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 Species I directed to Figs. 1-18 (claims 1-21) in the reply filed on July 9th, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 13 recites “a second side wall facing a side opposite to a side that the first side wall faces in the second direction” in lines 2-3 contains grammatically errors and should be amended to “a second side wall facing a side opposite to the first side wall in the second direction”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-21 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites “the die pad including a first surface facing a first side in a thickness direction” in lines 2-3, but the claim fails to further limit a plane and/or an object for referencing “a first side”. It is unclear to the examiner how to determine the first side for the die pad.
Claim 1 recites “a first side portion located closer to the first end portion in the first direction” in lines 14-15, but the claim fails to further limit which structure can be used to compare with the first side portion. It is unclear to the examiner how to determine the location of the first side portion.
Claim 1 recites “a second side portion located closer to the sealing resin in the first direction” in lines 15-16, but the claim fails to further limit which structure can be used to compare with the second side portion. It is unclear to the examiner how to determine the location of the second side portion.
Claims 2-21 are rejected for depending on claim 1 and having the above issues incorporating into the claims.
Claim 3 recites “the plurality of first terminal portions are located on a first side in a first direction with respect to the die pad” in lines 3-4. It is unclear to the examiner if “a first side” in claim 3 is the same or different from “a first side” in line 3 of claim 1.
Claim 6 recites “of the plurality of first terminal portions, those located at one end and at another end in the second direction each include the first terminal-extending portion” in lines 2-3. It is unclear to the examiner what is part of the plurality of first terminal portions and which structure “one end and another end” belong to.
Claim 6 further recites “of the plurality of second terminal portions, those located at one end and at another end in the second direction each include the first terminal-extending portion” in lines 4-5. It is unclear to the examiner what is part of the plurality of second terminal portions and which structure “one end and another end” belong to.
Claim 7 further recites “the first side in the second direction” in line 2. It is unclear to the examiner if “the first side” of claim 7 is the same or different from “a first side a thickness direction” in line 3. Furthermore, the claim fails to further limit a plane and/or an object for referencing “a first side”. It is unclear to the examiner how to determine the first side in the second direction.
Claim 10 also recites “the first side in the second direction” in line 3 and having the same issue as above.
Claim 11 also recites “a second dimension of the second side portion” in lines 2-3 without reciting “a first dimension of the second side portion”. It is unclear to the examiner how to determine the second dimension without referencing the first dimension of the second side portion.
Claim 13 recites “a fourth side portion located closer to the first end portion in the first direction” in lines 4-5, but the claim fails to further limit which structure can be used to compare with the fourth side portion. It is unclear to the examiner how to determine the location of the fourth side portion.
Claim 13 recites “a fifth side portion located closer to the sealing resin in the first direction” in line 5, but the claim fails to further limit which structure can be used to compare with the fifth side portion. It is unclear to the examiner how to determine the location of the fifth side portion.
Claim 14 recites “the second side in the second direction” in line 2 without reciting “a first side in the second direction” in claims 1 and 13-14. It is unclear to the examiner how to determine the second side in the second direction without referencing the first side in the second direction.
Claim 15 recites “the first side in the second direction with respect to the sixth side portion” in lines 2-3. It is unclear to the examiner if “the first side in the second direction” in claim 15 is the same or different from “the first side” in line 3 of claim 1.
Claim 16 also recites “the first side in the second direction” in line 2 and having the same issue as above.
Claim 18 recites “a third dimension of the fourth side portion” in lines 1-2 without reciting “a first dimension and a second dimension of the fourth side”. It is unclear to the examiner how to determine the third dimension of the fourth side portion without referencing the first dimension and the second dimension of the fourth side.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Majima et al. (Pub. No.: US 2020/0075440 A1) discloses a semiconductor device having a die pad and a plurality of terminal portions, a semiconductor element mounted on the die pad, the leads includes a base material and a metal layer covering the entire surface of the leads, the base material includes terminal-extending portion with the first side wall includes a first side portion, a second side portion and the third side portions (see Fig. 1-11 and [0039-0069]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CUONG B NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1509 (Email: CuongB.Nguyen@uspto.gov). The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30 AM-5:00 PM Eastern Standard Time.
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, Steven H. Loke can be reached on (571) 272-1657. 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.
/CUONG B NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Prosecution Insights