DETAILED ACTION
Foreign 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
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/10/24 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been 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 package having protruding leads
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(s) 2-5, 7, and 9 is/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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant) regards as the invention.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “wherein a clearance distance between the lead and an adjacent lead is greater with the lead being twisted than without the lead being twisted.”
The metes and bounds of the claimed limitation can not be determined for the following reasons: the limitation “an adjacent lead” in this claim lacks proper antecedent basis, as claim 1 already recites “… the twisted section of the lead is external to the encapsulation material and provides an increased clearance distance between a residual dambar portion of the lead and an adjacent lead…” Thus, it is unclear if this second recitation of “an adjacent lead” (a) requires the second option of the “or” statement in claim 1, (b) merely further limits the second option but does not require the second option, or (c) refers to yet another adjacent lead.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “wherein a creepage distance between the lead and an adjacent lead along a surface of the encapsulation material is greater with the lead being twisted than without the lead being twisted.”
The metes and bounds of the claimed limitation can not be determined for the following reasons: the limitation “an adjacent lead” in this claim lacks proper antecedent basis, as claim 1 already recites “… the twisted section of the lead is external to the encapsulation material and provides an increased clearance distance between a residual dambar portion of the lead and an adjacent lead…” Thus, it is unclear if this second recitation of “an adjacent lead” (a) requires the second option of the “or” statement in claim 1, (b) merely further limits the second option but does not require the second option, or (c) refers to yet another adjacent lead.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “wherein a pitch between the lead and an adjacent lead with the lead being twisted is similar or same to the pitch without the lead being twisted.”
The metes and bounds of the claimed limitation can not be determined for the following reasons: the limitation “an adjacent lead” in this claim lacks proper antecedent basis, as claim 1 already recites “… the twisted section of the lead is external to the encapsulation material and provides an increased clearance distance between a residual dambar portion of the lead and an adjacent lead…” Thus, it is unclear if this second recitation of “an adjacent lead” (a) requires the second option of the “or” statement in claim 1, (b) merely further limits the second option but does not require the second option, or (c) refers to yet another adjacent lead.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “wherein a pitch between the lead and an adjacent lead with the lead being twisted is similar or same to the pitch without the lead being twisted.”
The metes and bounds of the claimed limitation can not be determined for the following reasons:
The term "similar" is a relative term that renders the claim indefinite. It is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Determining whether one is infringing the limitation is subjective, rather than objective, and the claim is unclear.
Claim 5 recites the limitation “wherein the lead is twisted around the longitudinal axis by an angle of substantially ninety degrees.”
The metes and bounds of the claimed limitation can not be determined for the following reasons:
The term "substantially" is a relative term that renders the claim indefinite. It is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. “Substantially” is defined as "being largely but not wholly that which is specified” (see Merriam Webster online dictionary). The term “substantially” defines a target (90 degrees) and implicitly requires boundaries different than the target beyond which one is not “substantially” the target any more. Neither the claims, nor the specification, defines these boundaries. For example, it is unclear which of the following are close enough to 90 degrees to be “substantially 90 degrees” and which are not: 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 89.5, 89.9, etc.
Thus, determining whether one is infringing the limitation is subjective, rather than objective, and the claim is unclear.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “wherein a clearance distance between the lead and an adjacent lead is independent of the residual dambar portion of the lead.”
The metes and bounds of the claimed limitation can not be determined for the following reasons: the limitation “an adjacent lead” in this claim lacks proper antecedent basis, as claim 1 already recites “… the twisted section of the lead is external to the encapsulation material and provides an increased clearance distance between a residual dambar portion of the lead and an adjacent lead…” Thus, it is unclear if this second recitation of “an adjacent lead” (a) requires the second option of the “or” statement in claim 1, (b) merely further limits the second option but does not require the second option, or (c) refers to yet another adjacent lead.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “further comprising: an adjacent lead protruding out of the encapsulation material and extending along a further longitudinal axis, wherein the adjacent lead comprises a further twisted section along which the adjacent lead is twisted around the further longitudinal axis.”
The metes and bounds of the claimed limitation can not be determined for the following reasons: the limitation “an adjacent lead” in this claim lacks proper antecedent basis, as claim 1 already recites “… the twisted section of the lead is external to the encapsulation material and provides an increased clearance distance between a residual dambar portion of the lead and an adjacent lead…” Thus, it is unclear if this second recitation of “an adjacent lead” (a) requires the second option of the “or” statement in claim 1, (b) merely further limits the second option but does not require the second option, or (c) refers to yet another adjacent lead.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102, some of which 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-11 and 14-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2014/0239489 A1 (“Yoneda”).
Yoneda teaches, for example:
PNG
media_image1.png
419
574
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
356
571
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
391
574
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Yoneda teaches:
1. A semiconductor device (“semiconductor device 10” including “semiconductor chip 12a” or “semiconductor chip group 12”, see e.g. para 28, 36, and Fig. 1; it includes all terminals labeled 14 or 14x - where x can be b, g, p, n, a – and is partially encapsulated by resin portion 16; see various embodiments of the device such as shown in e.g. Figs. 4, 9, and 13), comprising:
an encapsulation material (resin portion 16, see e.g. para 36) at least partially encapsulating a semiconductor component of the semiconductor device; and
a lead (e.g. 14n, 14p, 14g, or 14b) protruding out of the encapsulation material (see e.g. Figs. 4, 9, 13) and extending along a longitudinal axis (y-axis, as shown in e.g. Figs. 4, 9, 13), the lead comprising a twisted section along which the lead is twisted around the longitudinal axis (see “sub twist portions 26a, 26b”, e.g. para 65 and Fig. 9),
wherein:
the twisted section of the lead is encapsulated in the encapsulation material and there is no further twisted section on an outer portion of the lead which protrudes out of the encapsulation material, so that the outer portion of the lead extends along a plane different from a plane along which the most inner portion of the lead extends, or
the twisted section of the lead is external to the encapsulation material and provides an increased clearance distance between a residual dambar portion of the lead and an adjacent lead, wherein the twisted section is located between the encapsulation material and the residual dambar portion (the “residual dambar portion” may be any portion of 14n or 14p outside of 16; in the Applicant’s specification, the dambar 24 is used during the manufacturing of the device and may be “removed”, see e.g. para 54; while certain portions 12A and 12B as shown in Fig. 10B may exist as protrusions, this is not necessary, and residual dambar portions may not protrude from the lead, as 12A and 12B do not protrude at all as shown in Fig. 1A; thus, the limitation “residual dambar portion” does not require anything of the lead structurally; see in Fig. 9 wherein there is an increased distance between 14p at label 22 and 14g than the distance between 14p at label 24 and 14g).
2. The semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein a clearance distance between the lead and an adjacent lead is greater with the lead being twisted than without the lead being twisted (see e.g. Fig. 9, wherein, the distance between 22 and 14g is larger than the distance between 24 and 14g within 16).
3. The semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein a creepage distance between the lead and an adjacent lead along a surface of the encapsulation material is greater with the lead being twisted than without the lead being twisted (see e.g. Fig. 9, wherein, the distance between 22 and 14g is larger than the distance between 24 and 14g within 16).
4. The semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein a pitch between the lead and an adjacent lead with the lead being twisted is similar or same to the pitch without the lead being twisted (see e.g. Fig. 9).
5. The semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein the lead is twisted around the longitudinal axis by an angle of substantially ninety degrees (see e.g. Fig. 9).
6. The semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein the twisted section of the lead is configured to provide an interlocking between the encapsulation material and the lead when the twisted section of the lead is encapsulated in the encapsulation material (see e.g. Fig. 9).
7. The semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein a clearance distance between the lead and an adjacent lead is independent of the residual dambar portion of the lead (see e.g. Fig. 9).
8. The semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein:
a portion of the lead external to the encapsulation material and arranged between the twisted section and an end of the lead has a thickness measured in a direction perpendicular to a main surface of the encapsulation material and a width measured in a direction parallel to the main surface of the encapsulation material, and the thickness of the portion of the lead is greater than the width of the portion of the lead (see e.g. in Fig. 9, wherein at 22, the thickness is larger than the width).
9. The semiconductor device of claim 1, further comprising: an adjacent lead protruding out of the encapsulation material and extending along a further longitudinal axis, wherein the adjacent lead comprises a further twisted section along which the adjacent lead is twisted around the further longitudinal axis (see e.g. Fig. 9, wherein both 14n and 14p protrude and are twisted).
10. The semiconductor device of claim 1, wherein the semiconductor device is a through hole semiconductor package (see e.g. Fig. 9; the leads 14 project from the resin 16 such that they could extend into a through-hole in a substrate such as a printed circuit board).
Yoneda teaches, for example:
PNG
media_image1.png
419
574
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
265
426
media_image4.png
Greyscale
11. A semiconductor device (“semiconductor device 10” including “semiconductor chip 12a” or “semiconductor chip group 12”, see e.g. para 28, 36, and Fig. 1; it includes all terminals labeled 14 or 14x - where x can be b, g, p, n, a – and is partially encapsulated by resin portion 16; see various embodiments of the device such as shown in e.g. Figs. 4, 6), comprising:
an encapsulation material (resin portion 16, see e.g. para 36) at least partially encapsulating a semiconductor component of the semiconductor device; and
a first lead (e.g. 14n or 14p) protruding out of the encapsulation material (see e.g. Figs. 4, 9, 13) and extending along a longitudinal axis (y-axis, as shown in e.g. Figs. 4, 6),
wherein a portion (e.g. 22b, see e.g. Fig. 6) of the first lead external to the encapsulation material has a thickness measured in a direction perpendicular to a main surface of the encapsulation material and a width measured in a direction parallel to the main surface of the encapsulation material, wherein the thickness of the portion of the first lead is greater than the width of the portion of the first lead (see e.g. in Fig. 6, wherein 22 is taller than it is wide), and
wherein the first lead is untwisted along the longitudinal axis (see e.g. in Figs. 4 and 6, wherein the lead 24 is not twisted along the y-axis; rather, it changes shape as it progresses along the y-axis, from being flat within 16, to being U-shaped at the periphery of 16, is also U-shaped outside of 16, and final is flat at its location farthest from 16).
14. The semiconductor device of claim 11, further comprising: a second lead (e.g. 14g) adjacent to the first lead, wherein a thickness of the first lead is greater than a thickness of the second lead (14g is flat entirely, whereas 14p and 14n are partially U-shaped and thicker at least portion 22 than 14g).
15. The semiconductor device of claim 11, wherein the portion of the first lead external to the encapsulation material has the same geometry along its entire length in a longitudinal direction of the first lead (portion 22b itself is U-shaped along the entirety of the portion, see e.g. Fig. 4).
16. A method for manufacturing a semiconductor device (“semiconductor device 10” including “semiconductor chip 12a” or “semiconductor chip group 12”, see e.g. para 28, 36, and Fig. 1; it includes all terminals labeled 14 or 14x - where x can be b, g, p, n, a – and is partially encapsulated by resin portion 16; see various embodiments of the device such as shown in e.g. Figs. 4, 9, and 13), the method comprising:
providing a lead (e.g. 14n, 14p, 14g, or 14b) extending along a longitudinal axis (y-axis, as shown in e.g. Figs. 4, 9, 13);
twisting a section of the lead around the longitudinal axis, thereby providing a twisted section of the lead (see “sub twist portions 26a, 26b”, e.g. para 65 and Fig. 9); and
at least partially encapsulating a semiconductor component of the semiconductor device in an encapsulation material (resin portion 16, see e.g. para 36),
wherein the lead at least partially protrudes out of the encapsulation material (see e.g. Figs. 4, 9, 13),
wherein:
the twisted section of the lead is encapsulated in the encapsulation material and there is no further twisted section on an outer portion of the lead which protrudes out of the encapsulation material, so that the outer portion of the lead extends along a plane different from a plane along which the most inner portion of the lead extends, or
the twisted section of the lead is external to the encapsulation material and provides an increased clearance distance between a residual dambar portion of the lead and an adjacent lead, wherein the twisted section is located between the encapsulation material and the residual dambar portion (the “residual dambar portion” may be any portion of 14n or 14p outside of 16; in the Applicant’s specification, the dambar 24 is used during the manufacturing of the device and may be “removed”, see e.g. para 54; while certain portions 12A and 12B as shown in Fig. 10B may exist as protrusions, this is not necessary, and residual dambar portions may not protrude from the lead, as 12A and 12B do not protrude at all as shown in Fig. 1A; thus, the limitation “residual dambar portion” does not require anything of the lead structurally; see in Fig. 9 wherein there is an increased distance between 14p at label 22 and 14g than the distance between 14p at label 24 and 14g).
18. A method for manufacturing a semiconductor device (“semiconductor device 10” including “semiconductor chip 12a” or “semiconductor chip group 12”, see e.g. para 28, 36, and Fig. 1; it includes all terminals labeled 14 or 14x - where x can be b, g, p, n, a – and is partially encapsulated by resin portion 16; see various embodiments of the device such as shown in e.g. Figs. 4, 6), the method comprising:
at least partially encapsulating a lead (e.g. 14n or 14p) and a semiconductor component of the semiconductor device in an encapsulation material (resin portion 16, see e.g. para 36),
wherein a portion (e.g. 22b, see e.g. Fig. 6) of the lead external to the encapsulation material has a thickness measured in a direction perpendicular to a main surface of the encapsulation material and a width measured in a direction parallel to the main surface of the encapsulation material, wherein the thickness of the portion of the lead is greater than the width of the portion of the lead (see e.g. in Fig. 6, wherein 22 is taller than it is wide), and
wherein the lead extends along a longitudinal axis and is untwisted along the longitudinal axis (see e.g. in Figs. 4 and 6, wherein the lead 24 is not twisted along the y-axis; rather, it changes shape as it progresses along the y-axis, from being flat within 16, to being U-shaped at the periphery of 16, is also U-shaped outside of 16, and final is flat at its location farthest from 16).
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 of this title, 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) 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoneda in view of US 2011/0101544 A1 (“Fukuhara”).
Re claim 12, Yoneda teaches claim 11, as discussed above, and further teaches the first lead is a power lead (see e.g. para 28).
Yoneda does not explicitly teach the first lead is connected to a diepad, and the first lead and the diepad are made of a single piece of metal.
Fukuhara teaches and/or would have suggested as obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention, in combination with Yoneda that the first lead is connected to a diepad, and the first lead and the diepad are made of a single piece of metal (see e.g. leads 2g in e.g. Fig. 8, which are integral with the die pad 2c; see e.g. para 55, 59; the lead frame may be made of a metal such as copper alloy, see e.g. para 90).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the invention of Fukuhara to the invention of Yoneda. The motivation to do so is that the combination produces the predictable results of providing a full geometry of the lead frame, including a die pad (not shown in Yoneda) to support the chip, and a geometry that helps power supply (see e.g. para 55, 59, 60, etc.).
Yoneda and Fukuhara together further teach and/or would have suggested as obvious at the time of invention to one of ordinary skill in the art:
13. The semiconductor device of claim 12, wherein the first lead and the diepad have a same thickness (see e.g. Yoneda, para 51).
Applicant has not disclosed that the claimed shape (“same thickness” at the diepad portion and the lead portion) is for a particular unobvious purpose, produces an unexpected result, or is otherwise critical. It has been found that mere changes in the shape of an object, lacking any convincing proof of criticality or unobviousness thereof, is not sufficient for patentability. See MPEP 2144.04(IV)(B), In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). To overcome a prima facie case of obviousness, Applicant must show factual evidence that the particular range is critical or achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art range.
It has been established that “the [obviousness] analysis need not seek out precise teachings directed to the specific subject matter of the challenged claim” because the Office or “a court can take account of the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the art would employ.” KSR Int’ Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 418 (2007). It is also well settled that a reference stands for all of the specific teachings thereof as well as the inferences one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably been expected to draw therefrom. See In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264-65 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoneda in view of US 2011/0074016 A1 (“Narita”).
Yoneda teaches claim 16, as discussed above, and does not explicitly teach wherein twisting the section of the lead is based on a three dimensional coining technique.
However, see e.g. para 66, wherein the lead “is twisted…” as opposed to etching, cutting, etc.
Coining is a term meaning that the metal is subjected to forces to shape the material without cutting or removing material. Hence, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious that the teaching of Yoneda, to “twist” the material, lacking teachings of removal of material, would have been a “coining” technique. Furthermore, the “3D” nature of the lead is apparent from the extensions in the x, y, and z directions.
In any case, Narita teaches and/or would have suggested as obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention, in combination with Yoneda that twisting the section of the lead is based on a three dimensional coining technique (see e.g. para 359).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add the invention of Narita, including the forming of the lead to a desired shape by pressing and coining, to the invention of Yoneda. The motivation to do so is that the combination produces the predictable results of using a method that may be faster and thus more economical than etching (see e.g. para 359).
Conclusion
Conclusion / Prior Art
The prior art made of record, because it is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, but which is not relied upon specifically in the rejections above, is listed on the Notice of References Cited.
US 2025/0022780 A1 (“Bemmerl”) teaches a lead twisted at locations 10A or 10B, inside of an encapsulant 16, and being untwisted on the exterior of 16 (see cover).
US 4,864,079 (“Barlow”) teaches a twisted lead outside of an encapsulant (see e.g. cover figure).
Conclusion / Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kevin Parendo who can be contacted by phone at (571) 270-5030 or by direct fax at (571) 270-6030. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday from 9 am to 4 pm ET.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Billy Kraig, can be reached at (571) 272-8660. The fax 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.
/Kevin Parendo/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Prosecution Insights