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 claims 1-15 in the reply filed on 08/03/2026 is acknowledged.
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 claim 1 limitation “ the semiconductor die also including a bond pad coupled to the circuitry” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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 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 1-7 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.
Claim 1 recites “the semiconductor die also including a bond pad coupled to the circuitry”. It is unclear what device structural feature “the circuitry” is referring to. The specification alludes to component 204 (see applicant’s Fig. 2A) as the circuitry; however, no die bond pad (206) is shown to couple to the circuitry 204. Correction/clarification is required.
Claims 2-7 are rejected for being dependent on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-4 & 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Rancuret (US Pub. 2022/0373783).
Regarding claim 1, Rancuret teaches a micro-electromechanical (MEMS) device (Fig. 2A-2B), comprising:
a substrate 201 (Fig. 2A-2B);
a semiconductor die 206 coupled to the substrate 201 and including circuitry (e.g. 213 and/or circuitry within the semiconductor die) formed therein, the semiconductor die also including a bond pad 211 coupled to the circuitry (it is understood that the pad 211 is connected to circuitries, including circuitry 204, within the semiconductor die 206);
a structure 208 extending away from the semiconductor die 206 and having four sides (see Fig. 2A), the structure 208 comprising a corrodible material (Fig. 2A-2B); and
an epoxy contacting outer surfaces of the four sides of the structure 208 and over the corrodible material (Para [0032], where Rancuret teaches epoxy resin filling wells 215 & 217 that covers four sides of the structure 208, see Fig. 2A-2B; also see Fig. 4D-4E and note epoxy 416).
Regarding claim 2, Rancuret teaches the MEMS device of claim 1, further comprising a first bond wire 314 (left) coupling the semiconductor die 206 to a first side of the substrate 201/301 and a second bond wire 314 (right) coupling the semiconductor die 206 to a second side of the substrate 201/301, the second side of the substrate opposite the first side of the substrate, the epoxy 416 over the first wire bond and the second wire bond (see Fig. 4D-4E and respective texts).
Regarding claim 3, Rancuret teaches the MEMS device of claim 1, wherein the MEMS device further comprises a cap 212 coupled to the semiconductor die by way of the structure to form a sealed cavity between the cap 212, the structure 208, and the semiconductor die 206 (Fig. 2A-2B).
Regarding claim 4, Rancuret teaches the MEMS device of claim 3, wherein the cap is a glass member (Para [0028]), and wherein the epoxy does not contact a surface of the glass member that faces away from the semiconductor die (Para [0032], Fig. 2A-2B & 4D-4E and associated texts).
Regarding claim 6, Rancuret teaches the MEMS device of claim 1, wherein the epoxy extends to an edge of the substrate (Fig. 2A-2B & 4D-4E).
Regarding claim 7, Rancuret teaches the MEMS device of claim 1, wherein a gap 215/217 separates the epoxy from an edge of the substrate (also note additional gaps shown in Fig. 4D-4E).
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.
Claims 8-13 & 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rancuret (US Pub. 2022/0373783) in view of Chen et al. (US Pub. 2024/0047338).
Regarding claim 1, Rancuret teaches a micro-electromechanical (MEMS) device, comprising:
a substrate 201 including a bond lead (it is understood that the substrate 201 has a pad at the end of bond wire 314 that reads as bond lead, Fig. 4D-4E);
a semiconductor die 206 coupled to the substrate 201 and including a bond pad 211 coupled to the bond lead by way of a bond wire 314 (Fig. 2A-2B and Fig. 4D-4E, it is understood that there is pad on the substrate 201 and a pad 211 on the semiconductor die 206 and both said pads are connected via bond wire 314), the semiconductor die 206 having a device side (Fig. 2A-2B & Fig. (Fig. 2A-2B & Fig.D-4E);
a four-sided structure (note interposer 208 in Fig. 2A-2B), the four-sided structure 208 coupled to the device side of the semiconductor die 206 and to a glass member 212 and forming a sealed cavity between the semiconductor die 206 and the glass member 212 (Fig. 2B); and
an epoxy contacting the four sides of the four-sided structure and over the bond wire (Para [0032], where Rancuret teaches epoxy resin filling wells 215 & 217 that covers four sides of the structure 208, see Fig. 2A-2B; also see Fig. 4D-4E and note epoxy 416).
Rancuret is silent on wherein the four-side structure comprises a metal stack. However, Chen teaches a structure (interposer), wherein the structure (100 and/or 90) comprises a metal stack (see Fig. 18). This has the advantage of providing improved routing and conductive pathways between the semiconductor device components. 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 Rancuret with interposer structure, as taught by Chen, so as to provide improved routing for the semiconductor device.
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Rancuret and Chen teaches the MEMS device of claim 8, wherein the metal stack comprises multiple different metals and multiple oxide layers, and wherein the multiple different metals comprise copper and nickel (Rancuret’s Fig. 2A-2B & 4D-4E and Chen’s Fig. 18).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Rancuret and Chen teaches the MEMS device of claim 8, wherein the epoxy extends to an edge of the substrate ((Rancuret’s Fig. 2A-2B & 4D-4E).
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Rancuret and Chen teaches the MEMS device of claim 8, wherein a gap 215/217 separates the epoxy from an edge of the substrate (also note additional gaps shown in Fig. 4D-4E).
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Rancuret and Chen teaches the MEMS device of claim 8, wherein the metal stack comprises at least one of glass, oxide layers, and alloys (Chen’s Fig. 18 and associated text).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Rancuret and Chen teaches the MEMS device of claim 8, wherein the epoxy has a coefficient of thermal expansion below 25 (epoxy material are known to have a coefficient of thermal expansion within said range).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Rancuret and Chen teaches the MEMS device of claim 8, wherein the epoxy does not contact any part of a top surface of the glass member 212, the top surface of the glass member facing away from the semiconductor die 206 (Rancuret’s Fig. 2B).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 & 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion.
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) 270-3829. 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
Prosecution Insights