DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is responsive to the following communications: the Amendment filed 5/11/2026.
Claims 1-11 and 14-22 are pending. Claims 12-13 are cancelled. Claims 21-22 are new. Claims 1, 14 and 18 are currently amended. Claims 1, 14 and 18 are independent.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments and amendments, filed 5/11/2026, with respect to 112/Prior Art Rejections, as indicated in line numbers 1-4 of the office action mailed 2/11/2026, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicants' arguments and amendments, filed 5/11/2026, with respect to independent claims 1, 14 and 18, although substantive and pertinent to expediting the prosecution of the current application, are considered moot and not persuasive, respectfully, in light of new grounds of rejections made under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as noted below in the rejections of independent claims 1, 14 and 18.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the claimed subject matter of claims 1, 4, 14 and 18 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s).
Claim 1 recites the limitations “a trench on the pad region and partially penetrating the lower surface of the substrate”, “a second conductive material on the upper surface of the trench” and “wherein a distance from the upper surface of the trench to the lower surface of the trench is greater than a distance from the upper surface of the trench to the lower surface of the substrate”, which do not appear to be shown in the Drawings of the current application. As indicated by the applicants, the claim limitations should be supported by Figures 7D-7E of the Drawings (see Remarks 10, as filed on 5/11/2026). Thereby, using Figures 7D-7E as reference, the claimed trench appears to be the trapezoidal space in layers 110A and 150, which is filled in by elements 455, 456, 456’, 456’’ and 457 and as further represented by 455p in Figure 11B with the claimed lower and upper surfaces of the trench being the lower and upper surfaces of the trapezoidal space. The claimed substrate appears to be 110A, 110B or 100 as suggested by the disclosure in the Specification, and thereby, the claimed lower surface of the substrate would then be the lower surface of 110A or 110B (same as the lower surface of 100). With that said, the trench does not appear to penetrate the lower surface of the substrate in any form, because the trench extends from the upper surface of 110A or 100 into 110A without reaching the lower surface of 110A, 110B or 100. Additionally, the distance from the upper surface of the trench to the lower surface of the trench, which corresponds to the thickness of the trench, does not appear to be greater than a distance from the upper surface of the trench to the lower surface of the substrate 110A, 110B or 100. The claimed second conductive material appears to be 456, 456’, 456’’ but 456, 456’, 456’’ does not appear to be on the upper surface of the trench, because 456, 456’, 456’’ is situated below the trench as shown in Figures 7D-7E.
Claim 4 recites “a width of the lower surface of the trench in the first direction is greater than a width of the upper surface of the trench in the first direction”, which does not appear to be shown by the Drawings of the current application, because as shown in Figure 7D-7E and 11B of the Drawings the width of the lower surface of the trench appears to be less than the width of the upper surface of the trench.
Claim 14 recites the limitations “a trench partially penetrating the lower surface of the substrate” and “wherein a width of the lower surface of the trench in a first direction parallel to the lower surface of the substrate is greater than a width of the upper surface of the trench in the first direction”, which do not appear to be shown in the Drawings of the current application. As indicated by the applicants, the claim limitations should be supported by Figures 7A-7C of the Drawings (see Remarks 11, as filed on 5/11/2026). Thereby, using Figures 7A-7C as reference, the claimed trench appears to be the trapezoidal space in layers 110A and 150, which is filled in by elements 455, 456 and 457 and as further represented by 455p in Figure 11B with the claimed lower and upper surfaces of the trench being the lower and upper surfaces of the trapezoidal space. The claimed substrate appears to be 110A, 110B or 100 as suggested by the disclosure in the Specification, and thereby, the claimed lower surface of the substrate would then be the lower surface of 110A or 110B (same as the lower surface of 100). With that said, the trench does not appear to penetrate the lower surface of the substrate in any form, because the trench extends from the upper surface of 110A or 100 into 110A without reaching the lower surface of 110A, 110B or 100. Additionally, as shown in Figure 7A-7C and 11B of the Drawings the width of the lower surface of the trench appears to be less than the width of the upper surface of the trench.
Claim 18 recites the limitation “a trench partially penetrating the lower surface of the substrate”, which does not appear to be shown in the Drawings of the current application. As indicated by the applicants, the claim limitations should be supported by Figures 6 and 7A-7C of the Drawings (see Remarks 11, as filed on 5/11/2026). Thereby, using Figures 6 and 7A-7C as reference, the claimed trench appears to be the trapezoidal space in layers 110A and 150, which is filled in by elements 455, 456 and 457 and as further represented by 455p in Figure 11B with the claimed lower and upper surfaces of the trench being the lower and upper surfaces of the trapezoidal spacer. The claimed substrate appears to be 110A, 110B or 100 as suggested by the disclosure in the Specification, and thereby, the claimed lower surface of the substrate would then be the lower surface of 110A or 110B (same as the lower surface of 100). With that said, the trench does not appear to penetrate the lower surface of the substrate in any form, because the trench extends from the upper surface of 110A or 100 into 110A without reaching the lower surface of 110A, 110B or 100.
No new matter should be entered.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-11 and 14-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitations “a trench on the pad region and partially penetrating the lower surface of the substrate”, “a second conductive material on the upper surface of the trench and filling the first and second holes” and “wherein a distance from the upper surface of the trench to the lower surface of the trench is greater than a distance from the upper surface of the trench to the lower surface of the substrate”, which do not appear to be supported by the originally filed disclosure of the current application. As indicated by the applicants, the claim limitations should be supported by Figures 7D-7E of the Drawings and paragraphs [0153]-[0158] of the Specification (see Remarks 10, as filed on 5/11/2026). Thereby, using Figures 7D-7E as reference, the claimed trench appears to be the trapezoidal space in layers 110A and 150, which is filled in by elements 455, 456, 456’, 456’’ and 457 and as further represented by 455p in Figure 11B with the claimed lower and upper surfaces of the trench being the lower and upper surfaces of the trapezoidal space. The claimed substrate appears to be 110A, 110B or 100 as suggested by the disclosure in the Specification (¶0073), and thereby, the claimed lower surface of the substrate would then be the lower surface of 110A or 110B (same as the lower surface of 100). With that said, the trench does not appear to penetrate the lower surface of the substrate in any form, because the trench extends from the upper surface of 110A or 100 into 110A without reaching the lower surface of 110A, 110B or 100. Additionally, the distance from the upper surface of the trench to the lower surface of the trench, which corresponds to the thickness of the trench, does not appear to be greater than a distance from the upper surface of the trench to the lower surface of the substrate 110A, 110B or 100. The claimed second conductive material appears to be 456, 456’, 456’’ but 456, 456’, 456’’ does not appear to be on the upper surface of the trench, because 456, 456’, 456’’ is situated below the trench as shown in Figures 7D-7E. Paragraphs [0153]-[0158] of the Specification do not appear to provide support for these limitations.
Claim 4 recites “a width of the lower surface of the trench in the first direction is greater than a width of the upper surface of the trench in the first direction”, which does not appear to be supported by the originally filed disclosure of the current application, because as shown in Figure 7D-7E and 11B of the Drawings the width of the lower surface of the trench appears to be less than the width of the upper surface of the trench. The Specification does not appear to provide support for this limitation.
Claim 14 recites the limitations “a trench partially penetrating the lower surface of the substrate” and “wherein a width of the lower surface of the trench in a first direction parallel to the lower surface of the substrate is greater than a width of the upper surface of the trench in the first direction”, which do not appear to be supported by the originally filed disclosure of the current application. As indicated by the applicants, the claim limitations should be supported by Figures 7A-7C of the Drawings and paragraph [0146] of the Specification (see Remarks 11, as filed on 5/11/2026). Thereby, using Figures 7A-7C as reference, the claimed trench appears to be the trapezoidal space in layers 110A and 150, which is filled in by elements 455, 456 and 457 and as further represented by 455p in Figure 11B with the claimed lower and upper surfaces of the trench being the lower and upper surfaces of the trapezoidal space. The claimed substrate appears to be 110A, 110B or 100 as suggested by the disclosure in the Specification, and thereby, the claimed lower surface of the substrate would then be the lower surface of 110A or 110B (same as the lower surface of 100). With that said, the trench does not appear to penetrate the lower surface of the substrate in any form, because the trench extends from the upper surface of 110A or 100 into 110A without reaching the lower surface of 110A, 110B or 100. Additionally, as shown in Figure 7A-7C and 11B of the Drawings the width of the lower surface of the trench appears to be less than the width of the upper surface of the trench. Paragraph [0146] of the Specification does not appear to provide support for these limitations.
Claim 18 recites the limitation “a trench partially penetrating the lower surface of the substrate”, which does not appear to be supported by the originally filed disclosure of the current application. As indicated by the applicants, the claim limitations should be supported by Figures 6 and 7A-7C of the Drawings and paragraphs [0137]-[0147] of the Specification (see Remarks 11, as filed on 5/11/2026). Thereby, using Figures 6 and 7A-7C as reference, the claimed trench appears to be the trapezoidal space in layers 110A and 150, which is filled in by elements 455, 456 and 457 and as further represented by 455p in Figure 11B with the claimed lower and upper surfaces of the trench being the lower and upper surfaces of the trapezoidal space. The claimed substrate appears to be 110A, 110B or 100 as suggested by the disclosure in the Specification, and thereby, the claimed lower surface of the substrate would then be the lower surface of 110A or 110B (same as the lower surface of 100). With that said, the trench does not appear to penetrate the lower surface of the substrate in any form, because the trench extends from the upper surface of 110A or 100 into 110A without reaching the lower surface of 110A, 110B or 100. Paragraphs [0137]-[0147] of the Specification do not appear to provide support for this limitation.
Note the dependent claims 2-11, 15-17 and 19-22 do not cure the deficiencies of the claims on which they depend.
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 JAY C CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-6132. The examiner can normally be reached Mon- Fri 12pm-10pm.
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.
/JAY C CHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Prosecution Insights