DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 1a and 2d, corresponding to claims 1-3, 7-11, 15-17, in the reply filed on 9/16/26 is acknowledged.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-3, 7-11, 15-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,087,623,m hereafter referred to as the patent. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the current claims are broader.
Regarding claim 1, the patent claims a method of improving interfacial adhesion of a copper-glass interface in a Through Glass Via (TGV) of an electronic device, comprising:
providing a glass substrate with at least one TGV thereon (column 14, lines 10-11);
forming a coating of a curable polymer material on an internal wall of at least one TGV, wherein a viscosity of the curable polymer material before curing is less than 40 Poise (column 14, lines 12-15);
curing the coating of the curable polymer material to form a dielectric liner having a tensile strength greater than about 5 Mpa (column 14, lines 16-19); and
forming a layer of copper on the dielectric liner (column 14, line 20).
With respect to claim 2, the patent (column 14, line 18) claims a dielectric loss of the dielectric liner is less than about 0.002.
As to claim 3, the patent (claim 3) claims forming the coating of a curable polymer material includes dispensing the polymer material on a surface of the substrate, and directing the dispensed polymer material into the at least one TGV to coat the internal wall of the at least one TGV.
In re claim 7, the patent (claim 8) claims directing the dispensed polymer material into the at least one TGV includes applying differential pressure to guide the dispensed polymer material into the at least one TGV.
Concerning claim 8, the patent (claim 8) claims applying differential pressure includes applying a pressure differential between about 10-400 Torr.
Pertaining to claim 9, the patent (claim 9) claims a thickness of the dielectric liner is below about 5 microns.
In claim 10, the patent (claim 10) claims patterning the deposited layer of copper.
Regarding claim 11, the patent claims a method of improving interfacial adhesion of a copper-glass interface in a Through Glass Via (TGV) of an electronic device, comprising:
providing a glass substrate with at least one TGV thereon (column 14, lines 56-57);
dispensing a polymer material having a viscosity below 40 Poise on a surface of the glass substrate (column 14, lines 58-61);
directing the dispensed polymer material into the at least one TGV to form a coating of the polymer material on an internal wall of the at least one TGV (column 14, lines 58-61);
curing the coating of the polymer material on the internal wall to form a dielectric liner having a tensile strength greater than about 5 Mpa (column 14, lines 62-24); and
applying a copper coating on the dielectric liner (column 14, lines 65).
With respect to claim 15, the patent (claim 17) claims directing the dispensed polymer material into the at least one TGV includes applying differential pressure to guide the dispensed polymer material into the at least one TGV.
As to claim 16, the patent (claim 17) claims applying differential pressure includes applying a pressure differential between about 10-400 Torr.
In re claim 17, the patent (claim 18) claims in a thickness of the dielectric liner is below about 5 microns.
Conclusion
Any inquiry should be directed to DAVID A ZARNEKE at (571)272-1937. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Matt Landau can be reached at 571-272-1731. 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.
/DAVID A ZARNEKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2891 9/30/26
Prosecution Insights