DETAILED ACTION
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Cross-Reference to Related Applications
2. This application is a CON of 17/874,851 07/27/2022 PAT 12300571 which is a DIV of 16/529,023 08/01/2019 PAT 11538735 which claims benefit of 62/784,941 12/26/2018.
Preliminary amendment
3. Preliminary amendment filed on 08/13/2024 has been acknowledged and considered.
In the Preliminary amendment, the applicants have been canceled claim 1 and added new claims 2-21.
Claims 2-21 are currently pending in the application.
Oath/Declaration
4. The oath/declaration filed on 07/19/2024 is acceptable.
Information Disclosure Statement
5. The office acknowledges receipt of the following items from the applicant:
Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on 07/19/2024.
Specification
6. The specification is objected to for the following reason: 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 (see MPEP 606.01).
A title such as – INTEGRATED CIRCUIT PACKAGE INCLUDING A SOCKET ATTACHING TO A REDISTRIBUTION STRUCTURE – or is suggested by the applicant.
Note that the claims are directed to semiconductor device only, not including a method of making a semiconductor device.
The specification needs to be updated.
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.
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.
7. Claims 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Lin et al., hereafter “Lin” (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0151502 A1) in view of LIN et al., hereafter “LIN” (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0233452 A1) and further in view of ARIMA H (WO-2013/118501 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Lin discloses a device comprising:
a package component comprising an integrated circuit die (35), a redistribution structure (43) over the integrated circuit die (35), and a socket (68, see connector (116) refers as socket in Fig. 4A in Tucker et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2016/0330854 A1)) over the redistribution structure (43) (Fig. 14A and para [0052]-[0056]).
Lin discloses the features of the claimed invention as discussed above, but does not disclose a mechanical brace attached to a first side of the package component, the mechanical brace physically contacting the socket, the mechanical brace comprising a soft layer and a rigid layer, the soft layer disposed between the rigid layer and the socket; and a thermal module attached to a second side of the package component, the thermal module being thermally coupled to the integrated circuit die.
LIN, however, discloses a mechanical brace (200) attached to a first side of the package component (300A), the mechanical brace (200) physically contacting the socket (322), and a thermal module (700A) attached to a second side of the package component (300A), the thermal module (700A) being thermally coupled to the integrated circuit die (302) (Fig. 1B and para [0020]-[0028]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Lin to provide a mechanical brace attached to a first side of the package component, the mechanical brace physically contacting the socket, and a thermal module attached to a second side of the package component, the thermal module being thermally coupled to the integrated circuit die as taught by LIN for a purpose of providing a connection of the package component between the thermal module and the mechanical brace.
Lin and LIN disclose the features of the claimed invention as discussed above, but does not disclose the mechanical brace comprising a soft layer and a rigid layer, the soft layer disposed between the rigid layer and the socket.
ARIMA, however, discloses the mechanical brace (120) comprising a soft layer (121 including resin layer 124) and a rigid layer (122 including 3 of metal layers 125) (Fig. 8a-8b and English Text).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Lin and LIN to provide the mechanical brace comprising a soft layer and a rigid layer as taught by ARIMA H for a purpose of providing a better support for the package component for the semiconductor device.
Regarding claim 13, Lin, LIN and ARIMA H (citations to Lin unless otherwise noted) disclose wherein the rigid layer (122) has a first thickness, the soft layer (121) has a second thickness, and the first thickness is greater than the second thickness (Fig. 8(b) in ARIMA H).
8. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Lin, LIN and ARIMA H in view of Lynch (U.S. Patent No. 7,706,144 B2).
Regarding claim 12, Lin, LIN and ARIMA H disclose the features of the claimed invention as discussed above, but does not disclose further comprising bolts extending through the thermal module, the mechanical brace, and the package component.
Lynch, however, discloses further comprising bolts (304) extending through the thermal module (126), the mechanical brace (106), and the package component (112) (Fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Lin, LIN and ARIMA H to provide bolts extending through the thermal module, the mechanical brace, and the package component as taught by Lynch for a purpose of providing of securing attaching the thermal module, the package component and the chemical brace for the semiconductor device.
9. Claims 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Lin, LIN and ARIMA H in view of FANG et al., hereafter “FANG” (U.S. Publication No. 2019/0013289 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Lin, LIN and ARIMA H disclose the features of the claimed invention as discussed above, but does not disclose wherein the mechanical brace has a square shape.
FANG, however, discloses wherein the mechanical brace (51) has a square shape (Fig. 5A and para [0067]).
It would have been an obvious matter of the design choice to provide wherein the mechanical brace has a square shape in order to increase the volume of the chip, since it has been held within the general skill of a worker in the art to select any shape of the mechanical brace on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claims 15-16, Lin, LIN and ARIMA H disclose the features of the claimed invention as discussed above, but does not disclose wherein the mechanical brace has a non-truncated or truncated circular shape.
FANG, however, discloses wherein the mechanical brace (51) has a circle shape (Fig. 5B and para [0068]).
It would have been an obvious matter of the design choice to provide wherein the mechanical brace has a truncated or non-truncated circle in order to increase more support oforthe chip, since it has been held within the general skill of a worker in the art to select any shape of the mechanical brace on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
10. Claims 17-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over ARIMA H (WO-2013/118501 A1) in view of LIN et al., hereafter “LIN” (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0233452 A1).
Regarding claim 17, ARIMA H discloses a device comprising:
a mechanical brace (120) comprising:
a first layer (121) having a first stiffness; and
a second layer (122) having a second stiffness,
the second stiffness (122, 3 of 135 are same material as the core layer 123) greater than the first stiffness (121, nickel or iron 124); and a thermal module (139) (Fig. 12).
ARIMA H discloses the features of the claimed invention as discussed above, but does not disclose a package component between the thermal module and the mechanical brace, the package component comprising a module socket, the first layer of the mechanical brace contacting the module socket, the module socket having a third stiffness, the third stiffness greater than the first stiffness.
LIN, however, discloses a package component (300A) between the thermal module (700A) and the mechanical brace (200), the package component (200) comprising a module socket (322) (Fig. 1B).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of ARIMA H to provide a package component between the thermal module and the mechanical brace, the package component comprising a module socket as taught by LIN for a purpose of providing a connection of the package component between the thermal module and the mechanical brace.
Then, first layer (121) of the mechanical brace (120) of ARIMA H will be obviously contacting the module socket (322 in LIN), but ARIMA H and LIN does not disclose the module socket having a third stiffness, the third stiffness greater than the first stiffness.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date was made to provide the module socket having a third stiffness, the third stiffness greater than the first stiffness as cited in the claims above to improve the performance of the semiconductor device, since it has been held within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 18, ARIMA H and LIN (citations to ARIMA H unless otherwise noted) discloses wherein the second layer of the mechanical brace comprises a metal, but does not disclose the first layer of the mechanical brace comprises an elastomer.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date was made to provide the first layer of the mechanical brace comprises an elastomer as cited in the claims above to improve the performance of the semiconductor device, since it has been held within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Regarding claim 20, ARI wherein the first layer (121) has a first thickness, the second layer (122) has a second thickness, and the second thickness is greater than the first thickness (Fig. 12).
11. Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over ARIMA H and LIN in view of Lynch (U.S. Patent No. 7,706,144 B2).
Regarding claim 21, Lin, LIN and ARIMA H disclose the features of the claimed invention as discussed above including further comprising a thermal interface material (704) between the package component (300A) and the thermal module (700A) in LIN, but does not disclose further comprising bolts extending through the thermal module, the mechanical brace, and the package component.
Lynch, however, discloses further comprising bolts (304) extending through the thermal module (126), the mechanical brace (106), and the package component (112) (Fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of ARIMA H and LIN to provide bolts extending through the thermal module, the mechanical brace, and the package component as taught by Lynch for a purpose of providing of securing attaching the thermal module, the package component and the chemical brace for the
semiconductor device.
Allowable Subject Matter
12. The following is a statement of reason for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 2, Lin et al., hereafter “Lin” (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0151502 A1) discloses a device comprising a package component comprising: integrated circuit dies (35); an encapsulant (42) around the integrated circuit dies (35); a redistribution structure (43) over the encapsulant (42), the redistribution structure (43) comprising redistribution lines (44) that are electrically coupled to the integrated circuit dies (35); and a socket (68) attached to the redistribution structure (43) (Fig. 14A).
Lynch (U.S. Patent No. 7,706,144 B2) discloses a bolt (304) extending through the mechanical brace (106) and the package component (112) (Fig. 6).
Lin and Lynch, however, either alone or together in any combination, do not disclose, teach, or otherwise suggest a feature of “a mechanical brace over the socket, and the mechanical brace having an opening exposing the socket, the mechanical brace comprising a soft layer and a rigid layer, the soft layer disposed between the rigid layer and the socket” as cited in the independent claim 2.
Claims 3-10 are directly depend on the independent claim 2, then, they are also being allowed.
Claim 19 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Cited Prior Arts
13. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Chen et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2018/0151507 A1) discloses a die is mounted (15) over the front side of the first insulating layer. The die is encapsulated with an encapsulant. The connectors are formed (25) over the die, and coupled to die connectors. A dicing tape is attached to the connectors, and the carrier is removed. A cutting device is aligned (45) to a backside of the first insulating layer using the alignment pattern. The first insulating layer and the encapsulant are cut from the backside of the first insulating layer (Abstract).
Conclusion
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Phuc T. Dang whose telephone number is 571-272-1776. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00 am-5:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Jacob Choi can be reached on 469-295-9060. 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.
/PHUC T DANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights