DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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.
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.
Claims 1-15 and 20 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.
Regarding claim 1: The limitation “a first encapsulant over the first package component and encapsulating the optical die therein, wherein a first top surface of the optical die is recessed lower than a second top surface of the first encapsulant to form a recess, and wherein the optical die is exposed to the recess” is unclear because it appears that “a first encapsulant… encapsulating the optical die” is contradictory to “wherein the optical die is exposed to the recess”. Since the limitation is unclear, Examiner looked to the specification. To the best of Examiner’s understanding given the number of encapsulants referred to in the disclosure, the first encapsulant corresponds to encapsulant 56 shown in Figs. 9-12, 16-20, and 24-25. However, this encapsulant is not “encapsulating the optical die” in the final device, e.g. in Fig. 12, but encapsulates the optical die at an intermediate step in the manufacturing process, shown in Fig. 9. For the purpose of examination, the first encapsulant is interpreted according to the disclosure, wherein the first encapsulant need not fully encapsulate the optical die. However, the claim should be amended to reflect the structure of the device.
Regarding claims 4 and 9: The limitation “the second encapsulant… comprises curved and concave top surfaces” is confusing because it is unclear whether it requires individual top surfaces to be both curved and concave or if it can include different top surfaces wherein at least one is curved and another is concave. For the purpose of examination, either interpretation is considered to read on the claim. A similar problem is present in claim 9 with regards to the limitation “vertical and straight edges”, and it is similarly interpreted for the purpose of examination as reading on at least one vertical and straight edge and an additional vertical and straight edge, or a vertical edge and a straight edge.
Regarding claim 8: Claim 8 requires “a first interconnect structure underlying the semiconductor substrate” and “an interconnect structure underlying and bonding to the optical die and the package component”. It is unclear whether these are required to be different interconnect structures or if they can correspond to the same interconnect structure. For the purpose of examination, it is interpreted that the first interconnect structure and the interconnect structure can be the same or different or overlapping structures.
Regarding claims 13 and 20: It is unclear what a “partial particle” is. For the purpose of examination, it is considered to be any filler particle with a flat surface at an interface.
Regarding claims 2-7 and 9-15: Dependent claims 2-7 and 9-15 inherently contain all of the deficiencies of any base and/or intervening claims from which they depend.
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 1-5, 7-12, 16-17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hogyoku et al. (US 2018/0211989; hereinafter Hogyoku).
Regarding claim 1: Hogyoku disclosesA package comprising: a first package component (Figs. 10 and 13, re-distribution layer 31) comprising a plurality of redistribution lines therein (see paragraph 0078); a second package component (Fig. 10, second package component includes image sensor 11, on-chip lenses 21, underfill 72, covering portion 24, and glass substrate 23; Fig. 13, same components, except for the underfill 72) over and bonding to the first package component (Figs. 10 and 13 show this), wherein the second package component comprises: an optical die (Figs. 10 and 13, image sensor 11 including on-chip lenses 21) comprising a micro lens (Figs. 10 and 13, any of the on-chip lenses 21), wherein the micro lens faces up (Figs. 10 and 13 show this); and a first encapsulant (Figs. 10-11, underfill 72; alternatively, Fig. 13, covering portion 24) over the first package component and encapsulating the optical die therein, wherein a first top surface of the optical die is recessed lower than a second top surface of the first encapsulant to form a recess (Figs. 10 and 13 show this), and wherein the optical die is exposed to the recess (Figs. 10 and 13 show this).
Regarding claim 2: Hogyoku disclosesThe package of claim 1 (as applied above), wherein the recess extends laterally beyond edges of the optical die (Fig. 13, covering layer 24 extends laterally beyond edges of the optical die), and wherein portions of the recess extend lower than the first top surface of the optical die (see Fig. 13, slanted sidewalls of 24 at the edges of optical die 11, creating portions of the recess extending lower than the first top surface of the optical die).
Regarding claim 3: Hogyoku disclosesThe package of claim 2 (as applied above), wherein the second package component further comprises a second encapsulant encircling the optical die (Fig. 13, light transmissive member 22, which encircles the optical die at the portions where it makes contact with the slanted sidewalls of 24).
Regarding claim 4: Hogyoku disclosesThe package of claim 3 (as applied above), wherein the second encapsulant encircling the optical die comprises curved and concave top surfaces (Fig. 13, regions where the light transmissive member 22 makes contact with metal bumps 71 are curved and concave top surfaces).
Regarding claim 5: Hogyoku disclosesThe package of claim 1 (as applied above), wherein first edges of some portions of the first encapsulant facing the recess are vertically aligned to second edges of the optical die (Fig. 13, portion of covering layer 24 under the slanted sidewall and in contact with the vertical sidewalls/second edges of the optical die 11).
Regarding claim 7: Hogyoku disclosesThe package of claim 1 (as applied above) further comprising a third package component (Fig. 10, wiring layer 63) over and bonding to the first package component (the wiring layer 63 is over and bonded to the first package component via the second package component), wherein an additional top surface of the third package component is coplanar with the second top surface of the first encapsulant (see Fig. 10, outer edges of covering layer 24 comprise second top surfaces of the first encapsulant which are coplanar with the additional top surface of the third package component).
Regarding claim 8: Hogyoku disclosesA package comprising: an optical die (Fig. 28c, image sensor 11) comprising: a semiconductor substrate (see paragraph 0071); a micro lens (Fig. 28c, any of on-chip lenses 21) at a top surface of the semiconductor substrate; and a first interconnect structure (Fig. 28c, re-distribution layer 31) underlying the semiconductor substrate; a package component (Fig. 28c, wiring layer 63 and chip component 121 and a thin layer of the covering portion 24 immediately surrounding it) comprising a device die (Fig. 28c, chip component 121) therein; a first molding compound (Fig. 28c, covering portion 24, see paragraph 0089) molding the optical die and the package component therein (Fig. 28c shows this), wherein a first top surface of the optical die is recessed lower than both of a second top surface of the first molding compound and a third top surface of the package component (Fig. 28c shows this); and an interconnect structure underlying and bonding to the optical die and the package component (Fig. 28c, interconnects 32 bond the optical die and the package component; this interconnect structure underlies the optical die and the package component).
Regarding claim 9: Hogyoku disclosesThe package of claim 8 (as applied above), wherein the first top surface of the optical die is directly underlying a recess in the first molding compound (Fig. 28c shows this, the recess in the molding compound is the gap between the lenses 21 and the glass substrate 23), and wherein the first molding compound facing the recess comprises vertical and straight edges (Fig. 28c, the first molding compound 24 has vertical and straight edges facing the recess on the outer side surfaces of wiring layer 63 (vertical and straight) and the outer side surfaces of underfill 72 (vertical only)).
Regarding claim 10: Hogyoku disclosesThe package of claim 8 (as applied above) further comprising a second molding compound encircling the optical die (Figs. 28c, underfill 72, best depicted in Fig. 11), wherein the second molding compound is in the first molding compound (Fig. 28c shows that the underfill 72 is in the first molding compound 24).
Regarding claim 11: Hogyoku disclosesThe package of claim 10 (as applied above), wherein the second molding compound forms a distinguishable interface with the first molding compound (the specific material of the underfill 72 and the covering portion 24 are not disclosed; however, they are not taught to be the same material, and even if they were the same material, paragraphs 0247-0249 disclose that they are formed in different steps; since they are formed in different steps, it is understood that the interface would be distinguishable by some means).
Regarding claim 12: Hogyoku disclosesThe package of claim 11 (as applied above), wherein the distinguishable interface is a vertical interface (Fig. 28c shows that the distinguishable interface is a vertical interface).
Regarding claim 16: Hogyoku disclosesA package comprising: a first package component (Fig. 13, redistribution layer 31; as applied to claim 17, see Fig. 27, the first package component corresponds to elements not shown in the figure but described in paragraph 0241, i.e. external terminals arranged on the lower surface of the image sensor package 1 are each electrically connected to the image sensor 11 via a through mold via penetrating the covering portion 24) comprising a plurality of redistribution lines therein (see paragraph 0078; as applied to claim 17, metal wiring 62); a second package component (Fig. 13, image sensor 11 and a layer immediately surrounding it; as applied to claim 17, Fig. 27 and a layer immediately surrounding it) over and bonding to the first package component (Fig. 13 shows this; as applied to claim 17, paragraph 0241 describes this), wherein the second package component comprises; an optical die (Fig. 13, image sensor 11; as applied to claim 17, Fig. 27, image sensor 11) comprising a micro lens (Fig. 13, any of the on-chip lenses 21; as applied to claim 17, Fig. 27, any of the on-chip lenses 21), wherein the micro lens faces up; and a first encapsulant (Fig. 13, light transmissive member 21; as applied to claim 17, Fig. 27, covering portion 24A) encapsulating the optical die therein; and a second encapsulant (Fig. 13, covering portion 24; as applied to claim 17, Fig. 27, covering portion 24B) encapsulating the second package component therein, wherein a first top surface (slanted walls of covering portion 24 facing the light transmissive member 21 is a first top surface of the second encapsulant and it is recessed lower than a second top surface of the optical die as shown in Fig. 13; as applied to claim 17, top surface of 24B underlying the surface 13 shown in Fig. 27) of the second encapsulant is recessed lower than a second top surface of the optical die.
Regarding claim 17: Hogyoku discloses
The package of claim 16 (as applied above), wherein the first encapsulant further comprises a third top surface lower than the second top surface of the optical die (top surface of 24A underlying the surface 13 shown in Fig. 27).
Regarding claim 19: Hogyoku disclosesThe package of claim 16 (as applied above), wherein both of a first sidewall of the optical die (Fig. 13, top surface of optical die 11) and a second sidewall of the second encapsulant (Fig. 13, sidewalls of covering portion 24 facing wiring layer 63) face a recess (Fig. 13, the gap in the cover layer containing wiring layers 63, light transmissive layer 22, and optical die 11 is considered to be a recess).
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.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hogyoku et al. (US 2018/0211989; hereinafter Hogyoku), as evidenced by Wikipedia (Back-illuminated sensor, accessed via url: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Back-illuminated_sensor, copy attached to this Office Action).
Hogyoku discloses the package of claim 8, as applied above. Hogyoku fails to teach that the first top surface of the optical die comprises the top surface of the semiconductor substrate. However, Hogyoku does teach that the image sensor 11 is a back-illuminated CMOS image sensor. In back-illuminated CMOS image sensors, the semiconductor substrate is located toward the top surface of the die, directly under the color filters and lenses, as evidenced by Wikipedia (see Figure in introduction). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to prepare the Hogyoku device wherein at the periphery, away from the active area including lens array 21, to include the top surface of the semiconductor substrate as part of the first top surface of the optical die, since back-side illumination image sensors are known to have substrate layers directly beneath the lenses and the filters, and it would be desirable to omit filters and lenses outside of the active area of the die in order to not waste additional components.
Claims 6, 14, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hogyoku et al. (US 2018/0211989; hereinafter Hogyoku) in view of Smith (US Patent No. 9,201,193; hereinafter Smith).
Regarding claims 6, 14, and 18, respectively: Hogyoku discloses the package of claims 1, 8, and 16, respectively, as applied above. Hogyoku fails to teach that the package further comprises an optical fiber facing the microlens, wherein the optical fiber is configured to optically couple to the optical die. However, Smith, also related to image sensors (see abstract and Fig. 3), teaches a fiber optic bundle (Fig. 3, fiber optic tapered bundle 37 and Fig. 6, fiber optic bundle 60) to transmit light from an image intensifier (Fig. 3, image intensifier 38) to a sensor array (see Fig. 3, sensor 34), and teaches providing a micro-lens at the end face of every fiber to couple light to the sensor (see col. 2, lines 25-35). This configuration allows light to be transmitted directly to the appropriate pixel of the sensor, reducing noise. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the Hogyoku device such that optical fibers direct light from an image intensifier or other light source to the micro lenses of the micro lens array, wherein a particular optical fiber faces a particular micro lens, and wherein the particular optical fiber is configured to optically couple to the optical die, based on the teachings of Smith, in order to reduce noise.
Claims 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hogyoku et al. (US 2018/0211989; hereinafter Hogyoku) in view of Wang et al. (US Patent No. 10,777,518; hereinafter Wang), as evidenced by Hou et al. (US Patent No. 10,074,604; hereinafter Hou).
Regarding claim 13: Hogyoku discloses the package of claim 10, as applied above. Hogyoku fails to disclose that the second molding compound comprises a base material, and filler particles in the base material, and wherein the filler particles comprise a partial particle comprising a flat surface contacting the first molding compound. It has been held to be 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.Wang, also related to encapsulating package structures with multiple encapsulants (see title and abstract), teaches a molding compound comprising a base material, and filler particles in the base material, and wherein the filler particles comprises a partial particle comprising a flat surface contacting the first molding compound (see Fig. 14, base material 67, filler particles 68, and partial particles 68b comprising a flat surface contacting the first molding compound comprising 69 and 70). The inclusion of filler particles in the base material allows one of ordinary skill in the art to lower consumption of more expensive binder material or to enhance certain properties of the mixed material such as electrical insulation or thermal dissipation, as evidenced by Hou (see col. 3, lines 45-55). The flat surface including partial particles contacting the first molding compound allows a smooth interface between the molding compounds, without forming pits or bubbles. Since it was a known suitable material as it was previously taught by Wang, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the Hogyoku device by using a second molding compound that comprises a base material, and filler particles in the base material, in order to lower consumption of more expensive binder material or to enhance certain properties of the mixed material, and wherein at the interface contacting the first molding material, the filler particles comprise a partial particle comprising a flat surface contacting the first molding compound, in order to provide a smooth interface without forming pits or bubbles.
Regarding claim 20: Hogyoku discloses the package of claim 16, as applied above. Hogyoku fails to disclose that the second encapsulant comprises a base material, and filler particles in the base material, and wherein the filler particles comprise a partial particle comprising a flat surface, and wherein the flat surface forms a part of an interface between the first encapsulant and the second encapsulant. It has been held to be 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.Wang, also related to encapsulating package structures with multiple encapsulants (see title and abstract), teaches a second encapsulant comprising a base material, and filler particles in the base material, and wherein the filler particles comprises a partial particle comprising a flat surface contacting the first encapsulant (see Fig. 14, base material 67, filler particles 68, and partial particles 68b comprising a flat surface contacting the first encapsulant comprising 69 and 70). The inclusion of filler particles in the base material allows one of ordinary skill in the art to lower consumption of more expensive binder material or to enhance certain properties of the mixed material such as electrical insulation or thermal dissipation, as evidenced by Hou (see col. 3, lines 45-55). The flat surface including partial particles contacting the first molding compound allows a smooth interface between the encapsulants, without forming pits or bubbles. Since it was a known suitable material as it was previously taught by Wang, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the Hogyoku device by using a second encapsulant comprises a base material, and filler particles in the base material, and wherein the filler particles comprise a partial particle comprising a flat surface, and wherein the flat surface forms a part of an interface between the first encapsulant and the second encapsulant in order to lower consumption of more expensive binder material or to enhance certain properties of the mixed material, and in order to provide a smooth interface without forming pits or bubbles.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kirsten D Endresen whose telephone number is (703)756-1533. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday.
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, Thomas Hollweg can be reached at (571)270-1739. 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.
/KIRSTEN D. ENDRESEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2874
/THOMAS A HOLLWEG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2874
Prosecution Insights