11-20DETAILED 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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I (claims 1-10) in the reply filed on 8/25/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that no serious burden on the examiner exists in examining claims of groups I-II inventions together because “the detecting an infrared ray (claim 11) is only narrower than the measuring a temperature change in scope. Further, as claim 16 recites the detecting the infrared ray comprises detecting the infrared ray using a thermal imaging camera to generate a thermal image exclusive” existed in both groups. At least for the above reasons, Applicant respectfully submits that the Election of Invention Requirement should be withdrawn. This is not found persuasive because Applicant has not provided any showing or evidence to support such a conclusion. Since a single search for several distinction (2) inventions as indicated in the previous OA dated 6/29/26 (see page 3, 2nd paragraph) would not be made by a single search. And moreover if the number of (2) inventions were searched concurrently the search would be burdensome because examination and search burden for these patentably distinct (2) inventions due to their mutually exclusive characteristics. The (2) inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search queries); and/or the prior art applicable to one species would not likely be applicable to another species; and/or the species are likely to raise different non-prior art issues under 35 U.S.C. 101 and/or 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph. Therefore, the Restriction mailed on or about 6/29/26 is now made Final. Applicants are required to cancel non- elected invention II (claims 11-20) or take other appropriate action.
An OA on the merits of claims 1-10 as follows:
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed to.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“to each other” (claim 1, line 4) appears to be redundant of the bonding process should be deleted.
“is applied”(claim 7, line 2); “is performed” (claim 9, line 2) not positively active method step, the use of “ applying . . . performing . . . ) is/are suggested.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung (US 10885623) in view of Kwon et al (US 11474149).
Jung discloses the claimed method of manufacturing a semiconductor package, the method comprising:
providing a first semiconductor die on a stage 110 (see Fig. 1);
bonding a second semiconductor die 210 to the first semiconductor die220(see Fig. 1);
applying heat to a surface of the second semiconductor die 220, which is opposite to a bonding interface of the first semiconductor die and the second semiconductor die (see Fig. 1, where bottom surface of 210 is being heated by stage 110 (see Fig. 1, and discussed in col. 5, ¶ [0004]); and
measuring a temperature change on the surface of the second semiconductor die 210 to which the heat is applied to inspect a state of the bonding interface (appears to meet by the Jung, see discussion in col. 5, ¶ [0005], respectively).
if it is argued that the junk is lacking of measuring a temperature change on the surface of the second semiconductor die then refers to Kwon et al (in light of an abstract, see Fig. 6 in conjunction with Fig. 10 for measuring a temperature change on the surface of the second semiconductor die by sensor 320). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having an ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to employ the Kwon et al teaching as mentioned above onto the invention of Jung in order to facilitate the operation process including detect the fault heat generated from a fault die, etc.
As applied to claim 2, Fig. 1 refers to the arrows from the thermographic camera 120 which is broadly readable as the claimed line shaped.
Limitation of claim 9 is also met by the combination of Jung/Kwon since no inventive method feature existed in this claim when departed from the Jung/Kwon teaching.
Potential Allowable claims
Claims 3-8, 10 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MINH N TRINH whose telephone number is (571)272-4569. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH ~5:00-3:30.
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, Thomas J Hong can be reached at 571-272-0993. 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.
/MINH N TRINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3729
mt
