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 .
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.
Claims 1-4, and 6-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ling (US 2024/0071936) in view of Chung (US 2020/0212033).
Regarding claim 1, Ling discloses a semiconductor structure, comprising: an interposer (Fig. 1, numeral 12) ([0013]) comprising: a substrate (120) ([0015]); a redistribution layer (RDL) (126) ([0015]) located on the substrate (120); a first integrated passive device (IPD) (124) located in the substrate (120) ([0015]).
Ling does not disclose a second IPD located in the RDL.
Chung however discloses a second IPD located in the RDL ([0006]; [0026]) (Figs. 10, 11).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Ling with Chung to have a second IPD located in the RDL for the purpose of providing ESD protection (Chung, [0026]).
Regarding claim 2, Ling in view of Chung discloses wherein the first IPD (Ling, Fig.1, numeral 124) and the second IPD (Ling, Fig, 1, numeral 126; Chung, Fig.10, numeral C11, C14) are electrically connected to each other (Ling, [0015]; note (125) and (124) are electrically connected).
Regarding claim 3, Ling does not disclose wherein the first IPD and the second IPD are connected in series.
Chung however discloses that IPD devices are connected in series (Fig.10; numerals C11, C14).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to connected the first IPD and the second IPD in series for the purpose effectively forming a protective apparatus (Chung, [0054]).
Regarding claim 4, Ling does not disclose wherein the first IPD and the second IPD are connected in parallel.
Chung however discloses that IPD devices are connected in parallel (Fig.10; numerals C11, C12).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to connected the first IPD and the second IPD in parallel for the purpose effectively forming a protective apparatus (Chung, [0054]).
Regarding claim 6, Ling in view of Chung discloses wherein the first IPD (Ling, numeral 124) and the second IPD (Fig.10, numeral 311) are separated from each other (Fig. 10; note: lower layers in (101)).
Regarding claim 7, Ling does not disclose wherein the second IPD overlaps the first IPD.
Chung however discloses overlapping IPDs (Fig. 11).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to overlap the second IPD and the first IPD for the purpose of reducing layout area of capacitors (Chung, [0059]).
Regarding claim 8, Ling in view of Chung does not disclose wherein the second IPD does not overlap the first IPD.
Chung however discloses that positions of the second IPD can be adjusted to optimize a layout structure based on design requirements ([0067]).
It would have been therefore obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have the second IPD not overlapping the first IPD for the purpose of optimization a layout structure.
Regarding claim 9, Ling discloses wherein the first IPD (124) comprises a capacitor ([0022]).
Regarding claim 10, Chung discloses wherein the second IPD comprises a capacitor (Fig.10).
Regarding claim 11, Chung discloses wherein the RDL comprises: a dielectric layer (Fig.2, lower layer in (101)) located on the substrate (200); an interconnect structure (PP1) located in the dielectric layer; and a pad located above the interconnect structure and located in the dielectric layer ([0036])).
Regarding claim 12, Ling discloses wherein the first IPD (124) is electrically connected to the interconnect structure (in (125).
Regarding claim 13, Chung discloses wherein the second IPD (Fig.10, numeral C13) is electrically connected to the interconnect structure (PR2).
Regarding claim 14, Chung discloses wherein the second IPD (Fig.10, numeral C13) is located in the dielectric layer (Fig.10).
Regarding claim 15, Chung discloses wherein the dielectric layer (M1; [0042]) comprises a first surface and a second surface opposite to each other, and the first surface is adjacent to the substrate (Fig.2, numeral 200).
Regarding claim 16, Ling in view of Chung discloses wherein the first IPD (Lin, numeral 124) and the second IPD (Chung, Fig.2, numeral 130) are adjacent to the first surface, and the pad is adjacent to the second surface ([0036]).
Regarding claim 17, Chung discloses a die (Fig.2, numeral 120) located on the second surface and electrically connected to the pad ([0036]).
Regarding claim 18, Chung discloses a connection terminal (123) located between the die (120) and the pad (SP1) ([0029]).
Regarding claim 19, Ling discloses wherein the interposer (Fig.1, numeral 12) further comprises: a through-substrate via (TSV) (123) passing through the substrate (120).
Regarding claim 20, Chung discloses wherein the TSV extends into the dielectric layer (Fig.2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The search of the prior art does not disclose or reasonably suggest wherein the first IPD and the second IPD are electrically insulated from each other as required by claim 5.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JULIA SLUTSKER whose telephone number is (571)270-3849. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9 am-6 pm.
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, Matthew Landau can be reached at 571-272-1731. 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.
/JULIA SLUTSKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2891
Prosecution Insights