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 2/23/2026.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7-10, 12 and 21-25 are pending. Claims 4, 6, 11 and 13-20 are cancelled. Claim 25 is new. Claims 1 and 21 are currently amended. Claims 1 and 21 are independent.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/23/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments and amendments, filed 2/23/2026, with respect to 112 Rejections, as indicated in line number 3 of the office action mailed 11/25/2025, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicants’ arguments and amendments, filed 2/23/2026, with respect to Prior Art Rejections for independent claim 1, as indicated in line number 5 of the office action mailed 11/25/2025, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections have been withdrawn, and the claim is allowed as noted below in the section “Allowable Subject Matter”.
Applicants' arguments and amendments, filed 2/23/2026, 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 Cho as noted below in the rejection of independent claim 21.
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 claimed subject matter of claim 12 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). For example, claim 12 recites the limitation “a dielectric layer between the metal coating layer and the bottom side surface, and between the metal coating layer and the sidewall surfaces” which does not appear to supported by the Drawings of the current application, because claim 12 depends from claim 1 which requires “wherein the metal coating layer is directly on the bottom side surface and directly on the sidewall surface”. The Drawings of the current application do not appear to show wherein both the metal coating layer is directly on the bottom side surface and directly on the sidewall surfaces and wherein a dielectric layer is between the metal coating layer and the bottom side surface, and between the metal coating layer and the sidewall surfaces. Also, as shown in Figure 8A of the Drawings of the current application the dielectric layer 210 is between the metal coating layer 208 and the bottom side surface, and between the metal coating layer 208 and the sidewall surfaces, however the metal coating layer 208 is not directly on the bottom side surface and directly on the sidewall surfaces. 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 the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “a dielectric layer between the metal coating layer and the bottom side surface, and between the metal coating layer and the sidewall surfaces” which does not appear to supported by the originally filed Specification, because claim 12 depends from claim 1 which requires “wherein the metal coating layer is directly on the bottom side surface and directly on the sidewall surfaces”. The originally filed Specification does not appear to support wherein both the metal coating layer is directly on the bottom side surface and directly on the sidewall surfaces and wherein a dielectric layer is between the metal coating layer and the bottom side surface, and between the metal coating layer and the sidewall surfaces. Thus, claim 12 fails to comply with the written description requirement.
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)(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 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Cho et al. (US 2020/0051926 A1, hereinafter “Cho”)
Regarding independent claim 21, Figure 5b of Cho (as viewed upside down) discloses a semiconductor device, comprising:
a semiconductor die 104 (“semiconductor die”- ¶0018) including a top side surface (i.e., the side surface with layer 112), a bottom side surface (i.e., the side surface directly covered with 182), 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 with layer 112) of the semiconductor die 104 than the bottom side surface: and
a metal coating layer 182/202 (collectively 182 and 202, which are comprised of metals- ¶¶0031, 0033, 0036) physically contacting only the bottom side surface and the sidewall surface.
Regarding claim 22, Figure 5b of Cho (as viewed upside down) discloses wherein the semiconductor die 104 is electrically connected to a lead 122 (“conductive layer… traces”- ¶0023) of the semiconductor device (¶0026).
Regarding claim 23, Figure 5b of Cho (as viewed upside down) discloses the semiconductor device further comprising mold compound 140 (“molding compound”- ¶0027) covering portions of the semiconductor die 104 and the lead 122.
Regarding claim 24, Figure 5b of Cho (as viewed upside down) discloses wherein metal coating layer 182/202 contacts an entirely of the bottom side surface and the side surface.
Regarding claim 25, Figure 5b of Cho (as viewed upside down) discloses wherein metal coating layer 182/202 does not physically contact the top side surface.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5 and 7-10 are allowed.
Regarding independent claim 1, the claim is allowed, because the prior art of record including Antonio and/or Cho, either singularly or in combination, does not disclose or suggest the combination of limitations including, but not limited to, “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; wherein the metal coating layer is directly on the bottom side surface and directly on the sidewall surfaces”.
Claims 2-3, 5 and 7-10 are allowed as being dependent on allowed claim 1.
Conclusion
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