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 .
DETAILED ACTION
In response to an Office action mailed on 02/11/2026 (“02-11-26 OA”), the Applicant substantively amended claims 1, 4, 14, 17 and 20 and canceled claims 16 and 25-28 on 05/11/2026 ("05-11-26 Response”).
Currently, claims 1-15 and 17-24 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Despite the substantive amendment to the independent 1, previously-cited Luo reads on the amended independent claim 1.
On page 7 of the 05-11-26 Response, the Applicant argues that that Luo fails to teach an amended feature of “wherein at least one of the first and second metal layers is in contact with solder” of the independent claim 1 and an amended feature of “wherein the notches are in contact with tin” of the independent claim 14. The examiner respectfully disagrees.
The Applicant did not define the term “contact” so its plain meaning controls. The broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the term “contact” includes indirect, electrical or thermal contact. Luo discloses that “The lower second side 109 of the first conductive plate 102 in this example can be soldered to a circuit board ground connection of a host PCB (not shown) as schematically shown in dashed line in FIG. 1.” (para [0017]). Applying the BRI of the term “contact,” Luo teaches the amended feature of “wherein at least one of the first and second metal layers is in indirect or thermal contact with solder” of the independent claim 1.
Applicant’s amendments to the independent claim 14 have overcome the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejection of claims 14, 15 and 19 as being anticipated by Luo set forth starting on page 2 under line item number 1 of the 02-11-26 OA.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 1021
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, 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Luo (previously-cited Pub. No. US 2020/0402894 A1 to Luo et al.).
Fig. 1 of Luo has been annotated to support the rejection below:
[AltContent: textbox (N1b)]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (N1)]
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (LS1)][AltContent: textbox (LS2)][AltContent: textbox (LS)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
419
640
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding independent claim 1, Luo teaches a package (see Fig. 1), comprising:
a semiconductor die 130 (para [0013] - “a second semiconductor die 130”) having a device side 131 including circuitry formed therein (para [0013] - “The first side 131 of the second semiconductor die 130 is electrically connected to the second bottom 127 of the second conductive plate 122 via a second conductive epoxy 132.”):
a substrate 101, 120 (para [0024] - “first subassembly 101…second subassembly 120”) facing and coupled to the device side 131, the substrate 101, 120 including:
first metal layer 124, 122 (para [0012] - “The second subassembly 120 includes a second conductive plate 122 (e.g., copper or aluminum) with a second recess 123, as well as a conductive structure 124 that is electrically isolated from the second conductive plate 122.”) and second metal layer 104, 102, 106 (para [0010] - “The bottom of the example packaged electronic device 100 includes exposed portions of the first conductive plate 102, the first conductive pad 104, and the second conductive pad 106, separated by an electrically insulating packaging material 108 (e.g., molded plastic).”), the first metal layer 124, 122 positioned closer to the device side 131 than the second metal layer 104, 102, 106 and (mechanically) coupled to the second metal layer 104, 102, 106 by way of a via 126 (para [0012] - “an electrically insulating packaging material 126”), the second metal layer 104, 102, 106 having a top surface 107 facing the semiconductor die 130, the top surface 107 including a notch N1 etched therein; and
a dielectric 114 (para [0011] - “Some examples of materials for the first electrically insulating film 114 and other electrically insulating films of various implementations include dry films or liquid photo-imageable films, solder mask photo resist, polyimide materials (e.g., also photo-imageable and can remove unpolymerized material after application, for example, to make a pattern for isolation), and ABF films.”) contacting the notch N1 and at least part of the second metal layer 104, 102, 106 and the via 126; and
a mold compound 126, 116 (para [0012] - “an electrically insulating packaging material 126”; para [0011] - “A first intermediate conductive epoxy 116”) covering the semiconductor die 130 and the substrate 101, 120,
wherein the package includes a lateral surface LS approximately perpendicular to the first metal layer 124, 122 and second metal layer 104, 102, 106 of the substrate 101, 120, and wherein the mold compound 126, 116, the dielectric 114, and the second metal layer 104, 102, 106 are exposed to the lateral surface LS, a segment of the dielectric 114 positioned between the first metal layer 124, 122 and the lateral surface LS, the segment of the dielectric 114 contacting the mold compound 126, 116 at the lateral surface LS, wherein at least one of the first metal layer 124, 122 and second metal layer 104, 102, 106 is in indirect, electrical or thermal contact with solder (The Applicant did not define the term “contact” so its plain meaning controls. The broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) of the term “contact” includes indirect, electrical or thermal contact. Para [0017] - “The lower second side 109 of the first conductive plate 102 in this example can be soldered to a circuit board ground connection of a host PCB (not shown) as schematically shown in dashed line in FIG. 1.”).
Regarding claim 2, Luo teaches the at least one of the first metal layer 124, 122 and second metal layer 104, 102, 106 that includes a lateral surface LS2 or LS3 facing the lateral surface LS of the package, and wherein the notch N1 coincides with the top surface 107 and with the lateral surface LS2 or LS3 of the at least one of the first metal layer 124, 122 and second metal layer 104, 102, 106.
Regarding claim 3, Luo teaches the at least one of the first metal layer 124, 122 and second metal layer 104, 102, 106 that includes a bottom surface, and wherein the bottom surface does not have a notch etched therein.
Regarding claim 5, Luo teaches the dielectric 114 that fills the notch N1.
Regarding claim 6, Luo teaches the dielectric 114 that includes Ajinomoto build-up film (ABF) (para [0011] - “Some examples of materials for the first electrically insulating film 114 and other electrically insulating films of various implementations include…ABF films.”).
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 4 is objected to for depending on a rejected base claim 1, but would be allowable if it is rewritten in independent form to include all of the limitations of the base claim 1 or the base claim 1 is amended to include all of the limitations of claim 4.
Independent claim 7 and its dependent claims 8-13 allowed for the same reason(s) as stated on page 8 under line item number 2 of the 02-11-26 OA.
Independent claim 14 is allowed, because the prior art of record, singularly or in combination, fails to disclose or suggest, in combination with the other claimed elements in claim 14, wherein the notches are in contact with tin.
Claims 15 and 17-19 are allowed, because they depend from the allowed independent claim 14.
Independent claim 20 and its dependent claims 21-24 allowed for the same reason(s) as stated on page 9 under line item number 2 of the 02-11-26 OA.
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 MICHAEL JUNG whose telephone number is (408)918-7554. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 A.M. to 7 P.M.
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, Eliseo Ramos-Feliciano, can be reached at (571) 272-7925. 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.
/MICHAEL JUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817 26 May 2026
1 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 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
Prosecution Insights