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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on November 26, 2024 is being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I (Claims 1-7) in the reply filed on September 8, 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the device of group I can be made by a materially different process. This is found persuasive and the restriction of July 6, 2026 is withdrawn. Claims 1-18 are present for examination.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: Light Sensor Structure On a Bare Die and Packaging Method Thereof.
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 opaque molding substance covering the light emitting element in the final device Fig. 1G 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 Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: ”for packaging a light sensor structure” is repeated twice. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-7 are 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 1, line 5 recites the limitation “an opaque molding substance, covering the light emitting element and the light sensing element” Since Claim 1 is a device claim it is unclear how the opaque molding substance 4 covers the light emitting element 1 in the final device produce of Fig. 1G. For purposes of examination this will be interpreted as ” an opaque molding substance, covering the light emitting element and a side surface of the light sensing element”
Dependent claims 2-7 inherit the deficiencies of claim 1.
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 1-18 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 limitation "the connection pads" in lines: 10-11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of interpretation this will be interpreted as “the plurality of connection pads”
Claim 2 recites the limitation "bare die interfaces" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of interpretation this will be interpreted as “the bare die interface is formed between the opaque molding substance and the light emitting element
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the connection pads" in lines: 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of interpretation this will be interpreted as “the plurality of connection pads”
Dependent claims 2-7 inherit the deficiencies of claim 1.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the connection pads" in lines 17 and 19. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of interpretation this will be interpreted as “the plurality of connection pads”
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the connection pads" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of interpretation this will be interpreted as “the plurality of connection pads”
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the contacts on the light emitting surface of the light emitting element" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of interpretation this will be interpreted as “contacts on the light emitting surface of the light emitting element”
Dependent claim 12 inherits the deficiencies of claim 11.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the one portion" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of interpretation this will be interpreted as “the portion”
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the polishing method" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For purposes of interpretation this will be interpreted as “a polishing method”
Dependent claims 9-18 inherit the deficiencies of claim 8.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-18 would be allowed if rewritten to overcome the 112 rejections.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior art of record, Tsou (US 2020/0044112), Rossi (US 2016/0300876), Rudmann (US 2013/0037831), fail to disclose (by themselves or in combination) the following limitations in combination with the rest of the claim:
Regarding Claim 1 (from which claims 2-7 depend), wherein one of the light emitting element and the light sensing element is a bare die, and a bare die interface is formed between the opaque molding substance and the light emitting element or the light sensing element.
Regarding Claim 8 (from which claims 9-18 depend), forming an opaque molding substance covering the light emitting element and the light sensing element; removing a portion of the opaque molding substance along the first direction to expose the bottom surface of the light emitting element…
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tsou (US 2020/0044112) discloses (Fig. 1) a light emitting element 11, light sensing element 13, opaque molding material 18, and transparent molding 16/17. Tsou does not disclose wherein one of the light emitting element and the light sensing element is a bare die, and a bare die interface is formed between the opaque molding substance and the light emitting element or the light sensing element.
Rossi (US 2016/0300876) discloses (Fig. 16) a first optical component C1 and second optical components C2 that can be image sensor or mirror, wafer S1 with a transparent portion t1. Rossi does not disclose wherein one of the light emitting element and the light sensing element is a bare die, and a bare die interface is formed between the opaque molding substance and the light emitting element or the light sensing element.
Rudmann (US 2013/0037831) discloses (Fig. 13) an active optical component E is formed as a bare die on substrate P, optic mold O.
Rudmann does not disclose wherein one of the light emitting element and the light sensing element is a bare die, and a bare die interface is formed between the opaque molding substance and the light emitting element or the light sensing element.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GUSTAVO G RAMALLO whose telephone number is (571)272-9227. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am - 6pm.
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, William Partridge can be reached at (571) 270-1402. 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.
/GUSTAVO G RAMALLO/Examiner, Art Unit 2812
Prosecution Insights