DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for the second adhesive layer to be between the redistribution layer and the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip, but does not reasonably provide enablement for the second adhesive layer between the circuit chip and the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip, as claimed. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to use the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
In the claim and the Figures, the redistribution layer is between the circuit chip and the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip, so the claim reciting the second adhesive layer can not be between the circuit chip and the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip is not taught in the Specification and Figures.
For examination purposes it will be assumed the second adhesive layer is between the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip and the redistribution layer. Clarification and/or correction is required.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see the arguments regarding the use of bumps, filed 8/19/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of the claim(s) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made below.
It is agreed that the conductive grids structure of Wei is not bumps. Zitzlsperger is provided below to meet this limitation.
Applicant's arguments regarding the combination of Ng’s leadframe with Wei have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
It is argued that Wei teaches a display device with driver circuits and Ng teaches an LED package that “merely identifies a leadframe as one of several possible substrates…”. Ng is a “fundamentally different device” that would render Wei unsatisfactory for its intended purpose.
Note that the structure of Ng is not being imported into Wei. The use of a leadframe is the only thing imported into Wei. A skilled artisan would consider what others are using in an LED package, whether it is a display device or a LED package. Even though they are different uses of an LED, a skilled artisan would consider any substrate beyond their exact, specific application in order to meet there needs. For example, a skilled artisan would consider leashes for dogs when looking to invent a leash for a cat.
In response to applicant's argument that a Led package is nonanalogous art to a display device, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
Applicant’s arguments regarding claim 35, see the claim amendments filed 8/19/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of the claim(s) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made below.
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(s) 18-23, 25-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al., US 2021,0056893, in view of Ng, US 2008/0048199, and Abe, US 12,183,772, and Zitzlsperger et al., US 2022/0140215.
Regarding claim 18, Wei (figure 4A) teaches an optoelectronic component comprising:
a substrate 410 with a plurality of contacts (paragraph 0055);
a circuit chip 440 comprising a driver circuit and having a bottom side facing the substrate 410 and a top side facing away from the substrate 410;
at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 470 arranged on the top side of the circuit chip 440;
a redistribution layer 450 arranged between the circuit chip 440 and the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 470 for electrically contacting the driver circuit 440 and the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 470; and
wherein terminals of the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 470 are electrically connected to the redistribution layer 450 via bumps 460 (paragraph 0059), and
wherein the redistribution layer 460 is electrically connected to the contacts of the substrate 410 via wire bonds 455.
Wei, which teaches the substrate is a PCB 410, fails to teach the substrate is a lead frame.
Ng (paragraph 0018) teaches the substrate 104 can be a PCB or a lead frame.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the lead frame of Ng in place of the PCB in the invention of Wei because Ng teaches they are known equivalent substrates used in optoelectronic components. The substitution of one known equivalent technique for another may be obvious even if the prior art does not expressly suggest the substitution (Ex parte Novak 16 USPQ 2d 2041 (BPAI 1989); In re Mostovych 144 USPQ 38 (CCPA 1964); In re Leshin 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960); Graver Tank & Manufacturing Co. V. Linde Air Products Co. 85 USPQ 328 (USSC 1950).
Also, Wei fails to teach a housing body fastened to the lead frame, the housing body enclosing the circuit chip and having at least one recess above the circuit chip, in which the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip is arranged.
Abe (figure 3) teaches a housing body 40 fastened to the lead frame 20, the housing body 40 enclosing the circuit chip 10 and having at least one recess (filled by 1) above the circuit chip 10, in which the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 1 is arranged.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the housing body of Abe in the invention of Wei because every skilled artisan knows that the structure of Wei must be enclosed so that the LED’s and wires are protected. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Wei, which teaches a conductive grid structure, fails to teach the use of bumps on the terminals of the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip.
Zitzlsperger (figure 1) teaches using solder 72 on the terminals of the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use solder of Zitzlsperger in the invention of Wei because solder and a conductive grid structure are known equivalent structures used on the terminals of the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip. The substitution of one known equivalent technique for another may be obvious even if the prior art does not expressly suggest the substitution (Ex parte Novak 16 USPQ 2d 2041 (BPAI 1989); In re Mostovych 144 USPQ 38 (CCPA 1964); In re Leshin 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960); Graver Tank & Manufacturing Co. V. Linde Air Products Co. 85 USPQ 328 (USSC 1950). Though Zitzlsperger fails to specifically teach the solder is a bump, solder is typically used in the form of a bump. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
With respect to claim 19, Wei (figure 4A) teaches the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 470 comprises a light-emitting diode.
As to claim 20, though Wei, which teaches an array of LEDs (paragraph 0059), fails to teach the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip comprises: a first semiconductor chip which configured to emit light in a red wavelength range, and/or a second semiconductor chip configured to emit light in a green wavelength range, and/or a third semiconductor chip configured to emit light in a blue wavelength range, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use this LED arrangement in the invention of Wei because it is a conventionally known and used LED arrangement. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
In re claim 21, though Wei may not specifically teach a radiation direction of the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip comprises a transverse direction perpendicular to a main plane of extension of the lead frame, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use this arrangement in the invention of Wei because it is a conventionally known and used arrangement. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Concerning claim 22, Abe (figure 3) teaches sidewalls of the recess (filled by 1) of the housing body 40 are spaced from the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 1.
Pertaining to claim 23, Abe (figures 1 & 3) teaches a reflective layer 41 (paragraph 0074) arranged in the recess Filled by 1) of the housing body 40 and adjoining the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 1 in lateral directions.
In claim 25, Abe (figure 3 & 10B) teaches an encapsulation 5H covering the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 1 in a transverse direction and comprising a material transparent and/or diffusely scattering for the emitted radiation (paragraph 0095).
Regarding claim 26, though Wei fails to teach a temperature sensor integrated in the circuit chip configured to monitor a heat produced by the circuit chip and the semiconductor chip, and wherein a control unit, integrated in the circuit chip, is configured to control the driver circuit based on the temperature determined by the temperature sensor, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use a temperature sensor in the invention of Wei because a temperature sensor is conventionally known and used in the art. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
With respect to claim 27, though Wei fails to teach a first adhesive layer between the lead frame and the circuit chip; and a second adhesive layer between the circuit chip and the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip, wherein the first adhesive layer and the second adhesive layer are configured to dissipate a heat produced by the circuit chip and the semiconductor chip to the lead frame, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use these adhesive layers in the invention of Wei because they are conventionally known and used in the art to dissipate heat. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
As to claim 28, though Wei fails to teach a lighting unit comprising: a control unit; and a plurality of optoelectronic components according to claim 18, wherein the control unit is provided and configured to control the optoelectronic components individually or in groups via a bus system, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use this arrangement in the invention of Wei because it is conventionally known and used in the art. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
In re claim 29, Wei (figure 4A) teaches a method for manufacturing an optoelectronic component, the method comprising:
providing a substrate 410 with a plurality of contacts (paragraph 0055);
providing a circuit chip 440 comprising a driver circuit having a bottom side and a top side;
providing at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 410;
arranging a redistribution layer 450 on the top side of the circuit chip 440, wherein the redistribution layer 450 is configured to electrically contact the driver circuit 440 and the radiation- emitting semiconductor chip 470;
arranging the circuit chip 440 on the substrate 410 so that the bottom side of the circuit chip 440 faces the substrate 410;
providing electrical connections between the redistribution layer 450 and the contacts of the substrate 410 by wire bonds 455;
arranging the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 470 on the redistribution layer 450 at the top side of the circuit chip 440;
providing electrical connections between terminals of the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 470 and the redistribution layer 450 by bumps 460.
Wei, which teaches the substrate is a PCB 410, fails to teach the substrate is a lead frame.
Ng (paragraph 0018) teaches the substrate 104 can be a PCB or a lead frame.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the lead frame of Ng in place of the PCB in the invention of Wei because Ng teaches they are known equivalent substrates used in optoelectronic components. The substitution of one known equivalent technique for another may be obvious even if the prior art does not expressly suggest the substitution (Ex parte Novak 16 USPQ 2d 2041 (BPAI 1989); In re Mostovych 144 USPQ 38 (CCPA 1964); In re Leshin 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960); Graver Tank & Manufacturing Co. V. Linde Air Products Co. 85 USPQ 328 (USSC 1950).
Also, Wei fails to teach forming a housing body attached to the lead frame, wherein the housing body is formed by overmolding the circuit chip with a plastic material, and wherein the housing body has at least one recess on the top side of the circuit chip, in which the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip is to be arranged.
Abe (figure 3) teaches forming a housing body 40 attached to the lead frame 20, wherein the housing body 40 is formed by overmolding the circuit chip 10 with a plastic material (paragraph 0066 wherein the resin is a plastic), and wherein the housing body 40 has at least one recess (filled by 1) on the top side of the circuit chip 10, in which the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 1 is to be arranged.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the housing body of Abe in the invention of Wei because every skilled artisan knows that the structure of Wei must be enclosed so that the LED’s and wires are protected. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Wei, which teaches a conductive grid structure, fails to teach the use of bumps on the terminals of the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip.
Zitzlsperger (figure 1) teaches using solder 72 on the terminals of the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use solder of Zitzlsperger in the invention of Wei because solder and a conductive grid structure are known equivalent structures used on the terminals of the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip. The substitution of one known equivalent technique for another may be obvious even if the prior art does not expressly suggest the substitution (Ex parte Novak 16 USPQ 2d 2041 (BPAI 1989); In re Mostovych 144 USPQ 38 (CCPA 1964); In re Leshin 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960); Graver Tank & Manufacturing Co. V. Linde Air Products Co. 85 USPQ 328 (USSC 1950). Though Zitzlsperger fails to specifically teach the solder is a bump, solder is typically used in the form of a bump. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Concerning claim 30, wherein the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 470 is attached to the top side of the circuit chip 440 by flip-chip mounting (using 460) on the redistribution layer 450.
Pertaining to claim 31, Abe (figure 3) teaches arranging a reflective layer 41 (paragraph 0074) in the recess (filled by 1) of the housing body 40, the reflective layer 41 being adjacent to the at least one radiation- emitting semiconductor chip 1 in lateral directions.
In claim 32, though Abe, which teaches depositing the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 1 before forming the housing body 4) fails to teach the housing body 40 is formed before an arrangement of the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 1 on the top side of the circuit chip, and wherein the recess of the housing body comprises a base area which is larger than a base area of the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to reverse these steps in the invention of Wei because the transposition of process steps or the splitting of one step into two, where the processes are substantially identical or equivalent in terms of function, manner and result, was held to not patentably distinguish the processes [Ex parte Rubin 128 USPQ 440 (PTOBdPatApp 1959)].
Regarding claim 33, Abe (figure 8) teaches the housing body 41 is formed after the arrangement of the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 1 on the top side of the circuit chip 10 so that the housing body 41 is formed by overmolding the semiconductor chip 1 in lateral directions with the plastic material.
With respect to claim 34, Abe (figure 3) teaches arranging an encapsulation covering 5H the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 1 in a transverse direction, wherein the encapsulation 5H comprises a material transparent and/or diffusely scattering for the emitted radiation of the semiconductor chip 1 (paragraph 0095).
Claim(s) 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al., US 2021,0056893, in view of Ng, US 2008/0048199, and Abe, US 12,183,772, and Zitzlsperger et al., US 2022/0140215, and Bogner et al., US 7,586,190.
As to claim 35, Wei (figure 4A) teaches an optoelectronic component comprising:
a substrate 410 with a plurality of contacts (paragraph 0055);
a circuit chip 440 comprising a driver circuit and having a bottom side facing the lead frame and a top side facing away from the substrate 410;
at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 410 arranged on the top side of the circuit chip 440;
a redistribution layer 450 arranged between the circuit chip 440 and the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 470 for electrically contacting the driver circuit 440 and the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 470, wherein the redistribution layer 450 is arranged on the top side of the circuit chip 440, and the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 470 is arranged on the redistribution layer 450; and
wherein terminals (attached to bottom of 470) of the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 470 are electrically connected to the redistribution layer 450 via bumps 460 and the redistribution layer 450 is electrically connected to the contacts of the substrate 410 via wire bonds 455.
Wei, which teaches the substrate is a PCB 410, fails to teach the substrate is a lead frame.
Ng (paragraph 0018) teaches the substrate 104 can be a PCB or a lead frame.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the lead frame of Ng in place of the PCB in the invention of Wei because Ng teaches they are known equivalent substrates used in optoelectronic components. The substitution of one known equivalent technique for another may be obvious even if the prior art does not expressly suggest the substitution (Ex parte Novak 16 USPQ 2d 2041 (BPAI 1989); In re Mostovych 144 USPQ 38 (CCPA 1964); In re Leshin 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960); Graver Tank & Manufacturing Co. V. Linde Air Products Co. 85 USPQ 328 (USSC 1950).
Wei fails to teach a housing body fastened to the lead frame, the housing body enclosing the circuit chip and having at least one recess above the circuit chip, in which the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip is arranged.
Abe (figure 3) teaches a housing body 42 fastened to the lead frame 20, the housing body 42 enclosing the circuit chip 10 and having at least one recess (filled by 1) above the circuit chip 10, in which the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 1 is arranged.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the housing body of Abe in the invention of Wei because every skilled artisan knows that the structure of Wei must be enclosed so that the LED’s and wires are protected. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Wei, which teaches a conductive grid structure, fails to teach the use of bumps on the terminals of the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip.
Zitzlsperger (figure 1) teaches using solder 72 on the terminals of the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 2.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use solder of Zitzlsperger in the invention of Wei because solder and a conductive grid structure are known equivalent structures used on the terminals of the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip. The substitution of one known equivalent technique for another may be obvious even if the prior art does not expressly suggest the substitution (Ex parte Novak 16 USPQ 2d 2041 (BPAI 1989); In re Mostovych 144 USPQ 38 (CCPA 1964); In re Leshin 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960); Graver Tank & Manufacturing Co. V. Linde Air Products Co. 85 USPQ 328 (USSC 1950). Though Zitzlsperger fails to specifically teach the solder is a bump, solder is typically used in the form of a bump. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Wei fails to teach a first adhesive layer between the lead frame and the circuit chip; a second adhesive layer between the circuit chip and the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip; and wherein the first adhesive layer and the second adhesive layer are configured to: dissipate a heat produced by the circuit chip and the semiconductor chip to the lead frame, and compensate for differences in coefficients of thermal expansion of the materials used for the lead frame, the circuit chip, and the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip.
Bogner (figure 1) teaches a first adhesive layer (column 3, lines between heat sink 12 and a carrier substrate 2 made of silicon or gallium arsenide (column 3, lines 40-41); a second adhesive layer (column 3, lines 8-10) between the carrier substrate 2 and the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 4; and wherein the first adhesive layer and the second adhesive layer are configured to: dissipate a heat produced by the circuit chip and the semiconductor chip to the lead frame, and compensate for differences in coefficients of thermal expansion of the materials used for the lead frame, the circuit chip, and the radiation-emitting semiconductor chip.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the heat dissipating adhesives of Bogner in the invention of Wei because first the adhesive bonds the components together and aids in dissipating heat. Though Bogner does not teach a lead frame or a circuit chip, it teaches a heat sink made of metal, and a carrier substrate made of silicon or gallium arsenide. Since a lead frame is made of metal and a circuit chip is made of silicon or gallium arsenide, the teachings of Bogner are relevant to Wei because a need exists to improve the bonding of the components and heat dissipation.
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wei et al., US 2021,0056893, in view of Ng, US 2008/0048199, and Abe, US 12,183,772, as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Lee et al., US 10,217,918.
In re claim 24, Wei fails to teach sidewalls of the recess of the housing body are in direct contact with the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip and enclose it in lateral directions.
Lee (figure 2) teaches sidewalls of the recess (filled by 130/150) of the housing body 140 are in direct contact with the at least one radiation-emitting semiconductor chip 130 and enclose it in lateral directions.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to use the recessed housing body of Lee in the invention of Wei because they structure of Wei must be enclosed to protect the wire connection and the overall structure from the environment. The use of conventional materials to perform their known functions is obvious (MPEP 2144.07).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited prior art teaches various aspects of the invention.
Any inquiry should be directed to DAVID A ZARNEKE whose telephone number is (571)272-1937. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Matt 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.
/DAVID A ZARNEKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2891 9/10/26
Prosecution Insights