DETAILED ACTION
General Remarks
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
When responding to this office action, applicants are advised to provide the examiner with line numbers and page numbers in the application and/or references cited to assist the examiner in locating appropriate paragraphs.
Per MPEP 2111 and 2111.01, the claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation and the words of the claims are given their plain meaning consistent with the specification without importing claim limitations from the specification.
For Examiner’s Interview fill out the online Automated Interview Request (AIR) form (http://www.uspto.gov/patent/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.html).
Status of claim(s) to be treated in this office action:
Independent: 1.
Pending: 1-5,7-11.
Canceled: 6.
Response to Arguments
Applicant' s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-5 and 7-11 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.
In light of Applicant's agreement to change title to more descriptive, the title Specification Objection is hereby withdrawn.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 7, 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim et al., US PG pub. 20200091076 A1.
Re: Independent Claim 1, Kim discloses a package in which an electronic component (110, fig. 12) can be mounted, wherein the package is configured to be incorporated on a surface of a wiring substrate (118, fig. 12), the package comprising:
a first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12) having defined therein a mounting region (region 110, fig. 12) in which the electronic component (110, fig. 12) is mounted; and
a second portion (102, fig. 12) connected to the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12), wherein an area of the second portion (102, fig. 12) is larger than an area of the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12) in plain view (fig. 6) viewed from a direction normal to a surface through which the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12) and the second portion (102, fig. 12) are connected,
the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12) faces the wiring substrate (118, fig. 12), and
the second portion (102, fig. 12) is spaced apart from the wiring substrate (118, fig. 12).
Re: Claim 2, Kim disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Kim further discloses: wherein the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12) includes a first plate (121, fig. 12) and a second plate (111, fig. 12) which are apart from and opposite from each other, the mounting region (region 110, fig. 12) is set on a surface of the second plate (111, fig. 12) facing the first plate (121, fig. 12), and the second plate (111, fig. 12) is connected to the second portion (102, fig. 12).
Re: Claim 4, Kim disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Kim further discloses: wherein both surfaces of the second portion (102, fig. 12) are defined by a first surface connected to the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12) and a second surface facing the first surface, and the first surface and the mounting region (region 110, fig. 12) are thermally connected (as shown in figure 12 electronic component is connected to a heat sink 202 therefor the mounting region are thermally connected).
Re: Claim 5, Kim disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 4 on which this claim depends. Kim further discloses: wherein the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12) is arranged in the center of the first surface of the second portion (102, fig. 12).
Re: Claim 7, Kim disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Kim further discloses: a heat sink (202, fig. 12) facing the second portion (102, fig. 12); and
an insulating heat conduction sheet (108, fig. 12) disposed between the second portion (102, fig. 12) and the heat sink (202, fig. 12).
Re: Claim 10, Kim disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Kim further discloses: wherein the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12) is provided in plurality (as shown in figure 12 first portion is multiple portion of 110, 121, and 111), and the plurality of first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12)s are separated from each other and are connected to the second portion (102, fig. 12).
Re: Claim 11, Kim disclose(s) all the limitations of claim 1 on which this claim depends. Kim further discloses: a column (116, fig. 12) that is disposed on the second portion (102, fig. 12) in a remaining part of a region in which the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12) is disposed, and extends in the direction normal to the surface,
wherein the column (116, fig. 12) has one end connected to the second portion (102, fig. 12) and the other end connected to the wiring substrate (118, fig. 12) facing the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of AIA 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 of this title, 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(s) 3 is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al., US PG pub. 20200091076 A1; in view of Park et al., US Patent 10980124 B2.
Re: Claim 3, Kim discloses all the limitations of claim 2 on which this claim depends. Kim is silent regarding: wherein the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12) includes a side plate that connects the first plate (121, fig. 12) and the second plate (111, fig. 12), and the electronic component (110, fig. 12) arranged in the mounting region (region 110, fig. 12) is in contact with the side plate.
Park teaches thee electric component 110 include a top and bottom plate (top and bottom 131b, fig. 2) and side plate (131a, fig. 2) surround the electric component 110.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include top bottom and side plate to surround the electric component since this can protect the electric component from external damage during process also can improve the effectiveness of heat dissipation.
Claim(s) 8 and 9 is/are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al., US PG pub. 20200091076 A1.
Re: Claim 8, Kim discloses all the limitations of claim 7 on which this claim depends. Kim further discloses: wherein the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12) and the second portion (102, fig. 12) have a parallelepiped shape (as shown in figure 6 and figure 12 the first and second portion is a cuboid type of parallelepiped shape), and assuming that the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12) has a width Wml and a depth dml, and the second portion (102, fig. 12) has a width Wm2, a depth dm2, and a height hm2 (as shown in figure 6 and figure 12 shown that the second portion a width is greater than first portion a width and a height of the second portion and second portion a depth is greater than first portion a depth and second portion a height).
Kim is silent regarding: first and second portions relationships of formulas shown below are satisfied, Wm2 >Wml+2*hm2 dm2 >dml+ 2 * hm2.
The general dimensions of Kim are shaped for proper heat dissipation, such that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art (radiant heat spreading), it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges (dimensions) by routine experimentation. MPEP 2144.05. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to size the width and depth relationships of Kim, to properly dissipate heat.
Re: Claim 9, Kim discloses all the limitations of claim 7 on which this claim depends. Kim further discloses: wherein the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12) and the second portion (102, fig. 12) have a parallelepiped shape, assuming that the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12) has a width Wml and a depth dml, and the second portion (102, fig. 12) has a width Wm2, a depth dm2, and a height hm2.
Kim is silent regarding: when heat is transferred from the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12) to the second portion (102, fig. 12) by forming an angle 0 with a surface of the second portion (102, fig. 12) facing a surface connected to the first portion (110, 121 and 111, fig. 12), relationships of formulas shown below are satisfied, hm2 > (Wm2 - Wml) / 2 * sin0/ cos0 hm2> (dm2 - dml) / 2 * sin0 / cos0.
However, although these limitations have been considered by the Examiner, they
pertain to the manner in which the device operates. It has been held that a claim containing a recitation pertaining to the manner of operation is not deemed to patentably distinguish the claimed device from a prior art device that is structurally identical. MPEP 2114. The device of Kim is structurally identical to the Applicant's claimed device in claim 1 and claim 7. In addition, since the only distinction between the Applicant's claimed device and Kim’s is recited in functional language, it is incumbent upon the Applicant to demonstrate that Kim's device is not capable of operating as claimed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that such functional distinctions do not confer patentability when compared with prior art devices like Kim's.
Prior art made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to current application disclosure.
* (“Muthur Srinath et al., US PG pub. 20190043772 A1”) Discloses a thermal solution for 3D packaging. For instance, in accordance with one embodiment, there is an apparatus having therein: a substrate layer having electrical traces therein; a first layer functional silicon die electrically interfaced to the electrical traces of the substrate layer, the first layer functional silicon die having a first thermal pad integrated thereupon; a second layer functional silicon die positioned above the first layer functional silicon die, the second layer functional silicon die having a second thermal pad integrated thereupon; and a conductivity layer positioned between the first layer functional silicon die and the second layer functional silicon die, wherein the conductivity layer is to: (i) electrically join the second layer functional silicon die to the first layer functional silicon die and (ii) bond the first thermal pad of the first layer functional silicon die to the second thermal pad of the second layer functional silicon die via solder. Other related embodiments are disclosed.
* (“Kontani et al., US PG pub. 20150208524 A1”) discloses a connecting terminal includes an external terminal connecting portion, having an end surface to connect an external terminal thereto and located at a second principal surface side of a second circuit board faces, and a substrate-fixed portion which is securely connected to a first circuit board. A seal attachment portion is provided on a portion of the external terminal connecting portion including the end surface to attach thereto a seal member to seal a gap between the portion and the case. The connecting terminal includes a reduced sectional area portion having a sectional area smaller than an area of the top end surface in a region close to a plurality of electronic components arranged on the second circuit board on the external terminal connecting portion. The reduced sectional area portion is provided from the seal attachment portion to an end in the opposite side of the end surface.
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 TSZ CHIU whose telephone number is 571-272-8656. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 9:00AM to 5:00PM (EST).
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 https://www.uspto.gov/patent/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.html.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Leonard Chang can be reached on 571-270-3691. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TSZ K CHIU/Examiner, Art Unit 2898 Tsz.Chiu@uspto.gov
/Leonard Chang/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Prosecution Insights