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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6-9, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li (Pub. No. US 2023/0092816).
As to claim 1, Li discloses an electronic device (fig. 3), comprising:
at least one electrical connection structure, wherein the at least one electrical connection structure comprises:
a first substrate 12;
a first conductive pad 14 disposed on the first substrate, wherein the first conductive pad has a top surface and a side surface; a second substrate;
a second conductive pad 13a disposed on the second substrate;
a first conductive material (fig. 3, see material covering O1’; ¶0068 discloses pad 13a is formed by stacking) disposed on the second conductive pad;
a through-hole O1, O1’, O2 passing through the first conductive pad and the first substrate; and
a second conductive material 15 partially disposed within the through-hole and is at least partially in contact with the top surface and the side surface of the first conductive pad and the first conductive material.
As to claim 2, Li discloses an insulating layer 16 disposed on the second substrate; and an intermediate layer disposed between the insulating layer and the first substrate (¶0071 discloses that the quantity of adhesion layer 16 is plural).
As to claim 6, Li discloses that a portion of the insulating layer is disposed between the first conductive material and the second conductive pad (fig. 3, see insulation between bottom portion 152 and second conductive pad).
As to claim 7, Li discloses an insulating layer 16 disposed on the second substrate, wherein the insulating layer and the second conductive pad are separated by a first distance, and the first distance is greater than or equal to 0 (fig. 3).
As to claim 8, Li discloses that a maximum length of the second conductive pad is less than or equal to a maximum length of the first conductive material (fig. 3).
As to claim 9, Li discloses a maximum length of the first conductive material is less than or equal to a maximum length of the second conductive pad (fig. 3).
As to claim 15, Li discloses that a maximum height of an upper portion of the first conductive material is smaller than a maximum height of a lower portion of the first conductive material (fig. 3, see upper portion by opening O1 and lower portion including opening O1’ stacked on top).
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(s) 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li (Pub. No. US 2023/0092816).
As to claim 12, Li discloses an upper portion of the first conductive material and a lower portion of the first conductive material (fig. 3, see upper portion by opening O1 and lower portion including opening O1’ stacked on top).
However, Li does not disclose that a maximum length of an upper portion of the first conductive material is greater than a maximum length of a lower portion of the first conductive material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the maximum length of an upper portion of the first conductive material be greater than a maximum length of a lower portion of the first conductive material, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
As to claim 13, Li discloses an upper portion of the first conductive material and a lower portion of the first conductive material (fig. 3, see upper portion by opening O1 and lower portion including opening O1’ stacked on top).
However, Li does not disclose that a maximum height of an upper portion of the first conductive material is greater than a maximum height of a lower portion of the first conductive material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the maximum height of an upper portion of the first conductive material be greater than a maximum height of a lower portion of the first conductive material, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
As to claim 14, Li discloses an upper portion of the first conductive material and a lower portion of the first conductive material (fig. 3, see upper portion by opening O1 and lower portion including opening O1’ stacked on top).
However, Li does not disclose that a maximum height of an upper portion of the first conductive material is equal to a maximum height of a lower portion of the first conductive material.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the maximum height of an upper portion of the first conductive material be equal to a maximum height of a lower portion of the first conductive material, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component. A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-5, 10-11, 16-20 are 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.
Regarding dependent claim 3, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest, in combining with other limitations within the claim and limitation recited in claims 1 and 2, a combination of limitations that discloses wherein a top surface of the first conductive material is higher than a top surface of the insulating layer and not higher than a top surface of the intermediate layer. None of the reference art of record discloses or renders obvious such a combination.
Regarding dependent claim 5, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest, in combining with other limitations within the claim and limitation recited in claims 1 and 2, a combination of limitations that discloses wherein the intermediate layer is at least partially in contact with the first conductive material, and the through-hole passes through the intermediate layer and exposes a portion of the first conductive material. None of the reference art of record discloses or renders obvious such a combination.
Regarding dependent claim 10, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest, in combining with other limitations within the claim and limitation recited in claims 1 and 2, a combination of limitations that discloses that the second conductive material has an extension portion, the extension portion is in contact with the first conductive material, and the extension portion has a first width, the second conductive material has a second width at an interface between the first substrate and the intermediate layer, and the first width is greater than the second width. None of the reference art of record discloses or renders obvious such a combination.
Regarding dependent claim 16, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest, in combining with other limitations within the claim and limitation recited in claim 1, a combination of limitations that discloses another electrical connection structure, wherein the another electrical connection structure is electrically connected to the at least one electrical connection structure. None of the reference art of record discloses or renders obvious such a combination.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lee et al. (Pub. No. US 2009/0283315) discloses a first pad, a second pad, a first conductive material, and a second conductive material.
Huang et al. (Pub. No. US 2023/0134317) discloses a first pad with a through hole, a second pad, and a conductive material filling the through hole.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMOL H PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-7833. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30AM-6:00PM.
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, TIMOTHY THOMPSON can be reached at (571) 272-2342. 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.
/AMOL H PATEL/Examiner, Art Unit 2847
/TIMOTHY J THOMPSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2847
Prosecution Insights