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 § 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 1-4, 7 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Tanaka (US 20200343169), hereinafter Tanaka.
Regarding claim 1, Tanaka (US 20200343169) teaches (refer to Figures 3-7; also see markup of Figure 7 below) an anti-warpage reinforced carrier, comprising:
a substrate (SUB in markup of Figure 7; also see para 48) having an upper surface and a lower surface (i.e. upper and lower in orientation of Figures 4-7), wherein a plurality of positioning areas are defined on the upper surface, and the substrate further has a plurality of first through holes (FTH in markup of Figure 7) penetrating through the upper surface and the lower surface;
a plurality of rigid insulating plates (111, see para 47) arranged on the positioning areas respectively, each rigid insulating plate having a plurality of second through holes (through holes in which 112 are formed, para 47) penetrating through a first surface (i.e. upper surface of 111 in orientation of Figures 3-7) and a second surface (i.e. lower surface of 111 in orientation of Figures 3-7) of each rigid insulating plate;
a plurality of metal posts (112 that are formed by “copper plating” – see para 47) filled in the second through holes respectively;
a resin layer (130, described as “solder resist layer 130” which may be “acrylic resin or a polyimide resin”, see para 51) on the upper surface of the substrate (SUB) and the rigid insulating plates (111) and covering the rigid insulating plates and the upper surface of the substrate, wherein the resin layer (130) has a plurality of openings (131 and/or 132, labelled in Figures 5 and 6; see para 51);
a first circuit layer (formed by 151 that corresponds to 150, and/or formed by 161 & 162, which corresponds to 160 – see para 42; labelled in Figure 6) on a portion of a surface of the resin layer (130) and in the openings (131 and/or 132), and connected to (best seen in Figure 6 and 7) the metal posts (112); and
a second circuit layer (comprising SCL of markup of Figure 7) on a portion of the lower surface of the substrate and in the first through holes (FTH in markup of Figure 7), and connected to (best seen in Figure 7) the metal posts (112).
PNG
media_image1.png
424
670
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Tanaka (refer to Figures 3-7) teaches the anti-warpage reinforced carrier according to claim 1, wherein the openings (131 and/or 132) are in positional correspondence with the second through holes respectively (i.e. openings are positioned so that they are capable of being connected to corresponding respective second through holes; best seen in Figures 5-7).
Regarding claim 3, Tanaka (refer to Figures 3-7; also see markup of Figure 7) teaches anti-warpage reinforced carrier according to claim 1, wherein the first surface (i.e. upper surface of 111 in orientation of Figures 3-7) of each rigid insulating plate 111) further comprises a third circuit layer (TCL of markup of Figure 7; compare to 55 of Fig 4 & para 32 of PGPUB of application), the third circuit layer is connected to (best seen in Figure 6 and markup of Figure 7) the metal posts (112) in the second through holes and the first circuit layer (formed by 151 correspond to 150, and/or formed by 161 & 162, which correspond to 160 – see para 42; labelled in Figure 6).
Regarding claim 4, Tanaka (refer to Figures 3-7; also see markup of Figure 7) teaches the anti-warpage reinforced carrier according to claim 3, wherein the second surface (i.e. lower surface of 111 in orientation of Figures 3-7) of each rigid insulating plate (111) further comprises a fourth circuit layer (FCL of markup of Figure 7; compare to 57 of Fig 4 & para 32 of PGPUB of application), the fourth circuit layer is connected to (best seen in Figure 6 and markup of Figure 7) the metal posts (112) in the second through holes and the second circuit layer (comprising SCL of markup of Figure 7, noting that SCL is formed in first through holes > FTH).
Regarding claim 7, Tanaka (refer to Figures 3-7; also see markup of Figure 7) teaches the anti-warpage reinforced carrier according to claim 1, wherein the upper surface of the substrate has a plurality of grooves (GR of markup of Figure 7), the grooves defines the positioning areas, and the rigid insulating plates are clamped (by way of metal that is part of 13 that fits in the groove GR) into the grooves respectively.
Regarding claim 12, Tanaka (refer to Figures 3-7) teaches the anti-warpage reinforced carrier according to claim 1, wherein each rigid insulating plate is a ceramic plate, a glass plate, or a silicon carbide plate (para 47, especially last sentence, which describes material as “glass woven fabric” or “glass non-woven fabric”, that is reinforced by a resin).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka in view of Ito (US 20090072403), hereinafter Ito.
Regarding claims 5-6, Tanaka (refer to Figures 3-7; also see markup of Figure 7) teaches the anti-warpage reinforced carrier according to claim 1, teaching that the metal post (112) may be made of copper (para 47 describes 112 are formed by “copper plating”), but does not teach “a coating is further provided between” a side wall surface of the second through holes and the metal post (as recited in claim 5), wherein (as recited in claim 6) “the coating is a resin coating” . Ito (US 20090072403) teaches that when forming a metal post (11 of Figure 1d) made of copper in in second through holes (holes formed in 2 and 4 – compare Figure 1a and 1b) of a rigid insulating plate (comprising 2 and 4), it is known in the art to include a coating (9, described as "porous modified layer 9" in para 75) provided between (best seen in Figure 1e) a side wall surface of the second through holes and the metal post (11), wherein (as recited in claim 6) the coating (9) is a resin coating (para 75 discloses 9 is porous but made of same material as 2 and 4, and para 69 discloses that 2 and 4 are insulating materials). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify Tanaka to further include “a coating is further provided between” a side wall surface of the second through holes and the metal post (as recited in claim 5), wherein (as recited in claim 6) “the coating is a resin coating”. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Tanaka for at least the purpose of mitigating problems described in para 9 of Ito, such as diffusion of water or etching gas (para 9 of ito).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka.
Regarding claims 13, Tanaka (refer to Figures 3-7; also see markup of Figure 7) teaches the anti-warpage reinforced carrier according to claim 1, but does not teach “each rigid insulating plate has a length and width of 3 cm to 100 cm and a thickness of 0.1 mm to 1 mm” . However, given that each rigid insulating plate has at least an insulating function and it is known in the art that for a given material, the dimensions of an insulator (such as claimed length, width and thickness”) determine degree of insulation provided. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify Tanaka to size each rigid insulating plate depending on the insulating material of the rigid insulating plate to achieve target degree of insulation, such as by having dimensions as claimed. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Tanaka for at least the purpose of ensuing there is no insulation breakdown or short circuiting for the given conductor spacing and current such as for high power applications.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-11 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: Claims 8-11 are allowable because the prior art of record does not teach or suggest, singularly or in combination, at least the limitations of base claim 8 that requires “wherein the first anti-welding paint layer is on the resin layer and has a plurality of first pad openings, and the first pad layer is filled in the first pad openings and is electrically connected to the first circuit layer”.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AJAY ARORA whose telephone number is (571)272-8347. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM - 5 PM.
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, Drew Richards can be reached at 5712721736. 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.
/AJAY ARORA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892