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 .
Specification
The specification submitted 7/8/2024 has been accepted by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings submitted on 7/8/2024 have been accepted by the examiner.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted up to this point have been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim 10 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.
Regarding Claim 10, the applicant recites “wherein the first and polymer layers comprise benzocyclobutene-based polymers.” But there is no antecedence for “first and polymer layers”.
For the sake of compact prosecution, the examiner interprets this language as “first and second patterned polymer layers”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 7 and 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiang (US # 20230008792) in view of Chang (US # 20220139851) and Liu (US # 20130320556).
Regarding Claim 7, Chiang teaches a method for forming conductive structures between two substrates (100, 200; see Figs. 1-5 and corresponding text), the method comprising:
forming a first patterned base layer (122; Fig. 1) and a second patterned base layer (222; Fig. 3) on respective front surfaces of a first substrate (114, 110, 120) and a second substrate (214, 210, 220), wherein the first and second patterned base layers comprise through-holes (features 126/226 is formed in holes in Fig. 1) that expose partially the respective front surfaces of the first and second substrates (shown);
forming first metallic contact structures (126) in the through holes of the first patterned base layer and second metallic contact structures (226) in the through holes of the second patterned base layer, wherein both the first metallic contact structures and the second metallic contact structures have front surfaces that are higher than respective front surfaces of the first and second patterned base layers (shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 3);
forming a first and second patterned bonding the first patterned bonding layer (see Fig. 2);
bonding the front surfaces of the first and second patterned bonding layers with each other (see Fig. 5 and corresponding text);
bonding the front surfaces of the first and second metallic contact structures with each other (see Fig. 5 and corresponding text)
Although Chiang discloses much of the claimed invention, it does not explicitly teach the method comprising forming first and second patterned polymer layers, wherein the second metallic contact structures are exposed from and lower than respective front surfaces of the second patterned polymer layer; forming solder materials on the respective front surfaces of the first and second metallic contact structures; and bonding the first and second metallic contact structures with each other through the solder materials thereon after the front surfaces of the first and second patterned polymer layers are bonded with each other.
Nonetheless the prior art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention renders such non-explicit feature differences obvious, as explained below.
For example, Liu is in the same or analogous field, and it teaches a method of hybrid bonding wafers including forming, on both wafers, a conductive pad recessed within a surrounding insulating material, joined by a eutectic (solder) feature in a sequence in which the surrounding insulating layers are bonded first and the metal pads are bonded second. Or more specifically, wafers (100a/100b, Fig. 2) have recessed conductive features (112; see Fig. 2) embedded in an insulating layer (114) joined with solder (sealing layer 120), where the insulating layers are bonded first (fusion bond 132; [0031]) and then second after the first is the metal-to-metal bond 120’ (see Fig. 6 and [0032]).
A person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that modifying the bonding layer materials of Chiang with the hybrid bonding steps suggested by Liu would be obvious. Specifically, the modification suggested by Liu would be to employ a method comprising forming solder materials on the respective front surfaces of the first and second metallic contact structures; and bonding the first and second metallic contact structures with each other through the solder materials thereon after the front surfaces of the first and second patterned bonding layers are bonded with each other. The rationale for this obvious modification is that the eutectic/solder bond in the recess seals any possible gaps between the pads and to control the bonding at a particular temperature (Liu, [0027, 32]).
Although Chiang in view of Liu discloses much of the claimed invention, it does not explicitly teach the method comprising forming first and second patterned polymer layers as the first and second patterned bonding layers.
For a second prior-art example, Chang is in the same or analogous field, and it teaches a method comprising forming a first and second polymer layer (310/410; see [0029-32]), wherein embedded metallic contact structures (320 and 420) are exposed at respective front surfaces of the first and second patterned polymer layer; bonding the front surfaces of the first and second patterned polymer layers with each other ([0033] teaches hybrid bonding with BCB polymer).
A person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that modifying the bonding layer materials of Chiang in view of Liu with the polymer materials suggested by Chang would be obvious. Specifically, the modification suggested by Chang would be to employ a method step of forming a second patterned polymer layer, wherein the second metallic contact structures are exposed from respective front surfaces of the second patterned polymer layer. The rationale for this obvious modification is that polymers, including BCB, provide greater stress tolerance (Chang, [0030]) compared with inorganic dielectrics.
Regarding Claim 9, Chang, as applied to claim 7, teaches the method of claim 7, wherein forming a first patterned polymer layer and a second patterned polymer layer on the respective front surfaces of the first patterned base layer and the second patterned base layer comprises: forming a first polymer layer and a second polymer layer on the respective front surfaces of the first and second patterned base layers and on the respective front surfaces of the first and second metallic contact structures (spin-coating method creates a blanket layer of the polymer; se Fig. 2 and [0030]); and patterning the first polymer layer and the second polymer layer to form the first patterned polymer layer and the second patterned polymer layer that expose the respective front surfaces of the first and second metallic contact structures (standard patterning techniques in Chang [0053-56] shows that this is obvious because patterning organic layers, such as polymers, is a conventional method for forming conductive features).
Regarding Claim 10, insofar as the claim scope can be ascertained in view of the 35 USC 112 rejections and/or claim objections above, Chang, as applied to claim 7, teaches the method wherein the first and second patterned polymer layers comprise benzocyclobutene-based polymers ([0030]).
Regarding Claim 11, Liu and Chang, as applied to claim 7, teaches the method of claim 7, wherein the first and second metallic contact structures are lower (Liu teaches recessed conductive features) than the first and second patterned polymer layer (Chang teaches polymer materials), respectively, after forming the solder materials (apertures 122 are shown in Fig. 5, which shows the lower surfaces after formation of the solder materials).
Regarding Claim 12, Liu, as applied to claim 7, teaches the method of claim 7, wherein the bonding of the front surfaces of the first and second patterned polymer layers is performed at a first temperature ([0031]), and the bonding of the first and second metallic contact structures is performed at a second temperature ([0032]) higher than the first temperature (the metal is bonded at a higher temperature).
Claims 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chiang (US # 20230008792) in view of Chang (US # 20220139851) and Liu (US # 20130320556) and further in view of Yu (US # 20220246574).
Regarding Claim 8, although Chiang in view of Chang and Liu discloses much of the claimed invention, it does not explicitly teach the method of claim 7, wherein forming first metallic contact structures in the through holes of the first patterned base layer and second metallic contact structures in the through holes of the second patterned base layer comprises: forming respective seed layers on front surfaces of the first and second patterned base layers and the exposed front surfaces of the first and second substrates; forming respective patterned photoresist layers on the front surfaces of the first and second patterned base layers; depositing a metallic material within the through holes of the first and second patterned base layers to form the first and second metallic contact structures; and removing the patterned photoresist layers and the seed layers thereunder from the first and second patterned base layers, respectively.
Nonetheless the prior art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention renders such non-explicit feature differences obvious, as explained below.
For example, Yu is in the same or analogous field, and it teaches a method comprising forming a seed layer (116) on front surfaces of the first patterned base layers (112); forming patterned photoresist layers (118) on the front surfaces of the first patterned base layers; depositing a metallic material (128; [0025]) within through holes (120) of the first patterned base layers to form the first and second metallic contact structures (shown); and removing the patterned photoresist layers and the seed layers thereunder from the first patterned base layers, respectively (see Fig. 1D; [0026]).
A person having ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that modifying the metallic contact formation of Chiang in view of Chang and Liu with the steps suggested by Yu would be obvious. Specifically, the modification suggested by Yu would be to employ a method of claim 7, wherein forming first metallic contact structures in the through holes of the first patterned base layer and second metallic contact structures in the through holes of the second patterned base layer comprises: forming respective seed layers on front surfaces of the first and second patterned base layers and the exposed front surfaces of the first and second substrates; forming respective patterned photoresist layers on the front surfaces of the first and second patterned base layers; depositing a metallic material within the through holes of the first and second patterned base layers to form the first and second metallic contact structures; and removing the patterned photoresist layers and the seed layers thereunder from the first and second patterned base layers, respectively. The rationale for this obvious modification is that these metallization (seed/photoresist/plate/strip) steps provide a conventional predictable means of forming metal contacts. This would have been apparent to a person having ordinary skill in the art in reading both references because the existence and benefits of such a set of contact formation steps is well known in the art (see MPEP 2144.01).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER A JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)272-9475. The examiner can normally be reached normally working Monday to Friday between 9 am and 6 pm Eastern Time.
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, Brent Fairbanks can be reached on (408) 918-7532. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER A JOHNSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Prosecution Insights