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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 1/4/2024 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract and title are consistent with the requirements set forth in the MPEP 608.01(b) and 606, respectively.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Francis et al. US PGPub. 2007/0269604. Regarding claim 1, Francis teaches a manufacturing (fig. 7a-7h) method of a heat dissipation layer (hereinafter call 750’, fig. 7h) [0056], comprising: providing a first carrier substrate (713, fig. 7b) [0050] and a second carrier substrate (703, fig. 7a) [0050] creating a first confined space (separated by 733, fig. 7g) [0051] therebetween; forming a first seed layer (diamond layer 711, fig. 7c) [0050] on the first carrier substrate (713) and a second seed layer (diamond layer 701, fig. 7c) [0050] on the second carrier substrate (703); forming a first heat dissipation layer (711+733+701 collectively called 750’, fig. 7g) [0051] from the first seed layer (711) and the second seed layer (701) in the first confined space (733); and removing (fig. 7h, [0051]) the second carrier substrate (703) from the first heat dissipation layer (750’) (Francis et al., fig. 7a-7h).
Regarding claim 2, Francis teaches the manufacturing method of claim 1, wherein the first seed layer (711) is formed on a surface (712, fig. 7b) of the first carrier substrate (713) facing toward (fig. 7g) the second carrier substrate (703), and the second seed layer (701) is formed on a surface (702, fig. 7a) of the second carrier substrate (703) facing toward (fig. 7g) the first carrier substrate (713) (Francis et al., fig. 7g-7h). Regarding claim 4, Francis teaches the manufacturing method of claim 1, wherein a material (diamond, [0050]) of the first heat dissipation layer (750’) includes a high kappa material (Francis et al., [0050]). Where the claimed and the prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, , a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. Since the composition is the same, the product must necessarily exhibit the properties. MPEP 2112.01. Since the first heat dissipation layer (750’) of Francis is made of diamond that is also considered as a high kappa material by the applicants (see [0015] of the publication of the instant application), then Francis teaches that a material (diamond) of the first heat dissipation layer (750’) includes a high kappa material. Even further, [0018] of Chun et al., 2021/0407882 provides evidence that diamond is widely considered as a high kappa material.
Regarding claim 6, Francis teaches the manufacturing method of claim 1, wherein the second carrier substrate (703) is removed by a mechanical grinding process, a chemical mechanical polishing (CMP) process, or an etching process (chemical etch, [0051]) (Francis et al, [0051]).
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Francis et al. US PGPub. 2007/0269604. Regarding claim 5, Francis teaches the manufacturing method of claim 1, wherein after the second carrier substrate (703) is removed, a surface of the first heat dissipation layer (750’) with a surface roughness of less than about 1 nm is exposed (less than 10nm, [0051] which includes less than 1nm) (Francis et al., [0051]). Accordingly, at the time before the effective filing of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art to use surface roughness of the exposed surface of the first heat dissipation layer in the range as claimed because high surface roughness may significantly disrupt effective heat conduction (Francis et al., [0017]) and because it has been held that where the general conditions of the claims are discloses in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable range by routine experimentation. See MPEP 2144.05.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 7-10 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior arts of record taken alone or in combination neither anticipates nor renders obvious a manufacturing method wherein “the first heat dissipation layer is formed with first grains grown from the first seed layer and second grains grown from the second seed layer” as recited in claim 3 in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 1; and a manufacturing method comprising “providing a third carrier substrate over the second carrier substrate, wherein the third carrier substrate and the second carrier substrate creates a second confined space therebetween; forming a third seed layer on the second carrier substrate and a fourth seed layer on the third carrier substrate; forming a second heat dissipation layer from the third seed layer and the fourth seed layer in the second confined space; and forming a first protection layer covering the first carrier substrate and a second protection layer covering the third carrier substrate” as recited in claim 7 in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 1.
Claims 8-10 are also objected to as allowable for further limiting and depending upon allowable claim 7.
Claims 11-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior arts of record taken alone or in combination neither anticipates nor renders obvious a manufacturing method of a semiconductor device comprising “growing the heat dissipation layer from the first seed layer and the second seed layer in the confined space; and removing the second carrier substrate to expose a surface of the heat dissipation layer; bonding the heat dissipation layer onto the first interconnect structure by the first bonding layer; removing the substrate to expose the device layer; and forming a second interconnect structure on the device layer” as recited in claim 11; and a manufacturing method of a semiconductor device comprising “growing the heat dissipation layer from the first seed layer and the second seed layer between the first carrier substrate and the second carrier substrate; and removing the second carrier substrate to expose a surface of the heat dissipation layer; forming a second bonding layer on the exposed surface of the heat dissipation layer; and bonding the heat dissipation layer onto the second interconnect structure by the first bonding layer and the second bonding layer” as recited in claim 16.
Claims 12-15 and 17-20 are also allowed for further limiting and depending upon allowed claims 11 and 16. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Freitag et al. US PGPub. 2008/0145974 and Holzer et al. US Pat. 5,925,413 teach a method of forming a heat dissipation layer by using a seed layer.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NDUKA E OJEH whose telephone number is (571)270-0291. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 9am - 5pm..
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 N RICHARDS can be reached at (571) 272-1736. 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.
/NDUKA E OJEH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892