DETAILED ACTION
This Office action responds to the patent application no. 18/449,062 filed on August 14, 2023.
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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the number 51 in FIGs 2 and 5 looks more like solder layer and the number 52 in FIGs 2 and 5 looks more like solder bumps instead of being reversed as described in the Specification. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Figure 1 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: It is not clear if the solder bumps should be between the solder layer and the base or the solder bumps should be between the logic dies and the solder layer when their relationships are described, such as, “a soldering bump 51 and a solder layer 52 are provided between the supporting frame 71 and the base 9” in paragraph (¶ [0046]), “soldering bumps 51 and solder layers 52 is further provided between the logic die 3 and the base 9” in ¶ [0064], “a connection way of the soldering bumps 51 is adopted at lower ends of the lead frame 7, which makes connection stability between the lead frames 7 and the base 9 higher” in ¶ [0065].
Appropriate correction is required.
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3-9, 13, and 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “memory dies” in lines 6, 7, and 12. It is unclear how they relate to “memory dies” in line 4 and each other.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “at least one” in line 1. It is unclear how it relates to “at least one” in Claim 1, line 6.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “memory dies” in line 3 and 5. It is unclear how they relate to each other and “memory dies” in Claim 1, lines 4, 6, 7, and 12.
Claim 4 recites the limitations “the two memory dies” in line 1 and "the lead frames" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “memory dies” in line 2. It is unclear how it relates to “memory dies” in Claim 3, lines 3 and 5 and in Claim 1, lines 4, 6, 7, and 21.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the same die set" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “frame strips” in line 2 of the second appearance. It is unclear how it relates to “frame strips” in line of the first appearance.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “power wires” in line 9. It is unclear how it relates to “power wires” in line 6.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “grounding wires” in line 10. It is unclear how it relates to “grounding wires” in line 7.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “frame strips” in line 3. It is unclear how it relates to “frame strips” in line 2.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the frame strip" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “memory dies” in line 4. It is unclear how it relates to “memory dies” in Claim 1, lines 4, 6, 7, and 21.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “memory dies” in line 2. It is unclear how it relates to “memory dies” in Claim 1, lines 4, 6, 7, and 21.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “memory dies” in lines 5 and 6. It is unclear how it relates to “memory dies” in lines 3-4.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “memory dies” in lines 3, 4, 5, 10, and 12. It is unclear how they relates to each other and “memory dies” in Claim 16, lines 3-4, 5, and 6.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “at least one” in line 4. It is unclear how it relates to “at least one” in Claim 16, line 5.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3-9, 13, and 15-17 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 2, 10-12, and 14 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 if they are rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action:
Regarding Claim 1: The prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious a semiconductor structure, wherein the power-supply distribution layer comprises a first distribution layer and a second distribution layer connected with each other, a plane of the first distribution layer is perpendicular to the upper surface of the base, and the second distribution layer is located on a surface of the at least one of the plurality of the memory dies away from the base, wire bonds, connected with the second distribution layer, at least one lead frame, connected with the wire bonds and the power ports. These features in combination with other element sin the claim are neither disclosed nor suggested by the prior art of record.
Regarding Claim 16: The prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious a method of manufacturing a semiconductor structure, wherein the power-supply distribution layer comprises a first distribution layer and a second distribution layer connected with each other, a plane of the first distribution layer is perpendicular to an upper surface of the base, the second distribution layer is located on a surface of the memory dies away from the base, the wire bonds being connected with the second distribution layer, and connecting the at least one lead frame with the wire bonds and the power ports. These features in combination with other element sin the claim are neither disclosed nor suggested by the prior art of record.
Claims 2-15 and 17 depend on claim 1 or 16 so they are allowable for the same reason.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALICE W TANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7227. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 8:30 am to 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, Wael Fahmy can be reached at (571)272-1705. 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.
/ALICE W TANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2814
/WAEL M FAHMY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2814