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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant's arguments with respect to claims 1 – 4 and 6 – 11 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informality: on line 8, the phrase “NH3OH controlled pH 9 to 10” should be “NH3OH controlled pH is 9 to 10,” or something similar.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 – 4 and 6 – 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moriyama et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2017/0034926) in view of Merricks et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 2022/0090484).
Regarding claim 1, in Figure 2D, Moriyama discloses a manufacturing method of a copper foil for printed circuit boards, comprising: performing a multi-stage electroplating process to sequentially form a metal release layer (carrier, paragraph [0048]; after the resultant is thermocompression bonded, the carrier is detached, paragraph [0046], Figure 3I), a burnt copper layer (1st UT layer; 1st UT layer may be formed by copper pyrophosphate electroplating, paragraph [0059]), and a copper sulfate layer (2nd UT layer; 2nd UT layer may be formed by copper sulfate electroplating, paragraph [0059]), wherein the multi-stage electroplating process comprises a metal release electroplating process (paragraph [0049]), a copper pyrophosphate electroplating process (paragraph [0059]), and a copper sulfate electroplating process (paragraphs [0049], [0059]). Moriyama does not specifically disclose wherein a formula of the burnt copper layer is 5 g/L to 25 g/L of copper pyrophosphate ions, 100 to 300 g/L of potassium pyrophosphate, and NH3OH controlled pH 9 to 10. However, in paragraph [0045]), Merricks teaches a copper pyrophosphate electroplating process that produces a seed copper layer having 5 g/L to 25 g/L of copper pyrophosphate ions (20 g/L copper metal), 100 to 300 g/L of potassium pyrophosphate (140 g/L potassium pyrophosphate), and NH3OH controlled pH 9 to 10 (ammonia at concentration which gives a pH of 8.5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the burnt copper layer of Moriyama to have 5 g/L to 25 g/L of copper pyrophosphate ions, 100 to 300 g/L of potassium pyrophosphate, and NH3OH controlled pH 9 to 10 as taught by Merricks in order to form the burnt copper layer to be thin and relatively dense.
Further, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the NH3OH controlled pH of Moriyama modified by Merricks to be modified from 8.5 to about 9 in order to design for the most optimum solution. A prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges and prior art ranges do not overlap but are close enough that one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties (Titanium Metals Corp. v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 227 USPQ 773 (Fed. Cir. 1985))
Regarding claim 2, Moriyama discloses wherein a component of the metal release layer comprises Ni, W, Zn, Mo, Co, or a combination thereof (paragraphs [0048], [0049]).
Regarding claim 3, Moriyama discloses wherein an electroplating condition of the metal release electroplating process is 2 ASD to 20 ASD, a time is 2 seconds to 20 seconds, the metal release electroplating process is 2-stage to 6-stage electroplating, and an electroplating temperature is 25 to 60ºC (paragraphs [0048], [0049]).
Regarding claim 4, Moriyama discloses wherein a thickness of the metal release layer is 10 nm to 300 nm (paragraphs [0048], [0049]).
Regarding claim 6, Moriyama discloses wherein a thickness of the burnt copper layer is 10 nm to 300 nm (paragraph [0059]).
Regarding claim 7, Moriyama discloses an electroplating condition of the copper pyrophosphate electroplating process is 2 ASD to 20 ASD, a time is 2 seconds to 20 seconds, the copper pyrophosphate electroplating process is 2-stage to 6-stage electroplating, and an electroplating temperature is 25 to 60ºC (paragraph [0059]).
Regarding claim 8, Moriyama discloses wherein a formula of the copper sulfate layer is 70 g/L to 90 g/L of copper ions and 60 g/L to 150 g/L of sulfuric acid (paragraphs [0049], [0059]).
Regarding claim 9, Moriyama discloses an electroplating condition of the copper sulfate electroplating process is 5 ASD to 30 ASD, a time is 2 seconds to 20 seconds, and the copper sulfate electroplating process is 4-stage to 8-stage electroplating (paragraphs [0049], [0059]).
Regarding claim 10, Moriyama discloses wherein a thickness of the copper sulfate layer is 1.5 µm to 3 µm (paragraph [0050]).
Regarding claim 11, Moriyama discloses a copper foil for printed circuit boards, made by the manufacturing method for the copper foil for printed circuit boards according to claim 1 (Figure 2D).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TREMESHA W BURNS whose telephone number is (571)270-3391. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am - 4:30 pm EST.
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, Timothy Thompson can be reached at (571) 272-2342. 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.
TREMESHA W. BURNS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2847
/TREMESHA W BURNS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights