DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the applicant's divisional application filed July 15th, 2024. In virtue of this communication, claims 1-20 are currently presented in the instant application.
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 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 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. It is unclear how the conductive alloy can comprise approximately 55% copper and approximately 45% nickel while also comprising approximately 84.2% copper, approximately 12.1% manganese, and approximately 3.7% nickel. For the purposes of examination, claim 4 is understood to depend from claim 3 instead of from claim 2.
Claim Objections
Claims 5 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation “a temperature coefficient” is understood to be --a temperature coefficient of resistance--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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 7, 8, 12-16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jackson (US 2013/0334662 A1).
With respect to claim 7, Jackson teaches an apparatus in Figs. 1a-3 comprising:
a leadframe 22 (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 21, 23, 24);
a die 12 (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 19, 22, 23);
a metal component 18 coupled to the die 12 (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 20-23);
a plurality of posts (metal pillars of 18 and metal pillar bumps 19a, 19b) each having a first end and a second end, wherein the first end of each of the plurality of posts is coupled to the leadframe 22, the second end of each of a first set of the plurality of posts (metal pillars of 18) is coupled to the metal component 18, and the second end of each of a second set of the plurality of posts (metal pillar bumps 19a, 19b) is coupled to the die 12 (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 21-24).
With respect to claim 8, Jackson teaches the apparatus of claim 7, wherein: the metal component 18 is a conductive alloy (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 20, 25).
With respect to claim 12, Jackson teaches the apparatus of claim 7, wherein: the metal component 18 includes a perforated surface (see Fig. 3 and paragraph 26 and note only small strip 48g between perforations in 48; 48 is equivalent to 18).
With respect to claim 13, Jackson teaches the apparatus of claim 7, wherein: each of the plurality of posts (metal pillars of 18 and metal pillar bumps 19a, 19b) is conductive (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 21-25).
With respect to claim 14, Jackson teaches the apparatus of claim 7, wherein: each of the plurality of posts (metal pillars of 18 and metal pillar bumps 19a, 19b) is comprised of copper (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 20-23; note copper pillar bump).
With respect to claim 15, Jackson teaches the apparatus of claim 7, wherein: the leadframe 22 is a single level leadframe (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 21, 23, 24; 22 is single level).
With respect to claim 16, Jackson teaches a device in Figs. 1a-3 comprising:
a leadframe 22 (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 21, 23, 24); and
a die 12 including a conductive alloy 18 (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 19-23); wherein:
the leadframe 22 is coupled to the die 12 with a plurality of posts (metal pillars of 18 and metal pillar bumps 19a, 19b) (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 21-24); and
a first set of the plurality of posts (metal pillars of 18) each have a first end coupled to the conductive alloy 18 and a second end coupled to the leadframe 22 (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 21-24); and
a second set of the plurality of posts (metal pillar bumps 19a, 19b) each have a first end coupled to the die 12 and a second end coupled to the leadframe 22 (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 21-24).
With respect to claim 18, Jackson teaches the device of claim 16, wherein: the leadframe 22 and the die 12 comprise an integrated circuit package (see Figs. 1a-2, Abstract, and paragraphs 19-23).
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 1-6, 9-11, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jackson (US 2013/0334662 A1) in view of Udompanyavit et al. (US 2010/0001382 A1; hereinafter Udompanyavit).
With respect to claim 1, Jackson discloses a semiconductor device in Figs. 1a-2 comprising:
a leadframe 22 (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 21, 23, 24);
a semiconductor die 12 having a conductive alloy 18, the conductive alloy 18 configured to be a current sense element (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 19-23); and
first and second conductive posts (metal pillars of 18) coupling the leadframe 22 to the conductive alloy 18 of the semiconductor die 12 (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 21-24).
Jackson does not explicitly disclose wherein the conductive alloy comprises copper and nickel.
Udompanyavit discloses a semiconductor device 100 in at least Figs. 1, 2A, and 3 comprising a conductive alloy 115 configured as a current sense element, the conductive alloy 115 comprising copper and nickel (see Figs. 1, 2A, 3, and paragraphs 24, 26; note Constantan and Manganin which both comprise copper and nickel; also see paragraph 29 of applicant’s original specification).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the conductive alloy of Jackson would comprise copper and nickel as taught by Udompanyavit because such materials are well known in the art for use in current sense elements and it has been held by the courts that selection of a prior art material on the basis of its suitability for its intended purpose is within the level of ordinary skill (see MPEP 2144.07). Additionally, a conductive alloy comprising such materials has a low temperature coefficient of resistivity (TCR) and low TCR materials facilitates providing a precise resistance as part of making an accurate measurement of current or voltage (see paragraph 23).
With respect to claim 2, the combination of Jackson and Udompanyavit discloses the semiconductor device of claim 1, in which the conductive alloy 115 comprises approximately 55% copper and approximately 45% nickel (see Udompanyavit: Figs. 1, 2A, 3, and paragraphs 24, 26, note Constantan; also see paragraph 29 of applicant’s original specification).
With respect to claim 3, the combination of Jackson and Udompanyavit discloses the semiconductor device of claim 1, in which the conductive alloy 115 also comprises manganese (see Udompanyavit: Figs. 1, 2A, 3, and paragraphs 24, 26, note Manganin; also see paragraph 29 of applicant’s original specification).
With respect to claim 4, the combination of Jackson and Udompanyavit discloses the semiconductor device of claim 3, in which the conductive alloy 115 comprises approximately 84.2% copper, approximately 12.1% manganese, and approximately 3.7% nickel (see Udompanyavit: Figs. 1, 2A, 3, and paragraphs 24, 26, note Manganin; also see paragraph 29 of applicant’s original specification).
With respect to claim 5, the combination of Jackson and Udompanyavit discloses the semiconductor device of claim 1, in which the conductive alloy 115 has a temperature coefficient of resistance of approximately 0.000002/°C (see Udompanyavit: Fig. 1 and paragraphs 22-24, 26; note materials Constantan and Manganin; also see paragraph 21 of the applicants original specification; same material same properties).
With respect to claim 6, the combination of Jackson and Udompanyavit discloses the semiconductor device of claim 1, in which the conductive alloy 115 has a perforated surface (see Udompanyavit: Figs. 1, 3, and paragraph 30; note openings 320 in element 115. Also see Jackson: Fig. 3 and paragraph 26 and note only small strip 48g between perforations in 48).
With respect to claim 9, Jackson discloses the apparatus of claim 7.
Jackson does not explicitly disclose wherein: the metal component includes manganese.
Udompanyavit discloses an apparatus 100 in at least Figs. 1, 2A, and 3 comprising a metal component 115 (configured as a current sense element) wherein the metal component 115 includes manganese (see Figs. 1, 2A, 3, and paragraphs 24, 26, note Manganin; also see paragraph 29 of applicant’s original specification).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the metal component of Jackson would include manganese as taught by Udompanyavit because manganese is well known in the art for use in current sense elements and it has been held by the courts that selection of a prior art material on the basis of its suitability for its intended purpose is within the level of ordinary skill (see MPEP 2144.07). Additionally, a conductive alloy comprising such a material has a low temperature coefficient of resistivity (TCR) and low TCR materials facilitates providing a precise resistance as part of making an accurate measurement of current or voltage (see paragraph 23).
With respect to claim 10, Jackson discloses the apparatus of claim 7.
Jackson does not explicitly disclose wherein: the metal component includes approximately 84.2% copper, approximately 12.1% manganese, and approximately 3.7% nickel.
Udompanyavit discloses an apparatus 100 in at least Figs. 1, 2A, and 3 comprising a metal component 115 (configured as a current sense element) wherein: the metal component includes approximately 84.2% copper, approximately 12.1% manganese, and approximately 3.7% nickel (see Udompanyavit: Figs. 1, 2A, 3, and paragraphs 24, 26, note Manganin; also see paragraph 29 of applicant’s original specification).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the metal component of Jackson would include approximately 84.2% copper, approximately 12.1% manganese, and approximately 3.7% nickel as taught by Udompanyavit because such materials are well known in the art for use in current sense elements and it has been held by the courts that selection of a prior art material on the basis of its suitability for its intended purpose is within the level of ordinary skill (see MPEP 2144.07). Additionally, a metal component comprising such materials has a low temperature coefficient of resistivity (TCR) and low TCR materials facilitates providing a precise resistance as part of making an accurate measurement of current or voltage (see paragraph 23).
With respect to claim 11, Jackson discloses the apparatus of claim 7.
Jackson does not explicitly disclose wherein: the metal component has a temperature coefficient of resistance of approximately 0.000002/°C.
Udompanyavit discloses an apparatus 100 in at least Figs. 1, 2A, and 3 comprising a metal component 115 (configured as a current sense element) wherein: the metal component has a temperature coefficient of resistance of approximately 0.000002/°C (see Udompanyavit: Fig. 1 and paragraphs 22-24, 26; note materials Constantan and Manganin; also see paragraph 21 of the applicants original specification; same material same properties).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the metal component of Jackson would have a temperature coefficient of resistance of approximately 0.000002/°C as taught by Udompanyavit because a metal component comprising such a low temperature coefficient of resistivity (TCR) facilitates providing a precise resistance as part of making an accurate measurement of current or voltage (see paragraph 23).
With respect to claim 17, Jackson discloses the device of claim 16, wherein: the die 12 is a semiconductor die (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 19-23; integrated circuit die is a semiconductor die); the conductive alloy 18 is configured to be a current sense element (see Figs. 1a-2 and paragraphs 19-23).
Jackson does not explicitly disclose the conductive alloy includes copper and nickel.
Udompanyavit discloses a device 100 in at least Figs. 1, 2A, and 3 comprising a conductive alloy 115 configured as a current sense element, the conductive alloy 115 includes copper and nickel (see Figs. 1, 2A, 3, and paragraphs 24, 26; note Constantan and Manganin which both comprise copper and nickel; also see paragraph 29 of applicant’s original specification).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the conductive alloy of Jackson would include copper and nickel as taught by Udompanyavit because such materials are well known in the art for use in current sense elements and it has been held by the courts that selection of a prior art material on the basis of its suitability for its intended purpose is within the level of ordinary skill (see MPEP 2144.07). Additionally, a conductive alloy comprising such materials has a low temperature coefficient of resistivity (TCR) and low TCR materials facilitates providing a precise resistance as part of making an accurate measurement of current or voltage (see paragraph 23).
With respect to claim 19, Jackson discloses the device of claim 18.
Jackson does not disclose wherein: the integrated circuit package is a quad flat no-lead (QFN) package.
Udompanyavit discloses a device 100 in at least Figs. 1, 2, and 3 wherein: an integrated circuit package is a quad flat no-lead (QFN) package (see Figs. 1, 2A, 3, and paragraph 21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the integrated circuit package of Jackson would be a quad flat no-lead (QFN) package as taught by Udompanyavit because quad flat no-lead packages are well known in the art and the selection of a QFN would have flown naturally to one of ordinary skill in the art as necessitated by the specific requirements of a given application (see MPEP 2144 I).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jackson (US 2013/0334662 A1).
With respect to claim 20, Jackson discloses the device of claim 16.
Jackson does not explicitly disclose wherein: the die includes a transistor with a drain and a source.
However, the die 12 of Jackson is an integrated circuit die (see Figs. 1a-3) and it is well known in the art that integrated circuit die include transistors with a drain and a source (see MPEP 2144 I).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the die of Jackson would include a transistor with a drain and a source because transistor with a drain and a source are the fundamental components of integrated circuit die technology (see MPEP 2144 I).
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JORDAN M KLEIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7544. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Sue Purvis can be reached at 571-272-1236. 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.
/J.M.K/Examiner, Art Unit 2893
/SUE A PURVIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Prosecution Insights