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 Species 2 in the reply filed on 3/11/26 is acknowledged.
Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s remarks that Species 5 is part of Species 4.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 1/9/24. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
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 4 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 4 recites the limitation "the base die metal pad " in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 4 depends on claim 3, which itself depends on claim 1. Neither claim 4, nor parent claims 3 or 1 make reference to “a base die metal pad.” Examiner notes claim 2 refers to “a base die metal pad” but claim 2 is not a parent claim to claim 4.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3 and 5-9 are allowed.
Claim 1 contains allowable subject matter because of the limitation of forming a base-bottom die stack structure in which the bottom die front-side bonding pad structure and the base die front-side bonding pad structure are directly in contact with each other by bonding the bottom die and the base die; forming a base die through-electrode vertically passing through the base die substrate and electrically connected to the base die front-side bonding pad structure; forming a base die back-side bump structure electrically connected to the base die through-electrode over a back-side of the base die substrate; and, stacking a plurality of middle dies over the base die of the base-bottom die stack structure in combination with the other elements of the claim. Claims 2-3 and 5-9 depend on claim 1.
The closest prior art is Mallik et al. (U.S. 2023/0207525 A1) which discloses a method comprising: forming a base die (102, Fig. 2) stacking a plurality of middle dies (104, Fig. 2) over the base die; stacking a top die (106, Fig. 2) over the plurality of middle dies; and forming a bottom die back-side bump structure electrically connected to a bottom die through-electrode (140, Fig. 2). Yet, Mallik does not disclose forming a base-bottom die stack structure in which the bottom die front-side bonding pad structure and the base die front-side bonding pad structure are directly in contact with each other by bonding the bottom die and the base die; forming a base die through-electrode vertically passing through the base die substrate and electrically connected to the base die front-side bonding pad structure; forming a base die back-side bump structure electrically connected to the base die through-electrode over a back-side of the base die substrate; and, stacking a plurality of middle dies over the base die of the base-bottom die stack structure and these features are not rendered obvious in view of the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REEMA PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1436. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8am-5pm 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 http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christine Kim can be reached at (571)272-8458. 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.
/REEMA PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights