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 & Status of Claims
Applicant’s election of Invention I drawn to a core material and of which Species A directed to a solder layer made of Sn-40Bi that encompasses claims 1-2 and 4-5 in the reply filed on 16 JUNE 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 3 and 6-11 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected inventions and species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 16 JUNE 2026.
Claims 1-2 and 4-5 are under examination in the instant action.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Instant specification [0007]-[0009] recite “Japanese Patent No. 5367924” and “Japanese Patent No. 6217836”. The prior art documents should be recited in proper format having country as well as kind codes, for example: “JP 5367924 B1”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: The terms “%” and “% by mass” in the concentration ratio equations should not be in parentheses as they are required units of the various terms in the equation. 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.
Claims 1-2 and 4-5 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.
Regarding claims 1-2 and 4-5, instant claim 1 requires the limitation of
“when a concentration ratio of Bi contained in the solder layer is
a concentration ratio (%)=a measured value of Bi (% by mass)/a target Bi content (% by mass),
or
a concentration ratio (%)=an average value of measured values of Bi (% by mass)/a target Bi content (% by mass),
the concentration ratio is 90% to 107.5%,”
It is unclear whether the limitation of “a target Bi content” is the 40 mass% of the Sn-40Bi based solder alloy of which the solder layer is made of or if it refers to another amount.
It is unclear whether “the concentration ratio is 90% to 107.5%” is only to be followed when the measurement is done using the above equations as the instant claims recite the term “when” which is a conditional term or whether the claims are requiring the concentration ratio of the solder layer to be 90% to 107.5% wherein the concentration ratio is measured by either first or second technique/formula.
It is unclear what “90% to 107.5%” of the target value truly represents. Does it refer to the distribution of Bi in the solder layer, measurement at a specific thickness of the solder layer or a series of measurements at various specific thicknesses of the solder layer?
Claims 2 and 4-5 are dependents of claim 1 and thereby also indefinite.
Regarding claims 1-2 and 4-5, instant claim 1 requires the limitation of “a core having 0.95 or more sphericity”. The range of 0.95 or more of the instant claims is a one-sided range and includes numerical values above 1.0. However, it is unclear how a value above 1.0 as allowed by the claims can be attained since sphericity is a measure of how close the shape of an object is to that of a sphere and sphericity of sphere is 1.0. Claims 2 and 4-5 are dependents of claim 1 and thereby also indefinite. Claims 2 and 4-5 are dependents of claim 1 and thereby also indefinite.
Regarding claim 2, instant claim recites “The core material according to claim 1, wherein a target composition of the (Sn-40Bi)-based solder alloy is Sn-40Bi-0.5Cu.” It is unclear what is meant by a “target composition of the (Sn-40Bi)-based solder alloy”. If it is intending that “Sn-40Bi-0.5Cu” is the composition of
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 1-2 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2018/0174991 A1 of Nishino (US’991) in view of WO 2014/207897 A1of Kawasaki and its English machine translation (WO’897).
Regarding claims 1-2 and 4-5, US 2018/0174991 A1 of Nishino (US’991) teaches
[0018] “a core material including a core and an electric solder plating layer formed by performing electric plating with respect to a surface of the core with an (Sn-Bi)-based solder alloy made of Sn and Bi” {claim 3, [0028]} A core material, comprising: a core; and an electric solder plating layer of an (Sn-40Bi)-based solder alloy made of Sn and Bi in amount of 40 mass % on a surface of the core, the electric solder plating layer being subjected to electric solder plating, wherein the core includes a metal simple substance of Cu, Ni, Ag, Bi, Pb, Al, Sn, Fe, Zn, In, Ge, Sb, Co, Mn, Au, Si, Pt, Cr, La, Mo, Nb, Pd, Ti, Zr, or Mg, or an alloy of two or more types thereof, a metal oxide thereof, or a metal mixed oxide thereof, and when a concentration ratio of Bi contained in the solder plating layer is set to Concentration Ratio (%)=(Measured Value of Bi (mass %)/Target Bi Content (mass %))*100, or Concentration Ratio (%)=(Average Value of Measured Values of Bi (mass %)/Target Bi Content (mass %))*100, the concentration ratio is in a range of 90% to 107.5%” “[0021] Furthermore, the Bi concentration ratio (%) used herein indicates a ratio (%) of a measured value of Bi (mass %) to a target Bi content (mass %), or an average value of the measured values (mass %) of Bi to the target Bi content (mass %), in a predetermined region of the solder plating layer. [0022] In addition, it is possible to restate the Bi content in a predetermined region as the Bi concentration in the predetermined region, and thus, the Bi concentration ratio (%) used herein indicates a ratio (%) of the measured Bi concentration to the target Bi concentration, or a ratio (%) of the average of the measured Bi concentration to the target Bi concentration, in the predetermined region of the solder plating layer.” “[0066] The Cu ball 12 preferably has a sphericity of greater than or equal to 0.95, and more preferably has the sphericity of greater than or equal to 0.990, from the viewpoint of controlling a stand-off height.” “[0107] In Embodiment 2, the solder plating layer 16 of a four-dimensional Sn-based solder alloy formed of (Sn-Cu-Bi-Ni) containing Cu and Ni in addition to Sn and Bi is typically formed. A composition ratio as a target value thereof is as follows. [0108] Bi: 40 mass %, Cu: 0.5 mass %, Ni: 0.03 mass %, and Sn: the remainder. [0109] At this time, the distribution of Bi is 40 mass % as a target value, and is 36 mass % (a concentration value of 90%) to 43 mass % (a concentration ratio of 107.5%) as an allowable range. [0110] Specifically, in the following condition, Cu core balls in each of which the composition of the solder plating layer was (Sn-40Bi-0.5Cu-0.03Ni) accorded to the above description were prepared.” {claim 14, [0019], [0032]} “The core material according to claim 3, wherein the core material further includes a base plating layer of one or more elements selected from the group of Ni and Co, between the surface of the core and the electric solder plating layer in this order” “[0019] Here, in a case where a base plating layer subjected to Ni plating or the like is provided between the core and the solder plating layer of the (Sn—Bi)-based solder alloy, a core material is provided in which Bi is homogeneously distributed in the solder plating layer excluding the base plating layer.” [0032] “the core material further includes a base plating layer of one or more elements selected from the group of Ni and Co, between the surface of the core and the electric solder plating layer in this order.” [0033] “A core material claimed in Claim 6 according to this invention is the core material according to any one of Claims 1 through 5, characterized in that a Cu ball is used as the core.” “[0058] A metal material is used as the core. A spherical body and other shapes (a columnar column, a sheet, or the like) are considered as the shape of the core. In this embodiment, a case of a Cu core ball, which is a spherical body, and in particular, uses a ball made of Cu (hereinafter, referred to as a Cu ball) as the core, will be described. [0059] A particle diameter (a spherical diameter) of the Cu ball is different according to a size of the BGA or the like, but in the following embodiments, the Cu ball is a sphere having a diameter of approximately 200 μmϕ, and the thickness of the solder plating layer on one side in a radial direction is 20 μm to 100 μm. A particle diameter of the Cu core ball is suitably selected according to the density of electronic components to be used or the size thereof, and thus, it is possible to use a Cu ball in a range of 1 μm to 1000 μm, and a plating thickness is suitably selected according to the particle diameter of the Cu ball to be used. An electric plating device is used as a plating device of performing a plating treatment.” [0056] “a two-dimensional electric solder plating layer made of Sn and Bi”, “[0072] The thickness of the solder plating layer 16 is different according to the particle diameter of the Cu ball 12, and is preferably less than or equal to 100 μm on one side in the radial direction.” “[0094] FIG. 7 illustrates a sectional view of the sample A1. For the sake of convenience, the solder plating layer 16 was partitioned into an inner layer 16a, an interlayer 16b, and an outer layer 16c from the surface side of the Cu ball 12. The inner layer 16a was set to be in a range of 9 μm from the surface of the Cu ball 12. The interlayer 16b was set to be in a range of 9 μm to 17 μm. The outer layer 16c was set to be in a range of 17 μm to 23 μm. As illustrated in FIG. 7, in this embodiment, regions 17a, 17b, and 17c each having a thickness of 5 μm and a width of 40 μm were respectively cut from the inner layer 16a, the interlayer 16b, and the outer layer 16c. The concentration of Bi in each of the regions was measured by qualitative analysis. Such an operation was performed with respect to each of the inner layer 16a, the interlayer 16b, and the outer layer 16c for each of ten visual fields in total.” thereby reading on the recited limitations of the instant claims of “core material comprising” “a core having 0.95 or more sphericity” “a solder layer made of a (Sn-40Bi)-based solder alloy provided on an outer side of the core” the “concentration ratio” “of Bi contained in the solder layer” being “90% to 107.5%”, “a thickness of the solder layer on one side is 1 μm or more” of {instant claim 1}, “a target composition of the (Sn-40Bi)-based solder alloy is Sn-40Bi-0.5Cu” of {instant claim 2}, “The core material according to claim 1, wherein a base plating layer made of one or more elements selected from Ni and Co is provided between the core and the solder layer” of {instant claim 4} and “The core material according to claim 1, wherein Cu ball is used as the core” of {instant claim 5}. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP § 2144.05 I.
Regarding the claimed limitations of “a Sn layer provided on an outer side of the solder layer,” “a thickness of the Sn layer is 0.1 μm to 12 μm on one side, and the thickness of the Sn layer is 0.215% or more and 36% or less of the thickness of the solder layer”, it is noted that the prior art does not explicitly teach of these limitation as recited in instant claim 1. In the same field of endeavor of solder materials, WO 2014/207897 A1of Kawasaki and its English machine translation (WO’897) [0001] “solder materials and solder joints formed using solder materials” and teaches “[0022] A solder ball 1A of the present embodiment, as shown in FIG. 1, comprises a spherical core layer 2A having a desired diameter and a solder layer 3A covering the core layer 2A.” “[0026] The solder layer 3A is an example of the coating layer, and is composed of a metal material having a melting point Tm1 lower than the melting point Tm2 of the nuclear layer 2A. The solder layer 3A is melted by heating at a temperature of the melting point Tm 1 or higher of the solder layer 3A itself and at a temperature lower than the melting point Tm 2 of the nuclear layer 2A, and solidifies to join the electrode 10a of the semiconductor chip 10 and the conductive land 11a of the printed circuit board 11.” “[0028] The solder layer 3A is composed of, for example, a single Sn, a Sn-based alloy material”. and teaches that the range of coating layer is 1 to 1000 microns. It is noted that the claimed range of the Sn of the instant claims 1 and 2 overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art. Regarding the claimed limitation of “the thickness of the Sn layer is 0.215% or more and 36% or less of the thickness of the solder layer” of instant claims, US’991 teaches “[0072] The thickness of the solder plating layer 16 is different according to the particle diameter of the Cu ball 12, and is preferably less than or equal to 100 μm on one side in the radial direction.” while WO’897 teaches that the outermost Sn coating layer is 1 to 100 microns. This means that the claimed thickness ratio of Sn layer to solder layer of the instant claims 1 and 2 overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art. In the case where the claimed ranges "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990); In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465, 1469-71, 43 USPQ2d 1362, 1365-66 (Fed. Cir. 1997). See MPEP § 2144.05 I. Therefore, it 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 to take the core material of US’991 and add Sn layer as the top most layer in the ranges as suggested by WO’897. Doing so would be advantageous as the outermost Sn solder layer would have a melting point lower than the melting point of the inner surface thereby enabling to create solder joints by heating the core material to a temperature that is above the melting point of the outermost material and lower than that of the inner surface.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOPHY S. KOSHY whose telephone number is (571)272-0030. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 AM- 5:00 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, KEITH HENDRICKS can be reached at (571)272-1401. 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.
/JOPHY S. KOSHY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
Prosecution Insights