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
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7, 10 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ozawa et al. (US 2017/0287805).
Regarding claim 1, Ozawa et al. discloses, as shown in Figures 1-23, a semiconductor device comprising:
a substrate (20);
a semiconductor chip (30);
a heat-dissipating plate (51); and
sealing resin (60), wherein
the semiconductor chip is mounted face-down on the substrate,
the heat-dissipating plate is bonded to an upper surface of the semiconductor chip with a bonding material (40),
the sealing resin seals the semiconductor chip and side surfaces of the heat-dissipating plate,
an upper surface of the heat-dissipating plate is an exposed surface exposed from an upper surface of the sealing resin,
a convex portion (56) is provided on the side surface of the heat-dissipating plate,
the convex portion is a portion that protrudes from an outer periphery of the exposed surface in a direction in which the side surface faces,
the convex portion is in contact with the sealing resin,
the convex portion is bonded to the upper surface of the semiconductor chip with the bonding material, and
external dimensions of the heat-dissipating plate having the side surface provided with the convex portion in plan view are smaller than external dimensions of the semiconductor chip in plan view (Figures 2, 11, 15 and 17B).
Regarding claim 2, Ozawa et al. discloses external dimensions of the heat dissipating plate in plan view are grater than external dimensions of a heat-generating area of the semiconductor chip in plan view (Figures 2, 11, 15 and 17B).
Regarding claim 3, Ozawa et al. discloses a projected area of the convex portion projected onto a plane along the exposed surface is 10% or more of an area of the exposed surface.
Regarding claim 5, Ozawa et al. discloses a thickness of the convex portion is 10% or more of a thickness of the heat dissipating plate (Figures).
Regarding claim 6, Ozawa et al. discloses a distance in a thickness direction between the upper surface of the sealing resin and the upper surface of the convex portion is 10% or more of a thickness of the sealing resin (Figures).
Regarding claim 7, Ozawa et al. discloses the convex portion has a tapered shape in which a tip end thereof positioned at the exposed surface of the heat-dissipating plate and it widens as it away from the exposed surface (Figures).
Regarding claim 10, Ozawa et al. discloses an upper surface of the convex portion has a region,
the convex portion (56) is in contact with the sealing resin in the region, and
an arithmetic mean roughness in the region is larger than an arithmetic mean roughness in a front surface of the heat-dissipating plate other than the region (Figure 19, [0148]-[0149]).
Regarding claim 14, Ozawa et al. discloses the exposed surface is flush with the upper surface of the sealing resin (Figures).
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.
Claim(s) 8 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozawa et al. (US 2017/0287805).
Regarding claim 8, Ozawa et al. discloses an angle between the exposed surface and a front surface of the tapered shape but does not disclose the degree of the angle. However, the selection of these parameters such as energy, concentration, temperature, time, speed, molar fraction, depth, thickness, roughness, angle, etc., would have been obvious and involve routine optimization which has been held to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art. "Normally, it is to be expected that a change in energy, concentration, temperature, time, molar fraction, depth, thickness, roughness, angle, etc., or in combination of the parameters would be an unpatentable modification. Under some circumstances, however, changes such as these may impart patentability to a process if the particular ranges claimed produce a new and unexpected result which is different in kind and not merely degree from the results of the prior art... such ranges are termed "critical ranges and the applicant has the burden of proving such criticality.... More particularly, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Alter 105 USPQ233, 255 (CCPA 1955). See also In re Waite 77 USPQ 586 (CCPA 1948); In re Scherl 70 USPQ 204 (CCPA 1946); In re Irmscher 66 USPQ 314 (CCPA 1945); In re Norman 66 USPQ 308 (CCPA 1945); In re Swenson 56 USPQ 372 (CCPA 1942); In re Sola 25 USPQ 433 (CCPA 1935); In re Dreyfus 24 USPQ 52 (CCPA 1934).
Regarding claim 11, Ozawa et al. discloses an upper surface of the convex portion has a region, the convex portion is in contact with the sealing resin in the region, and an arithmetic mean roughness in the region is 0.1µm or more [0148]. Ozawa et al. does not disclose the arithmetic mean roughness is the region is 0.8 µm or more and 25 µm or less. However, the selection of these parameters such as energy, concentration, temperature, time, speed, molar fraction, depth, thickness, roughness, angle, etc., would have been obvious and involve routine optimization which has been held to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art. "Normally, it is to be expected that a change in energy, concentration, temperature, time, molar fraction, depth, thickness, roughness, angle, etc., or in combination of the parameters would be an unpatentable modification. Under some circumstances, however, changes such as these may impart patentability to a process if the particular ranges claimed produce a new and unexpected result which is different in kind and not merely degree from the results of the prior art... such ranges are termed "critical ranges and the applicant has the burden of proving such criticality.... More particularly, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Alter 105 USPQ233, 255 (CCPA 1955). See also In re Waite 77 USPQ 586 (CCPA 1948); In re Scherl 70 USPQ 204 (CCPA 1946); In re Irmscher 66 USPQ 314 (CCPA 1945); In re Norman 66 USPQ 308 (CCPA 1945); In re Swenson 56 USPQ 372 (CCPA 1942); In re Sola 25 USPQ 433 (CCPA 1935); In re Dreyfus 24 USPQ 52 (CCPA 1934).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNG K VU whose telephone number is (571)272-1666. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday: 7am - 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, JACOB CHOI can be reached at (469) 295-9060. 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.
/HUNG K VU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights