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 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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (“Kim” US 2019/0295859) and Otsubo et al. (“Otsubo” US 2022/0304201).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches a semiconductor device (Figures 7A-7D), comprising:
a substrate (11);
an electronic component (12) mounted on the substrate (11);
a first encapsulant (13) disposed on the substrate (11) and encapsulating the electronic component (12, see Figure 7A);
a first electromagnetic interference (EMI) shielding layer (shield layer 69) disposed on the first encapsulant (13), wherein the first EMI shielding layer (69) comprises a first plurality of shield protrusions (“v groove”, see Figure 7C) each having one or more inclined sidewalls (see inclined walls of the protrusions of the uneven surface 25 of the shielding layer 69 in Figure 7C).
Kim does not teach a second encapsulant or a second EMI shielding layer.
Otsubo teaches, however, a first encapsulant (6c) and a first EMI shielding layer (9, see Figure 13);
a second encapsulant (6a) disposed on the first EMI shielding layer (9); and
a second EMI shielding layer (8) disposed on the second encapsulant (6a) and electrically coupled to the first EMI shielding layer (9, through 23, see Figure 13), wherein the second EMI shielding layer (8) covers a top surface and lateral surfaces of the second encapsulant (6a, see Figure 13).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate the teachings of Otsubo into the teachings of Kim to include the second encapsulant and shielding layer as claimed for the purpose of further providing physical and electrical interference protection for the packaged component. It also would have been obvious to include the module of Kim as a submodule in Otsubo, inside the second encapsulant and second shielding layer, to increase packaging density. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claim 2, Kim teaches wherein the one or more inclined sidewalls (see sidewalls of the v groove protrusions in Figure 7D) converge at a pointed tip (see pointed tip shape in Figure 7D).
Regarding claim 3, Kim teaches wherein at least one of the first plurality of shield protrusions (see v groove protrusions in Figure 7D) has a pyramidal shape (see at least para. [0061] and [0091], which disclose the pyramidal shape of the protrusions).
Regarding claim 4, Kim teaches wherein the first encapsulant (13) comprises a first plurality of encapsulant protrusions (see grooves of uneven surface 25) corresponding to the first plurality of shield protrusions (see the surface of the encapsulant 13 conforming to the surface of the shielding layer 69, thus the surfaces correspond to each other’s shapes), and the first EMI shielding layer (69) comprises a bottom surface conforming to the first plurality of encapsulant protrusions (see Figure 7D), and a top surface parallel to the bottom surface (here, parallel is interpreted to require that the surfaces have the same pattern, which is shown in Figure 7D).
Regarding claim 8, Otsubo teaches wherein the second EMI shielding layer (8) has a planar top surface and a planar bottom surface (see Figure 13).
Regarding claim 21, wherein the second encapsulant (6a) has a planar top surface (see Figure 13).
Regarding claim 22, wherein the second EMI shielding layer (8) covers an entirety of the top surface of the second encapsulant (6a, see Figure 13).
Regarding claim 23, wherein the second EMI shielding layer (8) covers an entirety of the top surface and lateral surfaces of the second encapsulant (6a, see Figure 13).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 Genevieve G Bullard-Connor whose telephone number is (571)270-0609. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 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, Dale Page can be reached at 571-270-7877. 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.
/Genevieve G Bullard-Connor/Examiner, Art Unit 2899
/DALE E PAGE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights