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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Applicants’ response of 05/11/2026 has been entered in the record and considered. With respect to the rejection claims 35 USC 112 is withdrawn in view of applicants’ amendments. With respect to the rejections under 35 USC 102 (a)(1) and 35 USC 103 (a), the Applicant’s arguments have been considered but they are not persuasive for the reasons as discussed below. Claims 1-16 and 22-26 are under consideration. Claims 1, 8-11 and 22 are rejected. Claims 2-7, 12-16 and 23-26 are objected.
Claim Objections
Claims 11-16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
the recitation “the substrate having a front side” in line 3 is redundant in view of the earlier recitation “disposed on a front side of a substrate,” in line 2 which may reduce claim clarity. Applicant is requested to revise the claim language to eliminate redundancy and improve clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1, 8 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Pub # 2021/0082841 to Lee et al. (Lee).
Regarding independent claim 1, Lee discloses a semiconductor die (Fig. 25: 200), comprising:
a substrate (Fig. 21) including a semiconductor device (Fig. 25: 290), the substrate (Fig. 21) having a front side (211), a back side (where 242 is formed), and an inclined sidewall (see Fig. 25 with respect to Fig. 21; inclined sidewall formed where 270 is formed on, see Fig. 25 and Examiner’s Mark-up below) extending from the back side to the front side and including a step structure (see Fig. 21 for the step structure; step structure is where the concave portion 242 connects to the top of 213);
a contact pad (220 which is made of copper, ¶0076 presently considered to be a contact pad) connected (connected via 270, 275 and 292) to the semiconductor device (290), the contact pad (220) embedded in an inter dielectric layer (IDL) (230) disposed on the front side (211) adjacent the step structure (see Fig. 25 with respect to Fig. 21) and the contact pad (220) having a contact pad edge (see Examiner’s Mark-up below) with a surface aligned along the inclined sidewall (see Examiner’s Mark-up below); and
a redistribution layer (RDL) (see Fig. 25: 270) disposed along the step structure (see Fig. 25: 270 with respect to Fig. 22) on the inclined sidewall, the RDL (270) being physically and electrically connected to the contact pad (220) directly through the surface of the contact pad edge (see Examiner’s Mark-up below) aligned along the inclined sidewall (see Examiner’s Mark-up below).
PNG
media_image1.png
535
815
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Lee discloses disclose wherein the contact pad is a metal contact pad including at least one of aluminum or copper (¶0076).
Regarding independent claim 22, Lee discloses a semiconductor die (Fig. 25: 200), comprising:
a substrate (Fig. 21) including a semiconductor device (Fig. 25: 290), the substrate (Fig. 21) having a front side (211), a back side (where 242 is formed), and an inclined sidewall (see Fig. 25 with respect to Fig. 21; inclined sidewall formed where 270 is formed on, see Fig. 25 and Examiner’s Mark-up below) extending from the back side to the front side and including a step structure (see Fig. 21 for the step structure; step structure is where the concave portion 242 connects to the top of 213);
a contact pad (220 which is made of copper, ¶0076 presently considered to be a contact pad) connected (connected via 270, 275 and 292) to the semiconductor device (290), the contact pad (220) having a contact pad edge (see Fig. 25 with respect to Fig. 21, one end of 220 is aligned with the surface of the inclined sidewall; see also Examiner’s Mark-up below) with a surface aligned along the inclined sidewall (see Examiner’s Mark-up below); and
a redistribution layer (RDL) (see Fig. 25: 270) disposed along the step structure (see Fig. 25: 270 with respect to Fig. 22) on the inclined sidewall, the RDL (270) being physically and electrically connected to the contact pad (220) directly through the surface of the contact pad edge (see Examiner’s Mark-up below) aligned along the inclined sidewall (see Examiner’s Mark-up below).
PNG
media_image1.png
535
815
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub # 2021/0082841 to Lee et al. (Lee) in view of US Pub # 2017/0249493 to Yu et al. (Yu).
Regarding claim 8, Lee discloses wherein the contact pad is a metal contact pad including copper (¶0076).
Lee fails to explicitly disclose wherein the contact pad is a metal contact pad including at least one of aluminum or copper.
Yu discloses wherein the contact pad is a metal contact pad including aluminum (¶0033).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the contact pad of Lee with the aluminum contact pad as taught by Yu in order to provide an electrical connection to a subsequently formed second redistribution layer (¶0033).
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub # 2021/0082841 to Lee et al. (Lee) in view of US Pub # 2017/0077158 to Huang et al. (Huang).
Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses all of the claim limitation of claim 1 from which this claim depends.
Lee fails to explicitly disclose wherein the semiconductor device is an optical sensor device and the semiconductor die further comprises an optically active surface area (OASA) disposed on the front side of the substrate.
Huang disclose wherein the semiconductor device (Fig. 1I: 120 or 150 and ¶0019 and 0021) is an optical sensor device and the semiconductor die (400) further comprises an optically active surface area (OASA) (top surface of 120 or 150) disposed on the front side of the substrate (100).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modify the substrate of Lee to include an optical sensor device as taught by Huang in order to sense environmental characteristics (such as a temperature-sensing element, a humidity-sensing element, a pressure-sensing element or a capacitance-sensing element) (¶0019).
Regarding claim 10, Lee discloses all of the claim limitation of claim 9 from which this claim depends.
Lee fails to explicitly disclose a cover glass attached to the front side of the semiconductor die over the optically active surface area disposed on the front side of the substrate.
Huang discloses a cover glass (Fig. 1I: 170 and ¶0023) attached to the front side of the semiconductor die (400) over the optically active surface area (top surface of 120 or 150) disposed on the front side of the substrate (100).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the semiconductor die of Lee with the cover glass as taught by Huang so as to protect the optical element (¶0023).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub # 2017/0077158 to Huang et al. (Huang) in view of US Pub # 2021/0082841 to Lee et al. (Lee).
Regarding independent claim 11, Huang discloses a package (Fig. 1I), comprising:
an optical sensor die (Fig. 1I: 150 and ¶0022) including an optically active surface area disposed on a front side (100a) of a substrate (100), the substrate (100) having a front side (100a), a back side (100b) and an inclined sidewall (see Fig. 1B: 190) extending from the back side (100b) to the front side (100a) along an edge of an inter dielectric layer (IDL) (130) and including a step structure (As shown in Fig. 1B, formation of the inclined sidewall (190) produces a change in elevation/profile between adjacent portions of the substrate, thereby defining a stepped surface geometry (i.e., a step structure) along the substrate edge. Accordingly, the substrate is reasonably interpreted as including a step structure., see Fig. 1B),
a cover glass (Fig. 1I: 170 and ¶0023) attached to the front side of the substrate over the optically active surface area disposed on the front side of substrate (100);
a conductive contact pad (140 and ¶0021) embedded in the (IDL) (130) disposed on the front side adjacent the step structure,
a redistribution layer (RDL) (Fig. 1I: 220) disposed along the step structure on the inclined sidewall (see Examiner’s Mark-up 1 below), the RDL (130) being physically and electrically connected to the conductive contact pad (140).
PNG
media_image2.png
438
724
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Huang fails to explicitly disclose the conductive contact pad having a contact pad edge defining a portion of the inclined sidewall and the RDL being physically and electrically connected to the conductive contact pad directly through the contact pad edge defining a portion of the inclined sidewall.
Lee discloses the conductive contact pad (Fig. 25: 220) having a contact pad edge (see Examiner’s Mark-up 2 below) defining a portion of the inclined sidewall (see Examiner’s Mark-up 2 below) and the RDL (270) being physically and electrically connected to the conductive contact pad (220) directly through the contact pad edge (see Examiner’s Mark-up 2 below) defining a portion of the inclined sidewall (see Examiner’s Mark-up 2 below).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the substrate of the package of Huang with the substrate as taught by Lee in order for the redistribution layer to be electrically connected to the contact pad through the lateral surface of the contact pad (¶0081 of Lee).
PNG
media_image3.png
542
830
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-7, 12-16 and 23-26 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 2 recites:
wherein the step structure is a flat step section and the inclined sidewall includes a first inclined section extending from the back side toward the front side along a semiconductor material of the semiconductor die, a flat step section disposed above the contact pad embedded in the IDL disposed on the front side, and a second inclined section extending along an edge of the IDL disposed the front side.
Claim 12 recites:
wherein the step structure is a flat step section and the inclined sidewall includes a first inclined section extending from the back side toward the front side of the optical sensor die up to the IDL, a flat step section disposed above the conductive contact pad embedded in the IDL disposed on the front side, and a second inclined section extending along the edge of the IDL disposed the front side, the second inclined section being offset from the first inclined section by a width of the flat step section in a direction along the conductive contact pad.
Claim 23 recites:
wherein the step structure is a flat step section and the inclined sidewall includes a first inclined section extending from the back side toward the front side along a semiconductor material of the semiconductor die, a flat step section disposed above the contact pad, and a second inclined section extending to the front side.
Each of the above recitations, interpreted in combination with all other limitations of the claim and all limitations of any claims they depend from, is not taught or rendered obvious by the prior art of record and are indicated as allowable subject matter.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments (see page 7-11) filed 05/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but are not persuasive. The applied reference(s), as set forth in the Office Action and further explained below, continue to teach or suggest the limitations of amended independent claim(s) 1, 11 and 22.
With respect to amended claims 1 and 22, Applicant argues that the applied reference fails to disclose an inclined sidewall including a step structure, a conductive contact pad disposed adjacent the step structure, and an RDL disposed along the step structure. However, the Examiner notes that the US Pub # 2021/0082841 to Lee et al. continues to teach these limitations (see the rejected independent claims 1 and 22 above).
Similarly, with respect to amended claim 11, Applicant’s amendments and accompanying arguments have been considered but do not overcome the rejection because the combination of US Pub # 2017/0077158 to Huang et al. (Huang) in view of US Pub # 2021/0082841 to Lee et al. continues to disclose or render obvious the recited structural configuration, including the recited inclined sidewall including a step structure and associated features (see the rejected independent claims 1 and 22 above).
Accordingly, the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and/or 103 are maintained. It is for the above discussed reasons that the rejection as applied is considered proper.
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 MOHSEN AHMADI whose telephone number is (571)272-5062. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00am-5:00pm.
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 F Kraig can be reached at 571-272-8660. 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.
/MOHSEN AHMADI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Prosecution Insights