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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3, 6-7 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Slovin (US 2021/0135100) in view of Chen (US 2024/0241332).
Regarding claim 1, Slovin discloses, in FIG. 4A and in related text, a semiconductor device, comprising:
a semiconductor substrate (450) (see Slovin, [0044], [0057]);
a radio frequency (RF) switch (RF device 201A) above the semiconductor substrate (see Slovin, [0032], [0043], [0057]).
Slovin does not explicitly disclose a shielding layer between the semiconductor substrate and the RF switch.
Chen teaches a shielding layer (110) between the semiconductor substrate (150) and an RF device (180) (see Chen, FIG. 1, [0020]-[0022]). Therefore, Chen together with Slovin teaches a shielding layer between the semiconductor substrate and the RF switch.
Slovin and Chen are analogous art because they both are directed to semiconductor devices and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to modify Slovin with the features of Chen because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Slovin to include a shielding layer between the semiconductor substrate and the RF switch, as taught by Chen, to stop electromagnetic filed reaching silicon substrate (see Chen, [0017]).
Chen teaches the shielding layer (110) is metal (see Chen, [0020]). Therefore, Chen teaches wherein the shielding layer (metal, a conductor) has an electrical conductivity that is greater than 0 siemens per meter (S/m), with the same analogous prior art and field of endeavor statement and the same motivation as provided for in claim 1.
Chen does not explicitly teach wherein the shielding layer has an electrical conductivity that is greater than approximately 1x106 siemens per meter (S/m).
Here, electromagnetic radiation at high frequencies penetrates a skin depth of a metal shield, and the skin depth is determined by electrical conductivity of the metal shield (see, for example, D.D.L. Chung, Materials for Electromagnetic Interference Shielding, JMEPEG (2000) 9:350-354: 2. Mechanisms of shielding). That is, the electrical conductivity is a result effective variable for varying. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to have the claimed range/value through routine experimentation and optimization. Also, applicant has not disclosed that the claimed range is for a particular unobvious purpose, produces an unexpected result, or otherwise critical. See MPEP § 2144.05.
Regarding claim 2, Slovin in view of Chen teaches the device of claim 1.
Slovin in view of Chen teaches the shielding layer between the semiconductor substrate and the RF switch (see discussion on claim 1 above).
Chen teaches wherein the shielding layer (110) comprises a continuous layer of material (metal) (see Chen, FIG. 1, [0023]), with the same analogous prior art and field of endeavor statement and the same motivation as provided for in claim 1.
Regarding claim 3, Slovin in view of Chen teaches the device of claim 1.
Slovin in view of Chen teaches the shielding layer between the semiconductor substrate and the RF switch (see discussion on claim 1 above).
Chen teaches wherein the shielding layer (110) comprises a plurality of discontinuous segments of material (see Chen, FIG. 4A, [0038]), with the same analogous prior art and field of endeavor statement and the same motivation as provided for in claim 1.
Regarding claim 6, Slovin in view of Chen teaches the device of claim 1.
Chen teaches wherein the shielding layer is electrically coupled to an electrical grounding path of the semiconductor device (see Chen, [0026]), with the same analogous prior art and field of endeavor statement and the same motivation as provided for in claim 1.
Regarding claim 7, Slovin in view of Chen teaches the device of claim 1.
Slovin discloses and Chen teaches wherein the RF switch (201A in FIG. 4A of Slovin) and the shielding layer (110 in FIG. 2E of Chen) are both included in an interconnect region of the semiconductor device (see Slovin, FIG. 4A, [0057]; Chen, FIG. 2E, [0031]), with the same analogous prior art and field of endeavor statement and the same motivation as provided for in claim 1.
Regarding claim 29, Slovin in view of Chen teaches the device of claim 21.
Chen teaches wherein the shielding layer (110) has a thickness greater than 0 nanometers (see Chen, [0023]: shielding layer 110 is a solid metal layer), with the same analogous prior art and field of endeavor statement and the same motivation as provided for in claim 1.
Chen does not explicitly teach wherein the shielding layer has a thickness in a range of approximately 200 nanometers to approximately 20 microns.
Here, electromagnetic radiation at high frequencies penetrates a skin depth of a metal shield (see, for example, D.D.L. Chung, Materials for Electromagnetic Interference Shielding, JMEPEG (2000) 9:350-354: 2. Mechanisms of shielding). Therefore, the thickness of a shielding layer (for blocking electromagnetic radiation) has to be greater than the skin depth. That is, the thickness of the shielding layer is a result effective variable for varying. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to have the claimed range/value through routine experimentation and optimization. Also, applicant has not disclosed that the claimed range is for a particular unobvious purpose, produces an unexpected result, or otherwise critical. See MPEP § 2144.05.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Slovin in view of Chen, and further in view of Kong (US 2023/0200035).
Regarding claim 4, Slovin in view of Chen teaches the device of claim 1.
Slovin and Chen do not explicitly disclose or teach wherein the shielding layer comprises an iron-containing epoxy material.
Kong teaches wherein the shielding layer (50) comprises an iron-containing epoxy material (see Kong, FIG. 1, [0023]).
Slovin and Kong are analogous art because they both are directed to semiconductor devices and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to further modify Slovin with the features of Kong because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Slovin as already modified by Chen to include wherein the shielding layer comprises an iron-containing epoxy material, as taught by Kong, to provide an EMI absorption layer configured to block electromagnetic waves (see Kong, [0022]), and because it is simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (as electromagnetic shield). See MPEP § 2143.
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Slovin in view of Chen, and further in view of Kong (US 2023/0200035).
Regarding claim 28, Slovin in view of Chen teaches the device of claim 21.
Slovin and Chen do not explicitly disclose or teach wherein the shielding layer comprises at least one of: aluminum (Al), tantalum nitride (TaN), titanium nitride (TiN), copper (Cu), polysilicon, tungsten (W), or cobalt (Co).
Kong teaches wherein the shielding layer (50) comprises at least one of: aluminum (Al), tantalum nitride (TaN), titanium nitride (TiN), copper (Cu), polysilicon, tungsten (W), or cobalt (Co) (see Kong, FIG. 1, [0023], [0028]-[0029]).
Slovin and Kong are analogous art because they both are directed to semiconductor devices and one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success to further modify Slovin with the features of Kong because they are from the same field of endeavor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Slovin as already modified by Chen, to include wherein the shielding layer comprises at least one of: aluminum (Al), tantalum nitride (TaN), titanium nitride (TiN), copper (Cu), polysilicon, tungsten (W), or cobalt (Co), as taught by Kong, to provide an EMI absorption layer configured to block electromagnetic waves (see Kong, [0022]), and because it is simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results (as electromagnetic shield). See MPEP § 2143.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-22 and 24-27 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record, Yokoyama in view of Slovin and Chen teaches a semiconductor device, comprising: a first semiconductor die, comprising: a first semiconductor substrate; a first interconnect region below the first semiconductor substrate; a radio frequency (RF) switch included in the first interconnect region below the first semiconductor substrate; a first shielding layer included in the first interconnect region, wherein the shielding layer is located between the first semiconductor substrate and the RF switch; and a first bonding region below the first interconnect region; a second semiconductor die, comprising: a second semiconductor substrate; a second interconnect region above the second semiconductor substrate; a second bonding region above the second interconnect region, wherein the first semiconductor die and the second semiconductor die are bonded at a bonding interface between the first bonding region and the second bonding region. The prior art of records, individually or in combination, do not disclose nor teach “wherein at least one of the first semiconductor die further comprises a second shielding layer located between the RF switch and the bonding interface, or the second semiconductor die further comprises a third shielding layer located between the RF switch and the second semiconductor substrate” in combination with other limitations as recited in claim 15.
The prior art of record, Slovin in view of Chen teaches semiconductor device, comprising: a semiconductor substrate; a plurality of active devices in the semiconductor substrate; an interconnect region, above the semiconductor substrate, including: a first portion, above the semiconductor substrate, comprising a first shielding layer, and a second portion, above the first shielding layer, comprising a radio frequency (RF) switch. The prior art of records, individually or in combination, do not disclose nor teach “a second shielding layer above the RF switch” in combination with other limitations as recited in claim 21.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the limitation “wherein the shielding layer has an electrical conductivity that is greater than approximately 1x106 siemens per meter (S/m)” of amended claim 1, Applicant argues that Chen does not teach the limitation. Applicant argues that the limitation is not an arbitrary recitation of a generic conductive property.
However, as discussed in Office Action mailed on 04/16/2026, electromagnetic radiation at high frequencies penetrates a skin depth of a metal shield, and the skin depth is determined by electrical conductivity of the metal shield (see, for example, D.D.L. Chung, Materials for Electromagnetic Interference Shielding, JMEPEG (2000) 9:350-354: 2. Mechanisms of shielding). That is, the electrical conductivity is a result effective variable for varying. Here, Applicant also concurs that the electrical conductivity is a result effective variable for varying. See paragraph [0067] of the Specification of the instant application (“In some implementations, the material of the shielding layer 414 has an electrical conductivity that is included in a range of approximately 1x106 S/m to approximately 1x108 S/m to enable the shielding layer 414 to sufficiently suppress E-field emissions from the RF switch 200.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to have the claimed range/value through routine experimentation and optimization. Also, applicant has not disclosed that the claimed range is for a particular unobvious purpose, produces an unexpected result, or otherwise critical. See MPEP § 2144.05.
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 SHIH TSUN A CHOU whose telephone number is (408)918-7583. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-16:00 Arizona Time.
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, Lynne Gurley can be reached at (571) 272-1670. 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.
/SHIH TSUN A CHOU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2811
Prosecution Insights