Election/Restriction
Applicant's election without traverse of Group I, claims 1 - 10, 19 - 23 is acknowledged. Claims 11 - 18 withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR. 1.142(b), as being drawn to non-elected invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 6, 10, 19 - 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sirinorakul et al (7205180).
With regard to claim 1, Sirinorakul et al. disclose an integrated circuit package (for example, see fig. 10) comprising:
a leadframe (32, and DAP) of a conductive material including a die attach pad (DAP) and a lead finger (32) separated from an edge of the die attach pad (DAP), wherein the leadframe has a first surface (a top surface) and a second surface (referred to as “32A1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 10 below) opposite the first surface (the top surface);
retaining features (metallic coating features 38, as shown in fig. 10 below, functions as retaining features) on the lead finger (32) at the second surface (32A1);
a die (Die as shown in fig. 10) on the first surface (the top surface) at the die attach pad (DAP); and
a molding compound (referred to as “M1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 10 below) that encapsulates the leadframe (32, and DAP) and the die (Die as shown in fig. 10) and extends into the retaining features (metallic coating features 38, as shown in fig. 10 below, functions as retaining features).
PNG
media_image1.png
484
925
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
169
530
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 2, Sirinorakul et al. disclose the leadframe includes fabrication features (referred to as “38A” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 10 above) on the second surface (32A1) and the retaining features (38) are arranged amongst the fabrication features (38A).
With regard to claim 3, Sirinorakul et al. disclose the retaining features (38) include an arrangement of retaining features (38) in the second surface (32A1).
With regard to claim 4, Sirinorakul et al. disclose the fabrication features (38A) extend in a first direction (for example, X-direction), and the retaining features (38) include spaced apart grooves (referred to as “G1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 10 above) that extend longitudinally along the lead finger (32) at the second surface (32A1) a second direction (for example, Y-direction) approximately perpendicular to the first direction (for example, X-direction).
PNG
media_image3.png
533
913
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 5, Sirinorakul et al. disclose the lead finger (for example, finger 30, fig. 4L) has a T-shape.
With regard to claim 6, Sirinorakul et al. disclose the retaining features (38) are a first set of retaining features (a first set of retaining features at the lead fingers 32), and a second set of retaining features (a second set of retaining features at the die pad DAP) are formed on the second surface (32A1) at the die attach pad (DAP).
With regard to claim 10, Sirinorakul et al. disclose the lead finger includes a plurality of lead fingers (32, fig. 10 or 30 fig. 4L) arranged around, coplanar with and spaced apart from a periphery of the die attach pad (DAP), each of the lead fingers (32) has respective retaining features (38) formed along the second surface thereof, and the molding compound (M1) extends into the respective retaining features (38).
With regard to claim 19, Sirinorakul et al. disclose a device (for example, see fig. 10) comprising:
a sheet (layers 32, DAP functions as a sheet) of a conductive material having a first surface (a top surface) and a second surface (referred to as “32A1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 10 below) opposite the first surface (the top surface),
wherein fabrication features (referred to as “38A” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 10 below) extend in a first direction (for example, X-direction) along at least one of the first and second surfaces,
the sheet (layers 32, DAP functions as the sheet) including: a die attach pad (DAP); and
a plurality of lead fingers (32, fig. 10) spaced apart from and surrounding (partially surrounding) the die attach pad (DAP), wherein an arrangement (a peak arrangement) of retaining features (metallic coating features 38, as shown in fig. 10 below, functions as retaining features) is formed in at least one lead finger (32) of the lead fingers (32) extending along a second direction (Y-direction) that is approximately perpendicular to the first direction (X-direction).
PNG
media_image4.png
520
837
media_image4.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 20, Sirinorakul et al. disclose the sheet (layers 32, DAP) is a leadframe and the device further comprises: a die (Die as shown in fig. 10) affixed to the first surface at the die attach pad (DAP); and a molding compound (referred to as “M1” by examiner’s annotation shown in fig. 10 above) that encapsulates the leadframe (layers 32, DAP) and the die (Die as shown in fig. 10) and extends into the retaining features of the arrangement of retaining features (38).
With regard to claim 21, Sirinorakul et al. disclose the lead finger (for example, finger 30, fig. 4L) has a T-shape and the retaining features (38) are grooves.
With regard to claim 22, Sirinorakul et al. disclose the arrangement of retaining features (38) includes voids (grooves forming in the features 38) formed on the second surface (32A1) at the die attach pad (DAP).
With regard to claim 23, Sirinorakul et al. disclose at least one void of the voids (grooves forming in the features 38) has spaced apart sidewalls that are tapered in a direction extending from the second surface (32A1).
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.
Claims 7 - 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sirinorakul et al (7205180).
With regard to claim 7, Sirinorakul et al. disclose the retaining features (38) include spaced apart voids (grooves) that extend a depth from the second surface (32A1) towards the first surface (the top surface). Figure 10 of the Sirinorakul et al. reference (shown below) does appear to show the depth (grooves in the features 38) is less than or equal to approximately 40% of a thickness of the leadframe (layers 32, DAP), as claimed. However, since the patent drawings are not labeled as “to scale,” one cannot be certain that the depth is less than or equal to approximately 40% of a thickness of the leadframe as seemingly shown [see MPEP 2125].
PNG
media_image3.png
533
913
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention to form the depth is less than or equal to approximately 40% of a thickness of the leadframe, because Fig. 10 suggests the depth (grooves in the features 38) is less than or equal to approximately 40% of a thickness of the leadframe (layers 32, DAP) and a prima facie case of obviousness exists where device dimensions of the prior art are such that one of ordinary skill in the art would have expected them to have the same performance {MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A)}
PNG
media_image3.png
533
913
media_image3.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 8, Sirinorakul et al. disclose at least one void of the voids (grooves) has spaced apart sidewalls that are tapered in a direction extending from the second surface (32A1) towards the first surface (the top surface).
With regard to claim 9, Sirinorakul et al. disclose at least one void of the voids (grooves in the retaining features 38) has cross-sectional V-shape.
Conclusion
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAN N TRAN whose telephone number is (571) 272 - 1923. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30-5:00PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Davienne Monbleau can be reached on (571) 272-1945. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TAN N TRAN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights