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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 1/9/26 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the encapsulant under the isolation pattern" in lines 2 and 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 1 does not specify one way or the other if the isolation pattern has encapsulant underneath it. Embedded does not explicitly imply any certain size or dimensions of the element in question.
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) 1-3 and 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over So et al US 2019/0058241 and further in view of Yen et al US 2020/0350180 and further in view of Han et al US 2020/0111742.
Pertaining to claim 1, So teaches a package structure, comprising:
a die 120, sandwiched between a front side redistribution structure and a backside redistribution structure See Figure 15 marked up below;
an encapsulant 111c, disposed on the backside redistribution structure;
a dielectric layer 180, disposed on the encapsulant 111c;
a conductive layer 112dA-1, covered by the dielectric layer 180, wherein the conductive layer comprises an antenna pattern; and
a through insulating via (TIV) 113F-1, embedded in the encapsulant 111c and vertically disposed between the antenna pattern 112dA-1 and the backside redistribution structure to electrically connect the antenna pattern and the backside redistribution structure See Figure 15 marked up below.
PNG
media_image1.png
344
609
media_image1.png
Greyscale
So fails to teach:
the conductive layer embedded in the encapsulant, and
wherein the conductive layer comprises an antenna pattern and an isolation pattern physically separated from each other.
Yen teaches:
a conductive layer (antenna) 14 [0035] embedded in a encapsulant 13, and
wherein the conductive layer 14 comprises an antenna pattern 14 and an isolation pattern 15 [0037] physically separated from each other See Figure 1A marked up below.
PNG
media_image2.png
352
810
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate the teachings of Yen into the device of So by embedding the antenna patterns in the encapsulant and adding a shielding layer in the encapsulant. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify So in the manner set forth above for at least the purpose of adding additional protection for the antenna patterns by partially encapsulating them in the encapsulant and shielding the antennas from interference that could disrupt performance combined with the upper dielectric layer taught by So.
So in view of Yen fails to teach wherein the encapsulant has an upper surface exposed by the dielectric layer (Specifically, So, who teaches the dielectric layer, does not teach an opening exposing the encapsulant).
Han teaches exposing area M in Figure 11 an encapsulant 130 through a dielectric layer 190. See Figure 11 and paragraph [0063].
PNG
media_image3.png
474
496
media_image3.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate the teachings of Han into the device of So by exposing a portion of the encapsulant through the dielectric layer. The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify So in the manner set forth above for at least the purpose of adding identifying information to the device such as a bar code [0063] of Han in a material layer that is easy to mark up.
Pertaining to claim 2, So/Yen/Han teaches the package structure of claim 1, wherein the upper surface of the encapsulant is level with an upper surface of the dielectric layer. “Level” is broad, because the two surfaces are on the same level in So (111c and 180 share a coextensive surface together), as such they are considered level. Level is not the same as having coplanar top surfaces.
Pertaining to claim 3, So/Yen/Han teaches the package structure of claim 1, wherein the upper surface of the encapsulant is lower with an upper surface of the dielectric layer. 111c of So is lower than the upper surface of 180
Pertaining to claim 5, So/Yen/Han teaches the package structure of claim 1, wherein the isolation pattern surrounds the antenna pattern in a top view See Figure 1C of Yen, and the isolation pattern is electrically floating. Element 15 is not electrically connected to anything see Figure 1A of Yen
Pertaining to claim 6, So/Yen/Han teaches the package structure of claim 1, further comprising:
a molding compound 111A of So laterally encapsulating the die 120; and
a circuit substrate (Mainboard not shown, see [0094]) bonding to the front side redistribution structure through a plurality of conductive terminals 170 [0094] of So
Pertaining to claim 7, So/Yen/Han teaches the package structure of claim 6, wherein a sidewall of the molding compound, a sidewall of the front side redistribution structure, a sidewall of the backside redistribution structure, and a sidewall of the encapsulant are aligned with each other. See So Figure 15 marked up above
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over So et al US 2019/0058241 and further in view of Yen et al US 2020/0350180 and further in view of Han et al US 2020/0111742 and further in view of Hsu et al US 2020/0135670.
Pertaining to claim 4, So/Yen/Han teaches the package structure of claim 1, wherein the isolation pattern 15 surrounds the antenna pattern 14 in a top view See Figure 1C of Yen, but fails to teach wherein the encapsulant under the isolation pattern is free of TIV. Hsu teaches an antenna surrounded by an isolation pattern 190 wherein the encapsulant 180 under the isolation pattern is free of a TIV See Figures 17 and 21. It would have been within the scope of one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to combine the teachings of So/Yen/Han and Hsu to enable the isolation formation step of So/Yen/Han to be performed according to the teachings of Hsu because one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed would have been motivated to look to alternative suitable methods of performing the disclosed isolation formation step of So/Yen/Han and art recognized suitability for an intended purpose has been recognized to be motivation to combine. MPEP § 2144.07.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 8 is 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.
Claims 9-14 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The primary reason for the allowance of the claims is the inclusion of the limitation in claims 8 and 9 comprising: a conductive layer comprising: a plurality of antenna patterns arranged as an array; and a plurality of isolation patterns laterally surrounding the plurality of antenna patterns respectively, an encapsulant laterally encapsulating the conductive layer and a dielectric layer overlying the conductive layer and the encapsulant, and having an opening to define facing inner sidewalls of the dielectric layer, wherein a portion of the encapsulant extends between and contacts the facing inner sidewalls of the dielectric layer.
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.”
/NICHOLAS J TOBERGTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817