CTFR 18/548,642 CTFR 82275 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 1-8 & 16-26 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. Claims 1, 2 & 3 recite the limitation “ each through mold ”. It is unclear if said limitation refers “each through mold via” or a different feature. Correction is required. Claims 1, 2 & 3 further recite the limitation “ the through mold vias ”. It is unclear if said limitation refers to “each through mold vias in the plurality of through mold vias” or different feature. Correction is required. Claims 4-8 &16 are rejected for being dependent on claim 1. Claims 17-21 are rejected for being dependent on claim 2. Claims 22-26 are rejected for being dependent on claim 3. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 4-5, 7-8 & 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al. (US Pub. 2016/0351494) in view of Chu et al. (US Patent 10,763,234) . Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches a semiconductor device, comprising: a first package including a die of an integrated circuit 102 (see Fig. 2F below), a protective film 118 disposed on an upper surface of the die 102, the protective film 118 being larger in area than the die 102 (Fig. 2F), a first molding material 106 covering an outer periphery of the die 102 (Fig. 2F), a plurality of through mold vias 104a formed penetrating the first molding material 106 and the protective film 118, wherein a diameter of each through mold via in the plurality of through mold vias in a first portion penetrating the protective film 118 (note the diameter of the 104a in 118) is smaller than a diameter of each through mold in the plurality of through mold vias in a second portion penetrating the first molding material (note diameter of 104a in 106, Fig. 2F), a seed layer 104c formed on upper end portions of each through mold via 104a in the plurality of through mold vias104a (Fig. 2F), a plurality of external connection terminals 108, wherein each external connection terminal in the plurality of external connection terminals 108 is connected to a lower end portion of a corresponding through mod via in the plurality of through mold vias 104a (Fig. 2F); and a second package placed on an upper surface of the protective film 118 of the first package and connected to the upper end portions of the through mold vias 104a (see Fig. 2F below). PNG media_image1.png 908 986 media_image1.png Greyscale Though Chen teaches a seed layer 104c on layer formed on upper end portions of each through mold via in the plurality of through mold vias as addressed above; however, Chen is silent on the seed layer being on peripheral side surfaces of each through mold via in the plurality of through mold vias, including on at least part of a first peripheral side surface corresponding to the first portion and on at least part of a second peripheral side surface corresponding to the second portion of each through mold via in the plurality of through mold vias. Nonetheless, Chu teaches in Fig. 5 a seed layer 325 being on peripheral side surfaces of each through mold via in a plurality of through mold vias, including on at least part of a first peripheral side surface corresponding to the first portion and on at least part of a second peripheral side surface corresponding to the second portion of each through mold via in the plurality of through mold vias (see Fig. 5a and note seed layer 325). This has the advantages of enhanced adhesion, reduced contact resistance and improved barrier characteristics. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the invention of Chen with the seed layer design, as taught by Chu, so as to obtain an improved contact structure for a semiconductor device. Regarding claim 4, the combination of Chen and Chu teaches the semiconductor device according to claim 1, wherein a re-distribution layer 110a is formed on the upper surface of the protective film and connected to the plurality of through mold vias 104a is formed (Chen’s Fig. 2F). Regarding claim 5, the combination of Chen and Chu teaches the semiconductor device according to claim 4, wherein a connection terminal 214 of the second package is formed on the re- distribution layer (110a & 104c, Chen’s Fig. 2F) . Regarding claim 7, the combination of Chen and Chu teaches the semiconductor device according to claim 1, wherein each external connection terminal 108/19 in the plurality of external connection terminals 108/19 is connected to the corresponding through mold via 104a in the plurality of through mold vias 104a in the protective film (Chen’s Fig. 2F and Chu’s Fig. 5). Regarding claim 8, the combination of Chen and Chu teaches the semiconductor device according to claim 1, wherein each external connection terminal in the plurality of external connection materials 108/19 is connected to a lower end portion of the corresponding through mold via in the plurality of the through mold vias via a first re-distribution layer (Chen’s Fig. 2F and Chu’s Fig. 5). Regarding claim 16, the combination of Chen and Chu teaches the semiconductor device according to claim 1, wherein the semiconductor device is provided as part of an electronic device (Chen’s Fig. 2F and Chu’s Fig. 5) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen and Chu as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yu et al. (US Pub. 2022/0223530) . Regarding claim 6, the combination of Chen and Chu is silent on the semiconductor device according to claim 1, wherein a through electrode that penetrates the die to connect to a wiring layer of the die is bored. However, Yu teaches in Fig. 9 wherein a through electrode 26A that penetrates a die MD1 to connect to a wiring layer of the die (note the shaded wiring layer directly under the die MD1) is bored. This has the advantages of stable and direct electrical connection to the components of semiconductor die MD1. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the invention of Chen and Chu with the through electrodes 26A, as taught by Yu, so as to obtain direct electrical pathways to components of a semiconductor device. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-3 and 17-26 are allowable pending resolution of 112 issues. Response to Arguments With respect to claim 1, applicant's arguments filed 04/08/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Examiner maintains that the prior art teaches all of the claim features as addressed in the rejection above (see mapping to prior art). With respect to claims 2 & 3, the claims are allowable pending resolution of 112 issues. Conclusion 07-39 AIA THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 TIMOR KARIMY whose telephone number is (571)272-9006. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 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, Eva Montalvo can be reached at (571) 272-9006 . 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. /TIMOR KARIMY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/548,642 Page 2 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/548,642 Page 3 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/548,642 Page 4 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/548,642 Page 5 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/548,642 Page 6 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/548,642 Page 7 Art Unit: 2818 Application/Control Number: 18/548,642 Page 8 Art Unit: 2818
Prosecution Insights