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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (Claims 1-16 and 21-24) in the reply filed on 2/27/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claims 11 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
in claim 11, line 2 delete “move” and insert therein - - moving - - for form; and
in claim 12, line 1 delete “wherein system” and insert therein - - wherein the system - - for form.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 5 is 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 5 recites the limitation “the first and second actuators” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation (the second actuator) in the claim. It is suggested to delete “the first and second actuators” and insert therein - - the first actuator and a second actuator - - to overcome this rejection. This is the interpretation given the limitation for purposes of examination.
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.
Claims 1-6, 9, 10, 12-14, 16, 21, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Akira (JP 10-150296 and see also the machine translation).
Regarding claims 1 and 6, Akira discloses a bond stage configured for bonding a first material or article worked upon (electronic component 11) to a second material or article worked upon (substrate 12), comprising (it being noted comprising is inclusive or open-ended and does not exclude additional, unrecited elements see MPEP 2111.03): a bonding platform (comprising substrate stage 3 and optionally further comprising top stage 8a) having a top surface and a bottom surface opposing the top surface; a first actuator (considered motor 8d and/or movable portion 8b) operable to tilt the bonding platform about a first axis; and a plurality of contact sensors (plurality of piezoelectric elements 4, 5, 6 detecting pressure values and regarding claim 6 wherein the plurality of contact sensors comprises at least one force sensor) disposed at the bonding platform (Figure 1 and Abstract and Paragraph 0005 of the machine translation).
As to the limitation in claim 1 of “bonding a semiconductor integrated circuit (IC) die”, the claims are directed to an apparatus wherein the limitation is directed to the material or article worked upon by the apparatus and/or a functional limitation and including a mere statement of purpose or intended use (see MPEP 2111.02). Inclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims (see MPEP 2115). A claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. If an examiner concludes that a functional limitation is an inherent characteristic of the prior art, then to establish a prima case of anticipation or obviousness, the examiner should explain that the prior art structure inherently possesses the functionally defined limitations of the claimed apparatus. The burden then shifts to applicant to establish that the prior art does not possess the characteristic relied on (see MPEP 2114). Akira teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim as set forth above wherein the bond stage is capable of “bonding a semiconductor integrated circuit (IC) die” wherein as the first and/or second material or article worked upon by the bond stage is a semiconductor integrated circuit (IC) die.
Regarding claim 2, Akira teaches a second actuator (considered motor 8g and/or movable portion 8e) operable to tilt the bonding platform about a second axis that is perpendicular to the first axis (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 3, Akira teaches the first and second actuators are disposed at the bottom surface of the bonding platform (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 4, the first (motor 8d) and second (motor 8g) actuators taught by Akira are symmetrically arranged with respect to a vertical line extending through a center point of the bonding platform along a plane extending at a 45 degree angle between the actuators (see Figure 1). Alternatively, the first (movable portion 8b) and second (movable portion 8e) actuators taught by Akira are each symmetrically arranged with respect to their upper surfaces and a vertical line extending through a center point of the bonding platform (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 5, the first and second actuators taught by Akira are operable to move vertically (such as by the bond stage is oriented vertically with respect to the first actuator in space and such as by the bond stage is oriented vertically with respect to the second actuator in space wherein vertically is a spatial relative term and including see paragraph 0013 of the instant specification).
Regarding claims 9 and 16, Akira discloses a (first material or article worked upon such as a die/electronic component 11) bonding tool, comprising: a bond head (head 1b) operable to temporarily secure a first movable object (the first material or article worked upon 11); a first actuator (comprising motor 1d and ball screw 1c) operable to move the bond head; a bond stage (comprising substrate stage 3 and optionally further comprising top stage 8a) having a support surface, the bond stage comprising: a second actuator (comprising motor 8d and/or motor 8g and/or movable portion 8b and/or 8e) operable to tilt the bond stage with respect to the bond head; and a contact sensor (piezoelectric elements 4, 5, 6 and regarding claim 16 wherein the contact sensor comprises a plurality of force sensors disposed around an outer periphery of the substrate stage 3 of the bond stage) operable to detect contact forces on different regions of the bond stage; and a system controller (comprising a driving unit 2 and a driving unit 10 and an inclination calculating unit 7) coupled to the bond head, the first actuator, the second actuator, and the contact sensor, the system controller being operable to: direct the first actuator to move the bond head towards a second movable object (second material or article worked upon 12) disposed on the support surface of the bond stage; and direct the second actuator to tilt the bond stage about at least one tilt axis in response to the contact sensor detecting an initial contact (pressure value) between the first object and the second object (see pages 3 and 4 of the machine translation including “The pressure at each position of the substrate stage 3 is output as a voltage value corresponding to the pressure value applied to that position by the piezoelectric elements 4, 5 and 6 mounted below the substrate stage 3. This voltage value is read by the inclination calculating unit 7 and converted into pressure values of respective parts, and then the relative inclination between the mounting head 1 and the substrate stage 3 is calculated from the difference between the pressure values at each position. Based on the calculation result, the motors 8d and 8g of the tilt stage 8 are driven by the slack stage driving unit 10 so that the mounting head 1 and the substrate stage 3 are parallel to each other. The inclination can be eliminated.”).
Regarding claim 10, the system controller taught by Akira is further operable to: direct the second actuator to continue tilting the bond stage once the initial contact between the first object and the second object is detected (after the pressures are detected and until the mounting head 1/bond head and the substrate stage 3/bond stage are parallel to each other).
Regarding claim 12, the system controller taught by Akira is further operable to: direct the second actuator to stop tilting of the bond stage in response to the system controller determining that a contact criterion between the first object and the second object is met (the mounting head 1/bond head and the substrate stage 3/bond stage are parallel to each other).
Regarding claim 13, the second actuator taught by Akira is operable to move vertically (such as by the bond stage is oriented vertically in space wherein vertically is a spatial relative term).
Regarding claim 14, Akira teaches the second actuator is disposed at the bottom surface of the bond stage (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 21, Akira discloses a bond stage configured for use with a (first material or article worked upon such as a die/electronic component 11) bonding tool (head 1b), comprising: a bonding platform (comprising substrate stage 3 and optionally further comprising top stage 8a), comprising: a top surface defining a tool plane; and a bottom surface opposite the top surface; a plurality of actuators (comprising motor 8d and/or motor 8g and/or movable portion 8b and/or 8e) coupled to the bottom surface of the bonding platform, the actuators being independently controllable to vertically displace different regions of the bonding platform; a plurality of contact sensors (piezoelectric elements 4, 5, 6) disposed at different peripheral regions of the bonding platform, wherein the plurality of actuators are arranged circumferentially about the bonding platform and are operable to tilt the bonding platform about at least two perpendicular tilt axes by independently vertically displacing the different peripheral regions of the bonding platform (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 22, the plurality of actuators (motor 8d and motor 8g) taught by Akira are symmetrically arranged with respect to a vertical line extending through a center point of the bonding platform along a plane extending at a 45 degree angle between the actuators (see Figure 1). Alternatively, the plurality of actuators (movable portion 8b and 8e) taught by Akira are each symmetrically arranged with respect to their upper surfaces and a vertical line extending through a center point of the bonding platform (see Figure 1).
Claims 1-5 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Usui et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2012/0247644).
Regarding claim 1, Usui discloses a bond stage configured for bonding a first material or article worked upon (panel 3) to a second material or article worked upon (panel 2), comprising: a bonding platform (base member 4) having a top surface and a bottom surface opposing the top surface; a first actuator (tilt member 52 provided with an actuator) operable to tilt the bonding platform about a first axis; and a plurality of contact sensors (plurality of contact type digital sensors 51) disposed at the bonding platform (Figure 10 and Paragraphs 0041 and 0103-0105).
As to the limitation in claim 1 of “bonding a semiconductor integrated circuit (IC) die”, as noted above the claims are directed to an apparatus wherein the limitation is directed to the material or article worked upon by the apparatus and/or a functional limitation and including a mere statement of purpose or intended use. Usui teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim as set forth above wherein the bond stage is configured for “bonding a semiconductor integrated circuit (IC) die” wherein as the first and/or second material or article worked upon by the bond stage is a semiconductor integrated circuit (IC) die.
Regarding claim 2, Usui teaches a second actuator (a tilt member 52 provided with an actuator is present at each of the four corners of the base member/bonding platform and thus) operable to tilt the bonding platform about a second axis that is perpendicular to the first axis (see Figure 10 and Paragraph 0104).
Regarding claim 3, Usui teaches the first and second actuators are disposed at the bottom surface of the bonding platform (see Figure 10).
Regarding claim 4, the first and second actuators taught by Usui are symmetrically arranged (at each corner) with respect to a vertical line extending through a center point of the bonding platform (see Figure 10).
Regarding claim 5, the first and second actuators taught by Usui are operable to move vertically (see Figure 10).
Regarding claim 21, Usui discloses a bond stage configured for use with a (first material or article worked upon such as a die/panel 3) bonding tool (comprising actuator 6 and base member 5), comprising: a bonding platform (base member 4), comprising: a top surface defining a tool plane; and a bottom surface opposite the top surface; a plurality of actuators (tilt members 52 provided with actuators) coupled to the bottom surface of the bonding platform, the actuators being independently controllable (the amounts of protrusion of the tilt members 52 are made to differ) to vertically displace different regions of the bonding platform; a plurality of contact sensors (contact type digital sensors 51) disposed at different peripheral regions of the bonding platform, wherein the plurality of actuators are arranged circumferentially about the bonding platform (at corners) and are operable to tilt the bonding platform about at least two perpendicular tilt axes by independently vertically displacing the different peripheral regions of the bonding platform.
Regarding claim 22, the plurality of actuators taught by Usui is symmetrically arranged (at each corner) with respect to a vertical line extending through a center point of the bonding platform (see Figure 10).
Regarding claim 23, the plurality of actuators taught by Usui comprises at least four actuators spaced apart along a circumference (external boundary or surface of a figure or object) of the bonding platform (see Figure 10).
Claims 1, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hyun et al. (KR 10-2022-0097146 and see also the machine translation).
Regarding claims 1, 5, and 6, Hyun discloses a bond stage, comprising: a bonding platform (plate 310 upon which a material or article worked upon may be bonded) having a top surface and a bottom surface opposing the top surface; a first actuator (a drive mechanism of a plurality of drive mechanisms 342) operable to tilt the bonding platform about a first axis and (regarding claim 5) the first actuator and a second actuator (a second drive mechanism of the plurality of drive mechanisms) are operable to move vertically; and a plurality of contact sensors (plurality of load cells 320 and regarding claim 6 wherein the plurality of contact sensors comprises at least one force sensor) disposed at (at least near) the bonding platform measuring the load applied to the bonding platform by a bond head (bonding head 210) (Figures 3-7 and Pages 4-6 of the machine translation).
As to the limitation in claim 1 of “for bonding a semiconductor integrated circuit (IC) die”, as noted above the claims are directed to an apparatus wherein the limitation is directed to the material or article worked upon by the apparatus and/or a functional limitation and including a mere statement of purpose or intended use. Hyun teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim as set forth above wherein the bond stage is capable for “bonding a semiconductor integrated circuit (IC) die” wherein as a first material or article worked upon on the bonding platform is a semiconductor integrated circuit (IC) die that is bonded.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 7, 8, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akira in view of Ho (KR 10-1868907 and see also the machine translation).
Akira is described above in full detail.
Regarding claims 7, 8, and 24, Akira teaches the tilting bonding platform carries a second material or article worked upon. Akira does not expressly teach one or more holes extending through a body of the bonding platform. It is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art a bonding platform (stage module 100) operable to tilt further comprise one or more suction holes (111) extending through a body of the bonding platform (upper plate 110) wherein the one or more holes are in fluidly communication with a vacuum source (vacuum nozzle 121) (and including one or more perforations, i.e. the one or more holes, extending through the bonding platform and fluidly coupled to a vacuum plenum of a diffusion plate 130 within the bonding platform) to stably hold the material or article worked upon as evidenced by Ho (Figure 2 and Page 3 of the machine translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the bond stage taught by Akira further comprise one or more suction holes extending through a body of the bonding platform wherein the one or more holes are in fluidly communication with a vacuum source (and including one or more perforations, i.e. the one or more holes, extending through the bonding platform and fluidly coupled to a vacuum plenum of a diffusion plate within the bonding platform) to stably hold the second material or article worked upon as evidenced by Ho.
Claims 9, 10, 12-14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akira optionally in view of Yasuhiro et al. (JP 2021-197536 and see also the machine translation).
Akira is described above in full detail regarding claims 9, 10, 12-14, and 16.
In the event it is somehow considered Akira does not necessarily anticipate one or more of the limitations in claim 9 of “a system controller coupled to the bond head, the first actuator, the second actuator, and the contact sensor, the system controller being operable to: direct the first actuator to move the bond head towards a second movable object disposed on the support surface of the bond stage; and direct the second actuator to tilt the bond stage about at least one tilt axis in response to the contact sensor detecting an initial contact between the first object and the second object” and in claims 10 and 12 as set forth above the following rejection is made. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the die bonding tool taught by Akira comprise a system controller (comprising the driving unit 2 and the driving unit 10 and an inclination calculating unit 7 wherein if somehow not considered a system controller it being noted broadly providing an automatic means to replace a manual activity which accomplished the same result is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art see MPEP 2144.04 and “III. AUTOMATING A MANUAL ACTIVITY” and optionally further in view of Yasuhiro wherein it is well understood by one of ordinary skill in this art a control unit 60 controls the operation of each component of the device and including tilt mechanism 8 and bonding head 12 see page 6 of the machine translation) coupled to the bond head, the first actuator, the second actuator, and the contact sensor, the system controller being operable to: direct the first actuator to move the bond head towards the second movable object (the second material or article worked upon, substrate 12) disposed on the support surface of the bond stage; and direct the second actuator to tilt the bond stage about at least one tilt axis in response to the contact sensor detecting an initial contact between the first object and the second object (a pressure value) and the system controller is further operable to: direct the second actuator to continue tilting the bond stage once the initial contact between the first object and the second object is detected (after the pressures are detected and until the mounting head 1/bond head and the substrate stage 3/bond stage are parallel to each other) and the system controller is further operable to: direct the second actuator to stop tilting of the bond stage in response to the system controller determining that a contact criterion between the first object and the second object is met (the mounting head 1/bond head and the substrate stage 3/bond stage are parallel to each other) following that expressly taught by Akira and including see pages 3 and 4 of the machine translation and “The pressure at each position of the substrate stage 3 is output as a voltage value corresponding to the pressure value applied to that position by the piezoelectric elements 4, 5 and 6 mounted below the substrate stage 3. This voltage value is read by the inclination calculating unit 7 and converted into pressure values of respective parts, and then the relative inclination between the mounting head 1 and the substrate stage 3 is calculated from the difference between the pressure values at each position. Based on the calculation result, the motors 8d and 8g of the tilt stage 8 are driven by the slack stage driving unit 10 so that the mounting head 1 and the substrate stage 3 are parallel to each other. The inclination can be eliminated.”.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akira in view of Usui. Additionally, claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akira and optionally Yasuhiro as applied to claims 9, 10, 12-14 and 16 above, and further in view of Usui.
Regarding claim 11, Akira is described above in full detail. Akira does not expressly teach the first actuator is directed to continue moving the bond head towards the bond stage while the bond stage is tilting. Akira does not require the die bonding tool bond the materials or articles worked upon using any particular technique. It is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art a first actuator (6) is directed to continuing moving the bond head (base member 5) towards the bond stage (base member 4) after initial contact of first and second materials or articles worked upon (panels 2, 3) being bonded to evenly spread bonding adhesive (7) over the entire surface of the first and second materials or articles worked upon for adhesive bonding as taught by Usui (Figure 10 and Paragraphs 0090-0091). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the system controller taught by Akira and Akira as optionally modified by Yasuhiro is further operable to: direct the first actuator to continue moving the bond head towards the bond stage after initial contact (i.e. while the bond stage is tilting) to allow for the materials or articled worked upon to include adhesively bonding the materials or articles worked upon and evenly spread bonding adhesive over the entire surface of the first and second materials or articles worked upon as taught by Usui.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akira in view of Eitan et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2024/0194633) or Ho. Additionally, claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akira and optionally Yasuhiro as applied to claims 9, 10, 12-14 and 16 above, and further in view of Eitan or Ho.
Regarding claim 15, Akira is described above in full detail. Akira does not expressly teach the contact sensor further comprises at least one encoder operable to determine a relative position and/or motion of different regions of the bond stage. It is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art of similar contact sensor (on the bond head as opposed to the bond stage) for correcting tilt (of the bond head) comprises at least one encoder operable to determine a relative position and/or motion of different regions of the bond head as evidenced by Eitan (Paragraphs 0040 and 0068). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the contact sensor taught by Akira and Akira as optionally modified by Yasuhiro further comprise at least one encoder operable to determine a relative position and/or motion of different regions of the bond stage as is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art of contact sensor for correcting tilt as evidenced by Eitan. The applied reference to Eitan has a common joint inventor with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Eitan only might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02. Alternatively, it is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to further include at least one encoder (with the actuator) operable to determine a relative position and/or motion of different regions of a bond stage for precise adjustment of the actuator and bond stage as taught by Ho (Page 6 of the machine translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the die bonding tool comprising the contact sensor taught by Akira and Akira as optionally modified by Yasuhiro further comprises at least one encoder operable to determine a relative position and/or motion of different regions of the bond stage as is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art for precise adjustment of the actuator and bond stage as evidenced by Ho.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Usui in view of Akira.
Usui is described above in full detail.
Regarding claim 6, Usui does not expressly teach the plurality of contact sensors comprises at least one force sensor. Usui teaches any suitable sensor may be used (Paragraph 0108). It is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art suitable contact sensors for bonding platforms that tilt include force sensors such as piezoelectric elements detecting pressure values as taught by Akira (described above in full detail). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the plurality of contact sensors taught by Usui comprises at least one force sensor as are the conventional and predictable suitable sensors as evidenced by Akira.
Claims 7, 8, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Usui in view of Ho.
Usui is described above in full detail.
Regarding claims 7, 8, and 24, Usui teaches the bonding platform retains the second material or article worked upon (panel 2) by means such as vacuum suction (Paragraph 0041) without expressly detailing the vacuum suction structure. Ho is described above in full detail. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the bond stage taught by Usui further comprise one or more suction holes extending through a body of the bonding platform wherein the one or more holes are in fluidly communication with a vacuum source (and including one or more perforations, i.e. the one or more holes, extending through the bonding platform and fluidly coupled to a vacuum plenum of a diffusion plate within the bonding platform) to stably hold the material or article worked upon as evidenced by Ho and consistent with that taught by Usui.
Claims 6, 9-14, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Usui in view of Hyun.
Regarding the limitations in claim 6, in claim 9 of “a contact sensor operable to detect contact forces” and in claim 16, Usui is described above in full detail regarding claim 1. Usui does not expressly teach the plurality of contact sensors comprises at least one force sensor. Usui teaches any suitable sensor may be used (Paragraph 0108). It is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art suitable contact sensors (load cells 320) for a platform (plate 310) that tilts in response to contact with a bond head (head 210 carrying a first material or article worked upon 212) include force sensors such as load cells as taught by Hyun (Pages 4-6 of the machine translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the plurality of contact sensors taught by Usui comprise a plurality of force sensors (load cells) as are the conventional and predictable suitable sensors as evidenced by Hyun.
Regarding claims 9 and 16, Usui discloses a (first material or article worked upon such as a die/panel 3) bonding tool, comprising: a bond head (base member 5) operable to temporarily secure a first movable object (the first material or article worked upon); a first actuator (actuator 6) operable to move the bond head; a bond stage (base member 4) having a support surface configured to have a second movable object (panel 2) as a second material or article worked upon disposed on the support surface of the bond stage, the bond stage comprising: a second actuator (tilt member 52 provided with an actuator) operable to tilt the bond stage with respect to the bond head; and a contact sensor (plurality of contact type digital sensors 51 including as load cells as taught by Usui as modified by Hyun above and regarding claim 16 wherein the contact sensor comprises a plurality of force sensors disposed around an outer periphery of the bond stage) operable to detect contact forces on different regions of the bond stage.
As to the limitations in claim 9 of “a system controller coupled to the bond head, the first actuator, the second actuator and the contact sensor, the system controller being operable to: direct the first actuator to move the bond head towards a second movable object disposed on the support surface of the bond stage; and direct the second actuator to tilt the bond stage about at least one tilt axis in response to the contact sensor detecting an initial contact between the first object and the second object” and in claims 10-12, Usui does not expressly teach the structure to direct the actuators to move. It is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art structure to direct actuators (driving mechanisms 342) to move is a system controller of a control unit as evidenced by Hyun (Page 5 of the machine translation and “In this case, the operation of the driving mechanisms 342 may be controlled by the control unit.”). Usui further teaches (see paragraph 0104 ) “The adjustment unit 50 includes a plurality of contact type digital sensors 51 and a plurality of tilt members 52, which tilt members 5 adjust relative tilt of the liquid crystal panel retaining base member 4 and the protective panel retaining base member 5 in response to the result of detection by the digital sensors 51 and the tilt members 52, as shown in FIG. 10.” wherein as shown in Figure 10 the first object/material or article worked upon is made to contact the second object/second material or article worked upon so that Usui is considered to teach the second actuator is directed to move to tilt the bond stage about at least one tilt axis in response to the contact sensor detecting an initial contact between the first object and the second object. Usui further teaches (see paragraph 0105) “The adjustment unit 50 detects the wetting spreading out state of the adhesive 7 by the sensor 9. If variations are locally produced, the tilt member 52 is actuated to make fine adjustment of the tilt of the liquid crystal panel retaining base member 4 and/or the protective panel retaining base member 5 to locally change the distance between the liquid crystal panel 2 and the protective panel 3.” and (see paragraph 0107) “This adjustment is made by the tilt member 52, as the relative tilt between the liquid crystal panel retaining base member 4 and the protective panel retaining base member 5 is monitored by the contact type digital sensor 51, so that the two panels 2, 3 will be parallel to each other.” so that Usui is considered to teach to make fine adjustments of the tilt while the first material or article worked upon/first object moves toward the second material or article worked upon/second object to spread adhesive therebetween and adjustment of the tilt is made until the materials or articles worked upon are parallel to each other. Usui does not expressly teach the structure to direct the second actuator to move to tilt until the materials or articles worked upon are parallel to each other. It is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art structure to direct an actuator (drive mechanism 342) to move to tilt a stage (plate 310) about at least one tilt axis in response to a contact sensor (load sensor 320) detecting an initial contact between a first object (on head 210) and the stage and make adjustments of the tilt by continuing to direct the actuator to continue tilting the stage once the initial contact between the first object and the stage is detected until all the loads measured by the contact sensors are equal is a system controller of a control unit optionally including an inclination correction unit as also taught by Hyun (see Pages 5 and 6 of the machine translation and “When the measuring plate 310 is pressed by the bonding head 210 as described above, the load values measured by the load sensors 320 may vary according to the inclination of the driving head 210 . The control unit may calculate the inclination of the measuring plate 310 and the inclination of the bonding head 210 based on the measured load values, and the bonding head ( The driving mechanisms 342 may be operated to correct the inclination of the 210 . According to the embodiments of the present invention as described above, the inclination of the bonding head 210 may be measured by the load sensors 320 , and the bonding head ( 342 ) by the driving mechanisms 342 . 210) may be corrected.” and “It may include a tilt correction unit 340 for For example, the inclination correction unit 340 is connected to the lower portion of the measurement plate 310 and adjusts the horizontality of the measurement plate 310 so that the loads measured by the load sensors 320 are equal to each other. It may include a plurality of drive mechanisms 342 for adjusting. In this case, the operation of the driving mechanisms 342 may be controlled by the control unit.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the tool taught by Usui comprise a system controller coupled to the bond head, the first actuator, and the second actuator to direct the actuators to move (i.e. being operable to: direct the first actuator to move the bond head towards the second movable object disposed on the support surface of the bond stage; and direct the second actuator to tilt the bond stage about at least one tilt axis) as a system controller is the conventional and predictable structure to direct actuators to move as evidenced by Hyun wherein it would have been further obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the system controller taught by Usui as modified by Hyun further connected to the contact sensor (plurality of load cells) and being operable to: direct the second actuator to tilt the bond stage about the at least one tilt axis in response to the contact sensor detecting an initial contact between the first object and the second object as is the conventional and predictable structure to direct the second actuator to tilt the bond stage about at least one tilt axis in response to the contact sensor detecting an initial contact between the first object and the stage as also evidenced by Hyun wherein the system controller is then further operable to: (regarding claim 10) direct the second actuator to continue tilting the bond stage once the initial contact between the first object and the second object is detected (at least until the adhesive is spread as taught by Usui and the materials or articles worked upon are parallel to each other/all the loads measured by the contact sensors are equal as taught by Usui and Hyun) during which (regarding claim 11) the first actuator is directed to continue moving the bond head towards the bond stage while the bond stage is tilting (to spread the adhesive as taught by Usui) and (regarding claim 12) the system controller is further operable to: direct the second actuator to stop tilting of the bond stage in response to the system controller determining that a contact criterion between the first object and the second object is met (the criterion is that the materials or articles worked upon are parallel to each other/all the loads measured by the contact sensors are equal as taught by Usui and Hyun).
Regarding claim 13, Usui teaches the second actuator is operable to move vertically (see Figure 10).
Regarding claim 14, Usui teaches the second actuator is disposed at a bottom surface of the bond stage (see Figure 10).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Usui and Hyun as applied to claims 9-14 and 16 above, and further in view of Eitan or Ho.
Regarding claim 15, Usui as modified by Hyun above teach all of the limitations in claim 15 except for a specific teaching the contact sensor further comprises at least one encoder operable to determine a relative position and/or motion of different regions of the bond stage. Eitan is described above in full detail. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the contact sensor taught by Usui as modified by Hyun further comprise at least one encoder operable to determine a relative position and/or motion of different regions of the bond stage as is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art of contact sensor for correcting tilt as evidenced by Eitan. Alternatively, Ho is described above in full detail. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the die bonding tool comprising the contact sensor taught by Usui as modified by Hyun further comprises at least one encoder operable to determine a relative position and/or motion of different regions of the bond stage as is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art for precise adjustment of the actuator and bond stage as evidenced by Ho.
Claims 2-4 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hyun in view of Usui and optionally further Akira.
Hyun is described above in full detail.
Regarding claim 2, Hyun teaches as an example three actuators (342) operable to tilt the bonding platform about three axes (Figures 1 and 7 and Page 5 of the machine translation). Hyun does not expressly teach one of the axis is perpendicular to another axis. Hyun is not limited to any particular number of actuators nor any particular relationship of the axes about which the bonding platform is tilted. It is well understood by one of ordinary skill in the art of tilting a bonding platform the plurality of actuators comprise four actuators, such as one at each corner of the bonding platform in a rectangle, as evidenced by Usui (described above in full detail) and thus a second actuator operable to tilt the bonding platform about a second axis that is perpendicular to the first axis it being further optionally noted tilting the bonding platform wherein the relationship of the axes about which the bonding platform is tilted includes tilting the bonding platform about a second axis that is perpendicular to the first axis is expressly known in a bond stage of the type taught by Hyun for similarly eliminating difference in inclination between a bond head (head 1b and analogous to the bonding head 210 taught by Hyun) and the bonding platform as evidenced by Akira (described above in full detail and see in particular Figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the bond stage taught by Hyun comprise four actuators, such as in a square or rectangle at corners of the outline depicted in Figure 7 of Hyun it being noted changes in shape and/or rearrangement of parts is a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed arrangement was significant (see MPEP 2144.04 and “B. Changes in Shape” and “C. Rearrangement of Parts”), as a simple substitution of one known number of actuators for another to yield predictable results as evidenced by Usui and including a second actuator operable to tilt the bonding platform about a second axis that is perpendicular to the first axis it being further optionally noted tilting the bonding platform wherein the relationship of the axes about which the bonding platform is tilted includes tilting about a second axis that is perpendicular to the first axis is expressly known in a bond stage of the type taught by Hyun for similarly eliminating the difference in inclination between the bond head and the bonding platform as evidenced by Akira.
Regarding claim 3, Hyun as modified by Usui and optionally further Akira teaches the first and second actuators are disposed at the bottom surface of the bonding platform (see Figures 4-6 of Hyun).
Regarding claim 4, the first and second actuators taught by Hyun as modified by Usui and optionally further Akira are symmetrically arranged (such as in a square or rectangle) with respect to a vertical line extending through a center point of the bonding platform.
Regarding claim 21, Hyun as modified by Usui and optionally further Akira discloses a bond stage configured for use with a die bonding tool (bonding head 210), comprising: a bonding platform (plate 310), comprising: a top surface defining a tool plane; and a bottom surface opposite the top surface; a plurality of actuators (drive mechanisms 342) coupled to the bottom surface of the bonding platform, the actuators being independently controllable to vertically displace different regions of the bonding platform; a plurality of contact sensors (load cells 320) disposed at different peripheral regions of the bonding platform, wherein the plurality of actuators are arranged circumferentially (in a square or rectangle) about the bonding platform and are operable to tilt the bonding platform about at least two perpendicular tilt axes by independently vertically displacing the different peripheral regions of the bonding platform.
Regarding claim 22, the plurality of actuators taught by Hyun as modified by Usui and optionally further Akira is symmetrically arranged (such as in a square or rectangle) with respect to a vertical line extending through a center point of the bonding platform.
Regarding claim 23, the plurality of actuators taught by Hyun as modified by Usui and optionally further Akira comprises at least four actuators spaced apart along a circumference of the bonding platform.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN L GOFF II whose telephone number is (571)272-1216. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 4:00 PM EST Monday - Friday.
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, Michael Orlando can be reached at 571-270-5038. 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.
/JOHN L GOFF II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1746
Prosecution Insights