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 § 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.
Claims 1-9, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Piccone (5,825,090).
Regarding Claim 1, in Figs 3, 4, 5, Piccone discloses a system for producing a metallic wafer substrate, comprising: a top pressure tool plate 40/45; a bottom pressure tool plate 42/46; a first pressure application device 52 (left) in physical contact with the top pressure tool plate; a second pressure application device 52 (right) in physical contact with the bottom pressure tool plate; a first semiconductor wafer 112 in selective contact with the top pressure tool plate; a second semiconductor wafer 112a in selective contact with the bottom pressure tool plate; and a metallic wafer 114 selectively held between the first semiconductor wafer and second semiconductor wafer. With regards to the last part of the claim, specifically, “wherein a predetermined amount of pressure is applied, for a predetermined duration, to the top pressure tool plate and bottom pressure tool plate respectively from the first pressure application device and second pressure application device, thereby further applying pressure to the first semiconductor wafer and second semiconductor water respectively, to thereby flatten the metallic wafer”, examiner considers this to be a functional/product by a process limitation. In device claims, it is the end product that is of the essence and not how it is made. Furthermore, the device of Piccone as shown in Figs. 5, 3 and 4, is capable of applying pressure and flattening the metal wafer 114. Please further see column 4, lines 46-64 with respect to bowing and flatness)
Regarding Claim 2, in Fig. 5 and column 4, lines 23-45, further including a heating device (see column 4, lines 23-45).
Regarding Claim 3, in Figs. 5, and column 4, lines 23-45, the heating device selectively applies a predetermined temperature to the system (again this is considered a functional/product by process limitations and Piccione’s device is capable of performing this)
Regarding Claim 4, first semiconductor wafer 112 and second semiconductor 112a wafer include Si.
Regarding Claim 5, metallic wafer 114 is deposited on the first semiconductor wafer 112a, and the second semiconductor wafer 112 is deposited on the metallic wafer.
Regarding Claim 6, in Figs. 3-5, a SiO2 layer on the metallic wafer (formation of the silicon dioxide is inherently so because of the heating of the wafers).
Regarding Claim 7, the predetermined duration of pressure reduces roughness on the metallic wafer 114 to a predetermined level (again this is considered to be a functional/product by process limitation. Furthermore, Piccione’s device is capable of doing this)
Regarding Claim 8, element 114 is tungsten (W)
Regarding Claim 9, again, this claim is considered to have functional/product by process limitation with the temperature range. Furthermore, Piccione’s device is capable of doing this.
Regarding Claim 19, in Figs. 3-5, Piccione discloses a system for producing a flattened metallic wafer substrate, comprising: a top pressure tool plate 45/40; a bottom pressure tool plate 45/40; a first pressure means 52 (left) for applying pressure to the top pressure tool plate; a second pressure means 52 (right) for applying to the bottom pressure tool plate; a first semiconductor wafer 112 in selective contact with the top pressure tool plate; a second semiconductor wafer 112a in selective contact with the bottom pressure tool plate; and a metallic wafer 114 selectively held between the first semiconductor wafer and second semiconductor wafer. With respect to the limitation, namely, wherein a predetermined amount of pressure is applied, for a predetermined duration, to the top pressure tool plate and bottom pressure tool plate respectively from the first pressure means and second pressure means to flatten the metallic wafer, examiner considers this to be functional/product by process limitation. In device claims it is the end product that is of the essence and now how it is made. Furthermoer, Piccione’s device is capable of doing this.
Regarding Claim 20, again, this limitation is considered to have functional/product by process limitation. Furthermore, Piccione’s device is capable of doing this.
Claims 10-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Huff (20090286382)
Regarding Claim 10, in Figs. 16A-17C, Huff discloses a method for producing a flattened metallic wafer substrate, comprising: placing a second semiconductor wafer 130 on a bottom pressure tool plate, the bottom pressure tool plate 54/58 (shown in Fig. 1) in physical contact with a second pressure application device; placing a metallic wafer 128 on the second semiconductor wafer 126; placing a first semiconductor wafer 130 on the metallic wafer, the first semiconductor wafer 126 in physical contact with a top pressure tool plate 56 (shown in Fig. 1), and the top pressure tool plate 56 in physical contact with a first pressure application device; applying a predetermined amount of pressure for a predetermined duration on the metallic wafer from the top pressure tool plate and bottom pressure tool plate respectively from the first pressure application device and second pressure application device, thereby further applying pressure to the first semiconductor wafer 126 and second semiconductor water 130 respectively; and flattening the metallic wafer 128.
Regarding Claim 11, including heating (with element 47), at least, the metallic wafer 128.
Regarding Claim 12, heating the metallic wafer occurs within a predetermined range of temperature between 150°C to 400°C (see paragraphs 0082, 0090, 0118, 0123)
Regarding Claim 13, in paragraph 0120, the predetermined amount of pressure is between 1500 psi to 2000 psi.
Regarding Claim 14, placing the metallic wafer 128, depositing the metallic wafer 128 on the second semiconductor wafer 126.
Regarding Claim 15, including depositing a SiO2 layer on the metallic wafer 128 (this is inherent since heating the wafer results in oxide formation)
Regarding Claim 16, reducing roughness on the metallic wafer to a predetermined level, the reducing roughness occurring from the predetermined duration of pressure (see paragraphs 0069-0071 and 0142)
Regarding Claim 17, in paragraphs 0042, 0122, 0125, 0126, 0170, metallic wafer 128 from one or more of the group of: Mo, W, Cu, Al, and Ti.
Regarding Claim 18, applying a predetermined amount of pressure for a predetermined duration is applying the predetermined amount of pressure in a duration between 30 minutes to 90 minutes (see paragraphs 0081 and 0082)
Examiner is including Parkhe 9887121 and Ikeda 20080164575 as pertinent prior art references that are NOT relied upon on this rejection but that disclose flatness achieving devices/systems.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FAZLI ERDEM whose telephone number is (571)272-1914. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8am-5pm.
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, Davienne Monbleau can be reached at 571-272-1945. 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.
/FAZLI ERDEM/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812
7/17/2026
Prosecution Insights