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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/25/2024, 3/21/2025, and 4/16/2025 were filed after the mailing date of the Non-final rejection on 7/16/2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The formal drawings filed on 7/25/2024 have been approved 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 12 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.
In claim 12, the phrase “ the first plurality of IPD dies are connected to form a large capacitor with a first capacitance greater than a second capacitance of each IPD dies ” since it is not clear from the claim what makes the first capacitance greater than a second capacitance when the IPD dies are identical.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 2-8 and 10-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by Lin et al. (US 2012/0187568).
With respect to Claims 2 and 11, Lin teaches forming a first independent passive device (IPD) module comprising a first plurality of IPD dies 284 therein, wherein the first plurality of IPD dies 284 comprise a first plurality of passive devices (i.e. capacitor that is free from active devices). The first plurality of passive devices are electrically disconnected from each other since the RDL has not been attached to the IPD dies). Encapsulating the first IPD module in an encapsulant 298. Forming a first plurality of redistribution lines 316 over the first IPD module to form an IPD package, wherein the first plurality of redistribution lines 316 interconnect the first plurality of IPD dies as an integrated passive device (see paragraphs 95-103; Figs. 8g-8l).
With respect to Claim 3, Lin teaches the first plurality of IPD dies 284 are identical to each other (Figs. 8g-8l).
With respect to Claim 4, Lin teaches semiconductor substrates of the first plurality of passive devices are joined to form a continuous semiconductor substrate 280 of the IPD module (see Fig. 7b).
With respect to Claim 5, Lin teaches encapsulating a second IPD module (i.e. to the left or right of in the encapsulant 298. Forming a second plurality of redistribution lines over the second IPD module, wherein the second plurality of redistribution lines interconnect a second plurality of IPD dies 284 in the second IPD module as an additional integrated passive device (see paragraphs 104 – 106; Figs. 8m and 8n)
With respect to Claim 6, Lin teaches at a time before the second plurality of
redistribution lines 318 are formed, the second plurality of passive devices are electrically disconnected from each other (see Figs. 8h and 8i).
With respect to Claim 7, Lin teaches forming a wafer comprising the first plurality of IPD dies 284 therein. Sawing the wafer to cut the first plurality of IPD dies from the wafer and to form the first IPD module (see Figs. 7b, 7c, and 8h-8j).
With respect to Claim 8, Lin teaches sawing the wafer 280 to cut a second plurality of IPD dies from the wafer and to form a second IPD module (see Figs. 7b, 7c, and 8h-8j).
With respect to Claim 10, Lin teaches attaching a power module (i.e. MCM which will generate some level of power) to the first IPD module via PCB 52 (see paragraph 35).
With respect to Claims 13 and 16, Lin teaches sawing at least one wafer 280 to form. A first IPD module comprising a first plurality of IPD dies 284 (i.e. capacitor) therein, wherein the first plurality of IPD dies are electrically disconnected from each other. A second IPD module comprising a second plurality of IPD dies 284 therein, wherein the second plurality of IPD dies are electrically disconnected from each other. Encapsulating both of the first IPD module and the second IPD module in an encapsulant 298 to form a reconstructed wafer. Forming redistribution lines 318 to electrically interconnect first passive devices in the first plurality of IPD dies and to electrically interconnect second passive devices in the second plurality of IPD dies (see paragraphs 95-103; Figs. 8g-8l).
With respect to Claim 14, Lin teaches the first plurality of IPD dies 284 and the second plurality of IPD dies 284 comprise semiconductor substrates. The semiconductor substrates of the first plurality of IPD dies are joined as a continuous semiconductor substrate 280. (see Fig. 7b)
With respect to Claim 15, Lin teaches sawing the reconstructed wafer 280 into a plurality of identical packages, wherein the first IPD module and the second IPD module are in a same package in the plurality of identical packages (see Figs. 7b, 7c and 8n).
With respect to Claim 17, Lin teaches at a time after the first IPD module is
encapsulated in the encapsulant 298, the first IPD module comprises a continuous semiconductor substrate continuously extending into the first plurality of IPD dies 284 (see Figs. 7b, 8m, and 8n).
With respect to Claim 18, Lin teaches forming a first IPD module comprising a first plurality of IPD dies 284 therein, wherein the first plurality of IPD dies are electrically disconnected from each other. Forming a second IPD module comprising a second plurality of IPD dies 284 therein. The second plurality of IPD dies are electrically disconnected from each other. Forming a package comprising the first IPD module and the second IPD module therein. The forming the package comprises forming a first plurality of redistribution lines 318 to interconnect the first plurality of IPD dies 284 as a first integrated passive device. Forming a second plurality of redistribution lines 318 to interconnect the second plurality of IPD dies 284 as a second integrated passive device (see paragraphs 95-103; Figs. 8g-8l).
With respect to Claim 19, Lin teaches encapsulating the first IPD module and the second IPD module in a same encapsulant to form a reconstructed wafer 280 (see Figs. 7b, and 8g - 8i .
With respect to Claim 20, Lin teaches bonding the package to an integrated
fanout package (see Fig. 8j).
With respect to Claim 21, Lin teaches before the package is formed, sawing
the first IPD module and the second IPD module from a same wafer 280 (see Figs. 7b, 8i-8n).
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 2-12 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,798,925. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the application and the patent recite forming a first independent passive device (IPD) module comprising a first plurality of IPD dies therein, wherein the first plurality of IPD dies comprise a first plurality of passive devices. The first plurality of passive devices are electrically disconnected from each other. Encapsulating the first IPD module in an encapsulant. Forming a first plurality of redistribution lines over the first IPD module to form an IPD package, wherein the first plurality of redistribution lines interconnect the first plurality of IPD dies as an integrated passive device.
Claims 13-17 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of U.S. Patent No. 11,798,925. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the application and the patent recite sawing at least one wafer to form: a first IPD module comprising a first plurality of IPD dies therein, wherein the first plurality of IPD dies are electrically disconnected from each other; and a second IPD module comprising a second plurality of IPD dies therein, wherein the second plurality of IPD dies are electrically disconnected from each other. Encapsulating both of the first IPD module and the second IPD module in an encapsulant to form a reconstructed wafer. Forming redistribution lines to electrically interconnect first passive devices in the first plurality of IPD dies, and to electrically interconnect second passive devices in the second plurality of IPD dies.
Claims 18-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 16 of U.S. Patent No. 11,798,925. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both the application and the patent recite forming a first IPD module comprising a first plurality of IPD dies therein. The first plurality of IPD dies are electrically disconnected from each other. Forming a second IPD module comprising a second plurality of IPD dies therein. The second plurality of IPD dies are electrically disconnected from each other; and forming a package comprising the first IPD module and the second IPD module therein. The forming the package comprises forming a first plurality of redistribution lines to interconnect the first plurality of IPD dies as a first integrated passive device;. Forming a second plurality of redistribution lines to interconnect the second plurality of IPD dies as a second integrated passive device.
Allowable Subject Matter
13. Claim 9 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowance subject
matter: none of the prior art of record teaches or suggest the combination of
the first plurality of IPD dies have a first count different from a second count of the second plurality of IPD dies in claim 9 .
Conclusion
14. Any inquiry concerning the communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to Alonzo Chambliss whose telephone number is (571)
272-1927.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's
supervisor, Jacob Y. 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 PMR or Public PMR.
Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PMR
only. For more information about the PMR system see hittp://pair-dkect.usptol gov.
Should you have questions on access to the Private PMR system contact the
Electronic Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
AC/July 16, 2026 /Alonzo Chambliss/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Prosecution Insights