DETAILED ACTION
Applicant’s election without traverse of the species depicted in fig. 2 in the reply filed on 7/8/26 is acknowledged. However, only claims 1-4 read on the elected species. Claims 5-6 are hereby withdrawn from consideration.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gu (US 2022/0189848).
As to claim 1, Gu teaches a channel manufacturing method (figs. 1 and 2) for performing:
a first forming step of forming, on a first surface (top) of a first substrate (130), a slit (A1) and a first recess (OA1) to be separated from each other (fig. 2, [0016] and [0033]);
a first transfer step of transferring a first adhesive (120) applied to a first substrate (110) for application to the first surface of the first substrate (fig. 1, [0016]); and
a first bonding step of bonding a second substrate (110) to the first surface of the first substrate (130) via the first adhesive (120, step 530, fig. 5).
As to claim 3, Gu further teaches in the first forming step, the slit is formed to include a curved section and the first recess is formed in a vicinity of the curved section (fig. 4C, [0041]).
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.
Claim(s) 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gu.
As to claim 2, Gu further teaches a plurality of the first recesses are formed (A1 and A2) but does not teach the plurality of first recesses are formed zigzag. However, the purpose of the recesses A1 and A2 is to have more bonding material 120 for a more robust connection without increasing the size ([0012]). That is accomplished not only by more (thicker) bonding material 120 but also by surface area. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to vary the recesses to be zig zagged, even a little bit, so as to increase the robustness of the connection.
As to claim 4, Gu only teaches forming slits and bonding a semiconductor device 110 on one side of the substrate. However, the substrate is comprised of a dielectric layer 132 with a top metal layer 131 and a bottom metal layer 133 (fig. 1). The recesses are made into the top metal layer of the substrate (fig. 1).
However, doing the same thing on the bottom side of the substrate (i.e. forming recess ins the bottom metal layer 133 in the same manner as was done on the top metal layer) would have been obvious so as to fabricate a 3D device while minimizing footprint size.
Conclusion
Any response to this Office Action should be faxed to (571) 273-8300 or mailed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Hand-Delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22313
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAREN M KUSUMAKAR whose telephone number is (571)270-3520. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday from 7:30a – 4:30p EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Fernando Toledo can be reached on 571-272-1867. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KAREN KUSUMAKAR/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
8/7/26
Prosecution Insights