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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Currently, claims 1-10 are pending and examined below.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement (IDS)
Two information disclosure statements submitted on 07/05/2024 ("07-05-24 IDS") and 06/10/2026 (“06-10-26 IDS”) are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the 07-05-24 IDS and 06-10-26 IDS are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested: SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE HAVING DUMMY WIRE CONNECTED TO SEMICONDUCTOR ELEMENT AND TERMINAL AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
Claim Objections
Claims 5-8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 5, “the semiconductor element” lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 6 is objected to for depending from the objected claim 5.
In claim 7, “the semiconductor element” lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 8 is objected to for depending from the objected claim 7.
Appropriate corrections are required.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3, 4, 9 and 10 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 3 is indefinite, because it appears to mix two statutory classes as it recites both an apparatus and a method of using or operating the apparatus.
Section 2173.05(p) offers the following guidance:
A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litigation, 639 F.3d 1303, 1318, 97 USPQ2d 1737, 1748-49 (Fed. Cir. 2011). In Katz, a claim directed to "[a] system with an interface means for providing automated voice messages…to certain of said individual callers, wherein said certain of said individual callers digitally enter data" was determined to be indefinite because the italicized claim limitation is not directed to the system, but rather to actions of the individual callers, which creates confusion as to when direct infringement occurs. Katz, 639 F.3d at 1318 (citing IPXL Holdings v. Amazon.com, Inc., 430 F.3d 1377, 1384, 77 USPQ2d 1140, 1145 (Fed. Cir. 2005), in which a system claim that recited "an input means" and required a user to use the input means was found to be indefinite because it was unclear "whether infringement … occurs when one creates a system that allows the user [to use the input means], or whether infringement occurs when the user actually uses the input means."); Ex parte Lyell, 17 USPQ2d 1548 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1990) (claim directed to an automatic transmission workstand and the method of using it held ambiguous and properly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Here, the present-tense verb “transmitting” clause raise a significant issue as to whether claim 1 is defined by its structure or by its operation. This is an important issue, because it is unclear when a potential infringement may occur. Would infringement occur when someone is in possession of “a semiconductor” or when it actually operates by “transmitting a control signal”?
Since claim 3 recites both a semiconductor device and a method of operating it, claim 3 is indefinite in view of the holding in IPXL Holdings v. Amazon.com, Inc.
Claim 4 is indefinite for depending from the indefinite claim 3.
Claim 9 is indefinite for the same reasons that the claim 3 is indefinite.
Claim 10 is indefinite for depending from the indefinite claim 9.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 1021
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.
Claims 1-3 and 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pub. No. US 2002/0036355 A1 to Young et al. ("Young").
Figs. 1 and 2 of Young have been provided to support the rejection below:
PNG
media_image1.png
540
414
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
167
394
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding independent claim 1, Young teaches a semiconductor device (see Figs. 1 and 2 for example), comprising:
a semiconductor element 10 (para [0021] - “semiconductor body 10”);
a terminal 101 (para [0022] discloses an electrical terminal area 101.);
a main wire 21 (para [0022] discloses a connection wire 21.) electrically connected between the semiconductor element 10 and the terminal 101;
a dummy wire 25 (para [0023] discloses a sacrificial wire 25.) having both ends connected to portions where both ends of the main wire 21 are connected (see Fig. 1) and having tensile strength of itself lower than tensile strength of the main wire itself (para [0029] - “…the sacrificial wire 24 to 27 can be thinner...”; That is, thinner the wire, the lower the tensile strength. Para [0035] - “In a specific example of a power MOSFET embodiment in accordance with the invention, Tanaka TANW-300 was used to form an AI:Ni wire 21 of 300 micrometre diameter for the source connection to the main bond pad 11. A thinner Tanaka wire (TANW-125) was used to form an AI:Ni wire 22 of 125 micrometre diameter for the gate connection to the bond pad 12. A single wire 25 of commercially pure (at least 99.99%) pure aluminium with a diameter of 150 micrometre was used for the sacrificial getter.” Para [0028] discloses that the aluminum wire 21 can be nickel-doped. Wire 25 is pure aluminum, so pure aluminum would also have further lower tensile strength than a nickel-dope aluminum.); and
sealing resin 150 (para [0034] - “plastic encapsulation 150”) covering the semiconductor element 10, the main wire 21, and the dummy wire 25 (see Figs. 1 and 2).
Regarding independent claim 2, Young teaches a semiconductor device (see Figs. 1 and 2 for example), comprising:
a semiconductor element 10 (para [0021] - “semiconductor body 10”);
a first terminal 102 (para [0022] discloses terminal area 101, a second terminal 11 or 110 (para [0029] discloses pad 11; para [0033] - “electrically conductive mount 110”), and a third terminal 101 (para [0022] discloses a terminal area 101.);
a main wire 22 (para [0022] discloses a connection wire 22”) electrically connected between the semiconductor element 10 and the first terminal 102;
a dummy wire 25 (para [0023] discloses a sacrificial wire 25.) electrically connected between the second terminal 11 or 110 and the third terminal 101 (see Fig. 1) and having tensile strength of itself lower than tensile strength of the main wire itself (para [0029] - “…the sacrificial wire 24 to 27 can be thinner...”; That is, thinner the wire, the lower the tensile strength. Para [0035] - “In a specific example of a power MOSFET embodiment in accordance with the invention, Tanaka TANW-300 was used to form an AI:Ni wire 21 of 300 micrometre diameter for the source connection to the main bond pad 11. A thinner Tanaka wire (TANW-125) was used to form an AI:Ni wire 22 of 125 micrometre diameter for the gate connection to the bond pad 12. A single wire 25 of commercially pure (at least 99.99%) pure aluminium with a diameter of 150 micrometre was used for the sacrificial getter.” Para [0028] discloses that the aluminum wire 21 can be nickel-doped. Wire 25 is pure aluminum, so pure aluminum would also have further lower tensile strength than a nickel-dope aluminum.); and
sealing resin 150 (para [0034] - “plastic encapsulation 150”) covering the semiconductor element 10, the main wire 22, and the dummy wire 25 (see Figs. 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 3, Young teaches a control wire 22 transmitting a control signal (Para [0035] - “Tanaka TANW-125 wire 22 of 125 micrometre diameter for its gate connection.”) for controlling power conduction of the semiconductor element 10 and having a diameter smaller (125 micrometer) than the main wire 21 (300 micrometer).
Regarding independent claim 5, Young teaches a method of manufacturing a semiconductor device, comprising:
electrically connecting a main wire 21 (para [0022] discloses a connection wire 21”) between the semiconductor element 10 (para [0021] - “semiconductor body 10”) and a terminal 101 (para [0022] discloses a terminal area 101.);
connecting both ends of a dummy wire 25 (para [0023] discloses a sacrificial wire 25.) having tensile strength of itself lower than tensile strength of the main wire 21 (para [0029] - “…the sacrificial wire 24 to 27 can be thinner...”; That is, thinner the wire, the lower the tensile strength. Para [0035] - “In a specific example of a power MOSFET embodiment in accordance with the invention, Tanaka TANW-300 was used to form an AI:Ni wire 21 of 300 micrometre diameter for the source connection to the main bond pad 11. A thinner Tanaka wire (TANW-125) was used to form an AI:Ni wire 22 of 125 micrometre diameter for the gate connection to the bond pad 12. A single wire 25 of commercially pure (at least 99.99%) pure aluminium with a diameter of 150 micrometre was used for the sacrificial getter.” Para [0028] discloses that the aluminum wire 21 can be nickel-doped. Wire 25 is pure aluminum, so pure aluminum would also have further lower tensile strength than a nickel-dope aluminum.) to portions where both ends of the main wire 21 are connected;
covering the semiconductor element 10, the main wire 21, and the dummy wire 25 by sealing resin (para [0034] - “plastic encapsulation 150”); and
determining or measuring a resistance value of the main wire and the dummy wire (see Table in para [0035]; para [0035] - “The results in terms of Rdson (ON resistance between the source and drain terminals 111 and 110 are summarized in the following table…”; para [0036] - “The lower initial Rdson of the Embodiment (as compared with the Control) is a consequence of the extra parallel connection provided by the additional wire 25.”).
A limitation of “determining a breakage state of the dummy wire based on a measurement result of a voltage value or a resistance value of the main wire and the dummy wire” appears to conflate a method step of measuring a resistance value of the main wire and dummy wire with an intended result of determining a breakage state of the dummy wire. Since the resistance value of the main wire and the dummy wire was determined or measured in the method step obtaining the ON resistance by Young, it necessarily flows from the method step that a breakage state of the dummy wire can be determined.
Regarding claim 6, a limitation of “determining a breakage state of the main wire based on a measurement result” appears to conflate a method step of measuring a resistance value of the main wire and dummy wire with an intended result of determining a breakage state of the main wire. Since the resistance value of the main wire and the dummy wire was determined or measured in the method step obtaining the ON resistance by Young, it necessarily flows from the method step that a breakage state of the main wire can also be determined.
Regarding independent claim 7, Young teaches a method of manufacturing a semiconductor device, comprising:
electrically connecting a main wire 21 (para [0022] discloses a connection wire 21”) between the semiconductor element 10 (para [0021] - “semiconductor body 10”) and a first terminal 102;
electrically connecting a dummy wire 25 (para [0023] discloses a sacrificial wire 25.) having tensile strength of itself lower than tensile strength of the main wire 21 (para [0029] - “…the sacrificial wire 24 to 27 can be thinner...”; That is, thinner the wire, the lower the tensile strength. Para [0035] - “In a specific example of a power MOSFET embodiment in accordance with the invention, Tanaka TANW-300 was used to form an AI:Ni wire 21 of 300 micrometre diameter for the source connection to the main bond pad 11. A thinner Tanaka wire (TANW-125) was used to form an AI:Ni wire 22 of 125 micrometre diameter for the gate connection to the bond pad 12. A single wire 25 of commercially pure (at least 99.99%) pure aluminium with a diameter of 150 micrometre was used for the sacrificial getter.” Para [0028] discloses that the aluminum wire 21 can be nickel-doped. Wire 25 is pure aluminum, so pure aluminum would also have further lower tensile strength than a nickel-dope aluminum.) between the second terminal 11 or 110 (para [0029] discloses pad 11; para [0033] - “electrically conductive mount 110”) and the third terminal 101 (para [0022]);
covering the semiconductor element 10, the main wire 21, and the dummy wire 25 by sealing resin (para [0034] - “plastic encapsulation 150”); and
determining or measuring a resistance value of the main wire and the dummy wire (see Table in para [0035]; para [0035] - “The results in terms of Rdson (ON resistance between the source and drain terminals 111 and 110 are summarized in the following table…”; para [0036] - “The lower initial Rdson of the Embodiment (as compared with the Control) is a consequence of the extra parallel connection provided by the additional wire 25.”).
A limitation of “determining a breakage state of the dummy wire based on a measurement result of a voltage value of the dummy wire” appears to conflate a method step of measuring a resistance value of the dummy wire with an intended result of determining a breakage state of the dummy wire. Since the resistance value of the main wire and the dummy wire was determined or measured in the method step obtaining the ON resistance by Young, it necessarily flows from the method step that a breakage state of the dummy wire can be determined.
Regarding claim 8, a limitation of “determining a breakage state of the main wire based on a measurement result of a voltage value or a resistance value of the main wire” appears to conflate a method step of measuring a resistance value of the main wire and dummy wire with an intended result of determining a breakage state of the main wire. Since the resistance value of the main wire and the dummy wire was determined or measured in the method step obtaining the ON resistance by Young, it necessarily flows from the method step that a breakage state of the main wire can also be determined.
Regarding claim 9, Young teaches a control wire 22 transmitting a control signal (Para [0035] - “Tanaka TANW-125 wire 22 of 125 micrometre diameter for its gate connection.”) for controlling power conduction of the semiconductor element 10 and having a diameter smaller (125 micrometer) than the main wire 21 (300 micrometer).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Pub. No. US 2024/0079396 A1 to Lin et al.
Pub. No. US 2009/0108425 A1 to Lee et al.
Patent No. US 6,031,281 to Kang et al.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL JUNG whose telephone number is (408) 918-7554. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 A.M. to 7 P.M.
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, Eliseo Ramos-Feliciano can be reached on (571) 272-7925. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MICHAEL JUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817 24 June 2026
1 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status
Prosecution Insights