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 8/27/2026
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-10, 12 and 21-26 are pending. Claims 4, 6, 11 and 13-20 are cancelled. Claim 26 is new. Claims 12 and 21 are currently amended. Claims 1, 12 and 21 are independent.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/29/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments and amendments, filed 8/27/2026, with respect to Drawings Objections and 112 Rejections, as indicated in line numbers 1-2 of the office action mailed 3/27/2026, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The objections/rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicants' arguments and amendments, filed 8/27/2026, with respect to independent claim 12, 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 using the prior art of Han as noted below in the rejection of independent claim 12.
Applicants' arguments and amendments, filed 8/27/2026, with respect to independent claim 21, 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 using the prior art of Tao as noted below in the rejection of independent claim 21.
A. Prior-art rejections based at least in part by Han
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.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Han (US 2015/0303075 A1).
Regarding independent claim 12, Figure 2 of Han (as viewed upside down) discloses a semiconductor device, comprising:
a semiconductor die 100 (“semiconductor device… chip”- ¶0055) having a top side surface (i.e., the side surface of 100 including 120 and 130) comprising a semiconductor material including circuitry therein having bond pads 130 (“interconnection patterns”- ¶0055) connected to nodes in the circuitry (¶¶0056-0058), a bottom side surface (i.e., the side surface of 100 facing away from 10), and sidewall surfaces between the top side surface and the bottom side surface;
a metal coating layer 500 (“antistatic layer… formed of a metallic”- ¶0062) including a bottom side metal layer over the bottom side surface extending continuously to a sidewall metal layer on the sidewall surfaces, wherein the sidewall metal layer defines a sidewall plane that is at an angle from 10° to 60° relative to a normal projected from a bottom plane defined by the bottom side metal layer, since Figure 2 of Han shows the metal coating layer 500 disposed at an angle within the claimed range; and a dielectric layer 400 (“molding member… insulating material”- ¶0060) between the metal coating layer 500 and the bottom side surface, and between the metal coating layer 500 and the sidewall surfaces.
B. Prior-art rejections based at least in part by Tao
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claims 21-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tao (US 2022/0285287 A1).
Regarding independent claim 21, Figure 33 of Tao (as viewed upside down) discloses a semiconductor device, comprising:
a semiconductor die 101 (“semiconductor chips”- ¶0021) including a top side surface (i.e., the side surface of 101 with 102), a bottom side surface (i.e., the side surface of 101 facing away from 121), and a sidewall surface between the top side surface and the bottom side surface, the top side surface proximate a device side (i.e., the side of 101 with layer 102) of the semiconductor die 101 than the bottom side surface: and
a metal coating layer 103 (“metal bumps”- ¶0137) including a bottom side metal layer over the bottom side surface extending continuously, without any joint, to a sidewall metal layer on the sidewall surface, the metal coating layer 103 physically contacting only the bottom side surface and the sidewall surface.
Regarding claim 22, Figure 33 of Tao (as viewed upside down) (as viewed upside down) discloses wherein the semiconductor die 101 is electrically connected to a lead 123/124 (collectively 123 “rewiring layer” and 124 “external contact parts”- ¶0058) of the semiconductor device (¶0058).
Regarding claim 23, Figure 33 of Tao (as viewed upside down) discloses the semiconductor device further comprising mold compound 105 (“encapsulation layer”- ¶0051; see Fig. 39 for notation) covering portions of the semiconductor die 101 and the lead 123/124.
Regarding claim 24, Figure 33 of Tao (as viewed upside down) discloses wherein metal coating layer 103 contacts an entirely of the bottom side surface and the side surface.
Regarding claim 25, Figure 33 of Tao (as viewed upside down) discloses wherein metal coating layer 103 does not physically contact the top side surface.
Regarding claim 26, Figure 33 of Tao (as viewed upside down) discloses wherein the sidewall metal layer defines a sidewall plane that is at an angle from 10° to 60° relative to a normal projected from a bottom plane defined by the bottom side metal layer, since Figure 33 of Tao shows the side portions of 103 adjacent to the bottom side surface (i.e., the side surface of 101 facing away from 121) of die 101 are disposed at an angle within the claimed range.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5 and 7-10 are allowed.
Regarding independent claim 1, the claim is allowed for reasons as previously indicated in line number 4 of the office action mailed on 3/27/2026.
Claims 2-3, 5 and 7-10 are allowed as being dependent on allowed claim 1.
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