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 Group I, claims 1-16 in the reply filed on 03/23/2026 is acknowledged.
Examiner notes that the claims 21-36 are listed as (Original) or (Currently Amended) on the most recent filing of claims, filed on 08/13/2024. However, these claims were previously canceled in filing of claims made on 03/20/2024, and have been considered canceled with regards to both the requirement for restriction and this office action.
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 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, 10-12, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bajwa (US-20210057377-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Bajwa teaches a method of processing a substrate on a bonding system (Paragraph [0002] methods of bonding a substrate taught), the method comprising the steps of:
(a) providing an oxide reduction delivery system on the bonding system (Paragraph [0006] method includes providing a reducing gas. Paragraphs [0031-0032] Figure 1A bond head (element 114) includes inner channel (element 114c) that provides a reducing gas to the substrate);
(b) supporting the substrate on a support structure of the bonding system (Paragraph [0006] substrate is supported by a support structure of the bonding machine); and
(c) moving at least one of the oxide reduction delivery system and the support structure with respect to one another, such that a gas provided by the oxide reduction delivery system contacts the substrate (Paragraphs [0036-0038] Figures 1C-1E a reducing gas (element 130) is supplied and contacts structures (element 104a) on the substrate (element 104), while the inner channel (element 114c), which can be considered the claimed "oxide reduction delivery system", moves relative to the substrate).
Regarding Claim 2, Bajwa teaches wherein the oxide reduction delivery system is integrated with a bond head assembly of the bonding system (Paragraphs [0031-0032] Figure 1A bond head (element 114) includes inner channel (element 114c) that provides a reducing gas to the substrate).
Regarding Claim 3, Bajwa teaches wherein the oxide reduction delivery system is a reducing gas delivery system (Paragraph [0032] the inner channel provides a reducing gas).
Regarding Claim 4, Bajwa teaches wherein the oxide reduction delivery system is a formic acid vapor delivery system (Paragraph [0032] the inner channel provides a reducing gas. Paragraph [0020] the reducing gas can be formic acid vapor).
Regarding Claim 6, Bajwa teaches wherein the oxide reduction delivery system is configured to deliver the gas including attached electrons (Paragraph [0032] the inner channel provides a reducing gas. Paragraph [0020] the reducing gas can be formic acid vapor. No removal of electrons or ionization is taught).
Regarding Claim 7, Bajwa teaches wherein step (c) includes moving the oxide reduction delivery system with respect to the support structure while the gas is dispensed by the oxide reduction delivery system (Paragraphs [0036-0038] Figures 1C-1E a reducing gas (element 130) is supplied, and "may continue to flow" while the inner channel (element 114c), which can be considered the claimed "oxide reduction delivery system", moves relative to the substrate).
Regarding Claim 10, Bajwa teaches a method of processing a substrate on a bonding system (Paragraph [0002] methods of bonding a substrate taught), the method comprising the steps of:
(a) providing an oxide reduction delivery system integrated with a bond head assembly of the bonding system (Paragraph [0006] method includes providing a reducing gas. Paragraphs [0031-0032] Figure 1A bond head (element 114) includes inner channel (element 114c) that provides a reducing gas to the substrate);
(b) supporting the substrate on a support structure of the bonding system (Paragraph [0006] substrate is supported by a support structure of the bonding machine); and
(c) moving the oxide reduction delivery system with respect to the support structure such that a gas provided by the oxide reduction delivery system contacts the substrate (Paragraphs [0036-0038] Figures 1C-1E a reducing gas (element 130) is supplied and contacts structures (element 104a) on the substrate (element 104), while the inner channel (element 114c), which can be considered the claimed "oxide reduction delivery system", moves relative to the substrate).
Regarding Claim 11, Bajwa teaches wherein the oxide reduction delivery system is a reducing gas delivery system (Paragraph [0032] the inner channel provides a reducing gas).
Regarding Claim 12, Bajwa teaches wherein the oxide reduction delivery system is a formic acid vapor delivery system (Paragraph [0032] the inner channel provides a reducing gas. Paragraph [0020] the reducing gas can be formic acid vapor).
Regarding Claim 14, Bajwa teaches wherein the oxide reduction delivery system is configured to deliver the gas including attached electrons (Paragraph [0032] the inner channel provides a reducing gas. Paragraph [0020] the reducing gas can be formic acid vapor. No removal of electrons or ionization is taught).
Regarding Claim 15, Bajwa teaches wherein step (c) includes moving the oxide reduction delivery system by moving the bond head assembly according to a predetermined motion profile (Paragraphs [0036-0038] Figures 1C-1E the bond head assembly (element 106) is moved, first raised by a predetermined amount, and then lowered by the same amount to re-establish touchdown. The oxide reduction delivery system, as the inner channel (element 114c) is a part of the bond head assembly).
Claims 1-2, 5, 8, 10, 13, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US-20200126948-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Lee teaches a method of processing a substrate on a bonding system (Paragraph [0002] methods of processing a substrate with a substrate bonding apparatus taught), the method comprising the steps of:
(a) providing an oxide reduction delivery system on the bonding system (Paragraphs [0022] and [0065] Figure 5 the die bonding apparatus (element 100) includes an atmospheric plasma device (element 170), which can be considered an "oxide reduction delivery system" as it hydrophilizes a surface of the die);
(b) supporting the substrate on a support structure of the bonding system (Paragraph [0066] a die is picked up and supported by the bonding head (element 140)); and
(c) moving at least one of the oxide reduction delivery system and the support structure with respect to one another, such that a gas provided by the oxide reduction delivery system contacts the substrate (Paragraphs [0075-0079] Figure 10 the bonding head, holding the die (element D), moves through the plasma processing window (element P2), moving relative to the atmospheric plasma device (element 170), which can be considered an "oxide reduction delivery system", while a plasma gas is supplied to hydrophilize a surface of the die).
Regarding Claim 2, Lee teaches wherein the oxide reduction delivery system is integrated with a bond head assembly of the bonding system (Paragraphs [0022] and [0065] Figure 5 the die bonding apparatus (element 100) includes an atmospheric plasma device (element 170) and a bonding head (element 140), which can be considered integrated together, as they are linked together as part of one apparatus and coordinated to function together in the taught method).
Regarding Claim 5, Lee teaches wherein the oxide reduction delivery system is a plasma gas delivery system (Paragraphs [0022] and [0065] Figure 5 the die bonding apparatus (element 100) includes an atmospheric plasma device (element 170), which can be considered an "oxide reduction delivery system”).
Regarding Claim 8, Lee teaches wherein step (c) includes moving the support structure with respect to the oxide reduction delivery system while the gas is dispensed by the oxide reduction delivery system (Paragraphs [0075-0079] Figure 10 the bonding head, holding the die (element D), moves through the plasma processing window (element P2), moving relative to the atmospheric plasma device (element 170), which can be considered an "oxide reduction delivery system", while a plasma gas is supplied to hydrophilize a surface of the die).
Regarding Claim 10, Lee teaches a method of processing a substrate on a bonding system (Paragraph [0002] methods of processing a substrate with a substrate bonding apparatus taught), the method comprising the steps of:
(a) providing an oxide reduction delivery system integrated with a bond head assembly of the bonding system (Paragraphs [0022] and [0065] Figure 5 the die bonding apparatus (element 100) includes an atmospheric plasma device (element 170), which can be considered an "oxide reduction delivery system" as it hydrophilizes a surface of the die. The die bonding apparatus (element 100) includes an atmospheric plasma device (element 170) and a bonding head (element 140), which can be considered integrated together, as they are linked together as part of one apparatus and coordinated to function together in the taught method);
(b) supporting the substrate on a support structure of the bonding system (Paragraph [0066] a die is picked up and supported by the bonding head (element 140)); and
(c) moving the oxide reduction delivery system with respect to the support structure such that a gas provided by the oxide reduction delivery system contacts the substrate (Paragraphs [0075-0079] Figure 10 the bonding head, holding the die (element D), moves through the plasma processing window (element P2), moving relative to the atmospheric plasma device (element 170), which can be considered an "oxide reduction delivery system", while a plasma gas is supplied to hydrophilize a surface of the die).
Regarding Claim 13, Lee teaches wherein the oxide reduction delivery system is a plasma gas delivery system (Paragraphs [0022] and [0065] Figure 5 the die bonding apparatus (element 100) includes an atmospheric plasma device (element 170), which can be considered an "oxide reduction delivery system").
Regarding Claim 16, Lee teaches further comprising the step of (d) moving the support structure with respect to the oxide reduction delivery system while the gas is dispensed by the oxide reduction delivery system (Paragraphs [0075-0079] Figure 10 the bonding head, holding the die (element D), moves through the plasma processing window (element P2), moving relative to the atmospheric plasma device (element 170), which can be considered an "oxide reduction delivery system", while a plasma gas is supplied to hydrophilize a surface of the die).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yamauchi et al. (US-20210265300-A1).
Regarding Claim 9, Lee teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as outlined above. Lee further teaches that step (c) includes moving the support structure along a second motion axis while the gas is dispensed by the oxide reduction delivery system (Paragraphs [0075-0079] Figure 10 the bonding head, holding the die (element D), moves through the plasma processing window (element P2), moving relative to the atmospheric plasma device (element 170), which can be considered an "oxide reduction delivery system", while a plasma gas is supplied to hydrophilize a surface of the die).
Lee fails to teach moving the oxide reduction delivery system along a first motion axis while dispensing the gas.
Yamauchi teaches a method of bonding that includes plasma treatment of a surface (Paragraph [0003]). Yamauchi teaches that the plasma source moves relative to the surface being treated while supplying the gas to the surface (Paragraph [0072] the activation treatment device moves while irradiating the bonding surfaces).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the method of Lee by including a movement of the oxide reduction delivery system while dispensing the gas.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the by applying the movement as taught by Yamauchi the amount of impurities that return to the bonding surfaces could have been reduced (Paragraph [0072]). Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the ability to move the oxide reduction delivery system during processing would allow for better precision and flexibility in processing, for example by allowing for correcting misalignments or adjusting the amount of treatment provided to particular positions on the surface through the movement of the oxide reduction delivery system. Further this modification could have been considered the combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW KEELAN LAOBAK whose telephone number is (703)756-5447. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 5:30pm.
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, Joshua Allen can be reached at 571-270-3176. 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.
/A.K.L./ Examiner, Art Unit 1713 /DUY VU N DEO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Prosecution Insights