110101527 A1, Hereinafter Cheng).
Regarding Claim 20, Cheng (e.g., Fig 1A-1D [0017]-[0036]) shows all aspects of the invention, including, a product formed by a method comprising:
forming a first layer comprising a first material (e.g., Fig 1A first layer 105), wherein a top surface of the first layer extends along a first direction and a second direction, the first direction parallel to a width of the first layer and the second direction parallel to a depth of the first layer;
forming, on at least the top surface of the first layer, a second layer comprising a second material (110 and 109);
forming a void in the second layer (e.g., Fig 1A shows a void in 110 and 109), wherein forming the void exposes a portion of the top surface of the first layer, and wherein the void comprises at least one sidewall formed by the second layer;
forming one or more layers on a top surface of the second layer, on at least a portion of the at least one sidewall of the void, and on the exposed portion of the top surface of the first layer (Fig 1B, 111,125); and
performing a material removal operation, wherein the material removal operation lifts portions of the one or more layers formed on the top surface of the second layer off of the top surface of the second layer ([0032] exposed portion of the UBM layer 111 is etched to expose the underlying polymer layer 110 outside the metal layer 125,).
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.
Claims 7, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu-3827
Regarding Claim 7, Lu-3827 (Fig 1J) shows a sixth material (130) as gold, which is a common solder material for a formation of bumps and selecting a material for its known conventional use would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.--,82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding Claim 16, See comments from Claim 7, as they would be considered repeated here.
Claims 8, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu-3827 in view of Lu et al (US 20140131861 A1, Hereinafter Lu-1861
Regarding Claim 8, while Lu-3827 does not explicitly show a layer of SiN, where the pad (Al) layer is formed on the SiN layer, Lu-3827 does show the pad may be formed on a chip, a SOI substrate or other materials.
Lu-1861 on the other hand and in a related field of bumps on a substrate, shows a bump structure formed on One or more inter-metal dielectric (IMD) layers 112 that comprise SiN among other materials used to connect the pad and other circuitry to each other and provide external connection.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have IMD dielectric layers comprising SiN with pad and circuitry layer formed thereon in the device of Lu-3827, as taught by Lu-1861, as the IMD layers allow for placing additional circuitry for external connection.
Regarding Claim 17, See comments from Par. 23-25 from Claim 8, as they would be considered repeated here.
Claims 3, 4, 13- 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu-3827 in view of Hwang et al (US 20170110639 A1, Hereinafter Hwang) further in view of Lu-1861.
Regarding Claim 3, Lu-3827 shows the second material to be SiN or other dielectric materials ([0017]), the third material (of 112) comprising Ti, it does not show the fourth material to be Ni, and the fifth material to be silver.
Hwang, on the other hand and in a related field of bumps (e.g., Figure 3-11, [0047]-[0055] shows the third material comprises titanium (e.g., UBM layer 10, including layer 11) , the fourth material comprises nickel (e.g., UBM layer 10, including nickel layer 12 on the titanium layer), and the fifth material comprises silver (layer 30, see Par [0060].
The selection of these material is known in the art to act as a barrier/bonding layer, a seed layer and a solder layer, respectively, and selection of the materials for their known conventional use would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Hence, it would have been obvious for having these materials in the Lu-3827 art, as taught by Hwang. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.--,82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Both Lu-3827 and Hwang are silent about the first material being Aluminum. Lu-1861, on the other hand and in a related field of UBM layer under bumps (see, e.g., 118 in Fig 7 and [0020]) teaches a Al pad under the UBM layers as an electrode, and Al is a suitable conductive choice for pads.
Therefore, it would have been obvious at the time of the invention to one of ordinary skill in the art to have the pad of Lu-3827 comprising Al because Al is recognized in the semiconductor art for its use as pad electrodes, as taught by Lu-1861, and because selecting a material for its known conventional use would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S.--,82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding Claim 4, Lu-3827 in view of Hwang (e.g., Figure 3-11, [0047]-[0095] shows a Ni layer (in UBM layer Ni-12) however it is silent about the height dimension of the layer being greater than or equal to 300 nm.
Lu-1861, on the other hand and in a related field of UBM layers, teaches a Ni layer (e.g., conductive pillar 410 [0029]) as “having a thickness between about 20 .mu.m and about 50 .mu.m. The conductive pillar 410 may be any thickness sufficient for a desired application.”
The prior art seems to disclose width satisfying the limitation “height dimension of the layer being greater than or equal to 300 nm”. Additionally, with regards to the particular height claimed, it is also noted that the specification fails to provide teachings about the criticality of having the nickel layer to be greater than 300nm, and the courts have held that differences in (height ) will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidence indicating such heights are critical. “Where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the workable ranges by routine experimentation”. In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Since the applicant has not established the criticality (see next paragraph below) of the height since Lu-1861 teaches an arrangement of heights known in the art, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a height of 300nm or more in the method of Lu-3827 in view of Hwang.
CRITICALITY: The specification contains no disclosure of either the critical nature of the claimed dimensions ratios or any unexpected results arising therefrom. Where patentability is said to be based upon particular chosen dimensions ratios or upon another variable recited in a claim, the applicant must show that the chosen ratios are critical. In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 1578, 16 USPQ2d 1934, 1939 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding Claim 13, See comments in Par. 28-37 for claims 3-4, as they would be considered repeated here.
Regarding Claim 14, See comments in Par. 28-37 for claims 3-4, as they would be considered repeated here
Regarding Claim 15, See comments in Par. 28-37 for claims 3-4, as they would be considered repeated here.
Claims 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu-3827 in view of RANGANATHAN (WO 2009088357 A1 (PDF provided), Hereinafter RANGANATHAN).
Regarding Claim 5, Lu-3827 (Fig 1E-1F) shows a material etching operation of the 112 and 114 layers, however it is silent about performing the material removal operation using an adhesive film.
RANGANATHAN (e.g., Figs 3A-3G, pages 9-12), on the other hand and in a related field of lift-off patterning uses an adhesive film (adhesive film 38) to remove a lift off material (36) that may be a metal, and then uses a second adhesive film (40) to remove a resist mask (32). Also teaches the choice of adhesive tape may be chosen as desired based on adhesion strength to the underlayers, which saves chemical cleaning time.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have an adhesive tape used to remove the layers 112 and 114 in the method of Lu-3827, as taught by Ranganathan, to reduce process and chemical cleaning time.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu-3827 in view of Hwang.
Regarding Claim 9, Lu-3827 does not show a reflow operation. Hwang ([0019],[0056]-[0059] )Fig 16, on the other hand and in a related field of bump formation, teaches reflowing the solder bump to form a IMC with a UBM layer, with the barrier layer disposed on the second surface of the UBM layer, the barrier layer substantially preventing the solder bump from being diffused into the second surface of the UBM layer. The IMC acts as an adhesive to allow a firm bond to the UBM layers and substrate.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have a reflow operation to be performed on the bump of Lu-3827, as taught by Hwang, to allow the bump to be adhered to the UBM layers.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu-3827 in view of Zhang (NPL- “Heterogeneous 2.5D integration on through silicon interposer, Hereinafter Zhang)
Regarding Claim 10, Lu-3827 shows a method forming a solder on top of UBM layers, however it is silent about forming a pillar comprising a seventh material.
Zhang, (Fig 20 , page 021308-15) teaches forming bumps including a Cu pillar, where a solder cap is formed on top of a pillar with a fourth material (Sn-Ag). Zhang also teaches that having a copper pillar is beneficial In order to achieve interconnections with low resistance, and pillar bumps are more rigid while requiring only a small volume of solder.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to form the Cu pillar with a seventh material in the structure of Lu-3827, as taught by Zhang, to form low resistance interconnections with finer pitch.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu-3827 in view of Zhang (NPL- “Heterogeneous 2.5D integration on through silicon interposer, Hereinafter Zhang)
Regarding Claim 18, Lu-3827 shows an apparatus with a solder on top of UBM layers, however it is silent about a pillar comprising a seventh material.
Zhang, (Fig 20 , page 021308-15) teaches bumps including a Cu pillar , where a solder cap is formed on top of a pillar with a fourth material (Sn-Ag). Zhang also teaches that having a copper pillar is beneficial In order to achieve interconnections with low resistance, and pillar bumps are more rigid while requiring only a small volume of solder.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to form a Cu pillar in the structure of Lu-3827, as taught by Zhang, to form low resistance interconnections with finer pitch.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 10/20/2025 have been considered but are moot in view of the new rejections.
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 ANEESA RIAZ BAIG whose telephone number is (571)272-0249. 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, Wael Fahmy can be reached at 5712721705. 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.
/ANEESA RIAZ BAIG/Examiner, Art Unit 2814
/WAEL M FAHMY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2814
Prosecution Insights