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 Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 3, replace “secondarily” with --secondary-- for agreement with the claim limitation of the independent claim from which claim 2 depends. 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.
Claims 1, 7, 8, 10, 11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawamura (US Patent Application Publication 2006/0220242) in view of Ku et al (US Patent Application Publication 2020/0035634).
Regarding claim 1, Kawamura discloses a method of manufacturing a display device, the method comprising:
manufacturing an electronic component [see Fig. 1B]; and
attaching the electronic component to a display panel 51 using a conductive adhesive member 52 [see Fig. 4; see also paragraphs 0076, wherein an anisotropically conductive material (ACF) is taught as an option for the adhesive member],
wherein the manufacturing of the electronic component includes:
providing a substrate 12 and a conductive layer 11 disposed on the substrate [see Fig. 3A];
performing a primary etching of the conductive layer to form a preliminary bump electrode 31b [see Fig. 3G; see also paragraphs 0058-0059].
Kawamura do not expressly disclose performing a secondary etching of the preliminary bump electrode to form a bump electrode. One such as Ku et al disclose a substantially similar semiconductor bump-processing technique whereby an already-formed metal bump 124 is exposed to a secondary etch to form a final form of a bump electrode [see Figs. 1G-1M; see also paragraphs 0034-0035]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to perform the secondary etching of Ku et al in the method of Kawamura in order to remove conductive material from the preliminary bump electrode in order to achieve a desired bump geometry.
Regarding claims 7 and 8, the prior art of Kawamura and Ku et al disclose the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Kawamura discloses wherein the manufacturing of the electronic component further includes:
forming a photoresist pattern 42 using a mask 41 in which an exposure opening is defined after the providing of the substrate and the conductive layer and before the primary etching of the conductive layer [see Figs. 3B and 3C]; and
removing the photoresist pattern after the secondary etching of the preliminary bump electrode [see Figs. 3F and 3G],
wherein in both the primary etching of the conductive layer and the secondary etching of the preliminary bump electrode, the photoresist pattern is used as the mask.
Regarding claim 10, the prior art of Kawamura and Ku et al disclose the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Kawamura discloses wherein the bump electrode does not include a portion having a width that widens in a direction from a lower surface to an upper surface thereof [see Fig. 3F].
Regarding claim 11, the prior art of Kawamura and Ku et al disclose the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Kawamura discloses wherein in the attaching of the electronic component to the display panel, the conductive adhesive member is in contact with an upper surface and a side surface of the bump electrode [see Fig. 4].
Regarding claim 14, the prior art of Kawamura and Ku et al disclose the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Kawamura discloses wherein the electronic component is any one of a flexible circuit board and a driving circuit chip [see paragraph 0076].
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kawamura (US Patent Application Publication 2006/0220242) in view of Ku et al (US Patent Application Publication 2020/0035634) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lai (USPN 6,916,691).
Regarding claim 4, the prior art of Kawamura and Ku et al disclose the method of claim 1. Furthermore, Kawamura discloses wherein the manufacturing of the electronic component further includes:
forming a first photoresist pattern 40 on the conductive layer 11 after the providing of the substrate and the conductive layer and before the primary etching of the conductive layer.
Neither Kawamura et al nor Ku expressly disclose using a half-tone mask. Kawamura disclose a photomask 41 for use in patterning the photoresist, but do not specify half-tone mask. One such as Lai discloses a substantially similar method including forming a photoresist layer 265 over further layers, and forming a first photoresist pattern using half-tone mask M10 [see Fig. 4; see also col. 7, lines 52-57]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to use the half-tone mask of Lai in the method of Kawamura because it is a well-known method in the art for achieving patterns in photoresist materials. It has been held that simple substitution of one known process for another to obtain predictable results is obvious. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). See MPEP 2143.
Regarding claim 5, the prior art of Kawamura, Ku et al and lai disclose the method of claim 4. Furthermore, Kawamura discloses comprising:
removing a portion of the first photoresist pattern to form a second photoresist pattern after the primary etching of the conductive layer and before the secondary etching of the preliminary bump electrode [see Figs. 3C-3F; see also paragraph 0058]; and
removing the second photoresist pattern after the secondary etching of the preliminary bump electrode [see Fig. 3G].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 3, 6, 9, 12 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: regarding dependent claim 2, the prior art of record fails to teach or make reasonably obvious, in combination with the other claimed elements and with sufficient specificity, wherein the preliminary bump electrode includes a protrusion protruding in a side direction, and the protrusion is removed in the secondary etching of the preliminary bump electrode; regarding dependent claim 3, the prior art of record fails to teach or make reasonably obvious, in combination with the other claimed elements and with sufficient specificity, wherein the primary etching of the conductive layer is performed during a first etching time, the secondary etching of the preliminary bump electrode is performed during a second etching time, and the second etching time is shorter than the first etching time; regarding dependent claim 6, the prior art of record fails to teach or make reasonably obvious, in combination with the other claimed elements and with sufficient specificity, wherein the first photoresist pattern includes a first pattern part and a second pattern part that is thinner than the first pattern part, and in the removing of the portion of the first photoresist pattern, the second pattern part is removed, and an upper portion of the preliminary bump electrode is exposed; regarding dependent claim 9, the prior art of record fails to teach or make reasonably obvious, in combination with the other claimed elements and with sufficient specificity, wherein a width of the second photoresist pattern is smaller than a width of the first photoresist pattern; regarding dependent claim 12, the prior art of record fails to teach or make reasonably obvious, in combination with the other claimed elements and with sufficient specificity, wherein a side surface of the bump electrode includes: a first side surface portion extending from a lower surface of the bump electrode; and a second side surface portion extending from the first side surface portion to an upper surface of the bump electrode and configured to define a bend point with the first side surface portion; and regarding dependent claim 13, the prior art of record fails to teach or make reasonably obvious, in combination with the other claimed elements and with sufficient specificity, wherein a side surface of the bump electrode has a substantially constant inclination.
Claims 15-20 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: regarding independent claim 15, and claims 16-20 which depend therefrom, the prior art of record fails to teach or make reasonably obvious, in combination with the other claimed elements and with sufficient specificity, wherein a side surface of the bump electrode includes: a first side surface portion extending from a lower surface of the bump electrode; and a second side surface portion extending from the first side surface portion to an upper surface of the bump electrode and configured to define a bend point with the first side surface portion.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COLLEEN E SNOW whose telephone number is (571)272-8603. The examiner can normally be reached M-W, 8am-4:30pm.
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, Dale E Page can be reached at 571-270-7877. 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.
/C.E.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2899 /VICTOR A MANDALA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights