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 .
Drawings
The drawings were received on 2/9/26. These drawings are acceptable.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katkar et al. (US 2015/0325543 A1) in view of Somaki et al. (US 5,641,113), Sakurai et al. (US 6,455,785 B1), and Azdasht (US 2010/0051589 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Katkar teaches:
A method of forming a plurality of monolithic solder contact pins [solder column (210); figure 2] on a contact pad layout [area of contact pads (120)] of a substrate [structure (110)], said contact pad layout comprising a plurality of contact pads [contact pads (120)], comprising the steps of:
a) arranging a first solder ball [solder ball (140)] at an arranging position of an arranging layout of a transporting tool [nozzle 240)], said arranging layout of the transporting tool corresponding to the contact pad layout of the substrate [see figure 2],
b) placing the transporting tool opposite the substrate such that the first solder ball is associated with a contact pad [see figure 2],
c) placing first solder ball onto the contact pad [see figure 2],
d) melting the first solder ball and releasing the first solder ball from the transporting tool to contact pad so as to form a solder bump on the contact pad [0007],
e) withdrawing the transporting tool from the substrate [nozzle (240) is inherently withdrawn in order to place each successive solder ball (140.2-140.4)],
f) arranging a second solder ball [solder ball (140.2)] at the arranging position of the arranging layout of the transporting tool [see figure 2],
g) placing the transporting tool opposite the substrate such that the second solder ball is associated with the solder bump [see figure 2],
h) placing the second solder ball onto the solder bump [see figure 2],
i) melting the second solder ball and releasing the second solder ball from the transporting tool to the solder bump so as to form a plurality of monolithic solder contact pins on the plurality of contact pads [each ball is melted and released in order to form multiple solder columns; 0007 and figure 2], and
j) withdrawing the transporting tool from the substrate [nozzle (240) is inherently withdrawn in order to place each successive solder ball (140.3-140.4)].
Katkar does not teach:
picking up a plurality of first solder balls from a solder ball reservoir;
picking up a plurality of second solder balls from a solder ball reservoir
the first/second solder ball is one of a plurality of first/second solder balls;
the first/second solder bump is one of a plurality of first/second solder bumps;
the first solder balls are associated with the plurality of contact pads; and
the claimed steps being performed on multiple solder balls/bumps simultaneously.
Somaki teaches forming a plurality of soldering columns by placing each row of solder balls on a previously placed solder ball and reflowing each row; 4: 17-8:67 and figures 4A-D.
Sakurai teaches forming solder ball columns by thermosonic bonding each successive ball to the previous one; 4:54-5:30 and figures 20-24.
Collectively, Katkar, Somaki, and Sakurai teach it is known to form solder columns by bonding solder balls on top of each other using various bonding methods, wherein each bonding method allows for placing and bonding of each successive solder ball.
Azdasht teaches solder ball contacting device (20) comprising mouthpieces (22) connected to vacuum device (23) and optical fibers (35) connected to a laser source and inserted into the mouthpieces; wherein the mouthpieces pick up a plurality of solder balls (27) from holding tank (25), which are arrayed to correspond to contact surfaces (32) so that the solder balls are arranged, placed, and irradiated by laser at the bonding surfaces simultaneously; 0036-0044 and figures 1 and 4.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention that any known bonding method could be used to form solder ball columns as long as it is capable of placing and bonding each solder ball. In this case, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use Azdasht device (20) to form the solder columns of Katkar or the collective since it is clearly capable of picking up, arranging, placing, bonding, and releasing a plurality of solder balls simultaneously. In doing so, Azdasht solder ball contacting device would pick up a plurality of balls from the reservoir, move to the bonding location, place the plurality of solder balls in contact with contact pads/previous solder balls, melt and release the plurality of solder balls, and then move/withdraw back to the reservoir to repeat the process.
Regarding claim 2, Katkar teaches:
wherein steps f) to j) are repeatedly carried out to increase a height of the monolithic solder contact pins [Katkar repeats the process to form a solder column four balls high, figure 2].
Regarding claim 3, Katkar teaches:
wherein the plurality of solder balls placed last on the monolithic solder contact pins have a lower melting point than the solder balls placed beneath them [balls (140.1) are of gold while the others are of indium; 0008].
Regarding claim 5, Katkar does not teach:
wherein in step a) or f) the solder balls are arranged at the plurality of arranging positions of the arranging layout of the transporting tool by sucking.
However, this claim is met by the incorporation of Azdasht.
Regarding claim 6, Katkar teaches:
wherein in step d) or i) the solder balls are melted by applying laser energy [laser (250)] onto them [0007].
Additionally, as noted above Azdasht uses laser.
Claims 4, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katkar et al. (US 2015/0325543) A1 in view of Somaki et al. (US 5,641,113), Sakurai et al. (US 6,455,785 B1), Azdasht (US 2010/0051589 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Inoue et al. (US 6,460,755 B1).
Regarding claim 4, Katkar does not teach:
wherein between steps a) and b) and/or between steps f) and g) it is checked, in particular by pressure reading of a dynamic pressure at the arranging positions and/or by optically inspecting the arranging positions, whether all of the plurality of arranging positions of the arranging layout are covered with solder balls.
Inoue teaches using CCD camera (80) to image the lower surface of arraying jig (50), which has vacuumed picked up solder balls (61), and processing that image to determine if any solder balls are missing; 10:51-67, 11:1-9, and figure 48.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the Inoue camera inspection concept in order to determine if any solder balls are missing.
Regarding claim 9, Katkar, Somaki, Sakurai, and/or Azdasht teach the following as noted below:
A solder ball placing apparatus comprising
a transporting tool [Azdasht device (20)],
a laser source [Azdasht laser source; 0041], and
a suction generating device [Azdasht vacuum device (23)];
using the transporting tool, the laser source and the suction generating device so as to carry out a method comprising the steps a)-i) [note that the limitations of these steps are addressed in the rejection of claims 1 and 5].
Katkar, Somaki, Sakurai, and Azdasht do not teach:
a controller configured to control the transporting tool, the laser source, and the suction generating device so as to carry out the method.
Inoue teaches a bump forming apparatus comprising controller (85); figure 11.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate a controller into the prior art apparatus in order to automate the apparatus and to configure/program the controller to perform the claimed steps in order to automate the claimed process steps.
Regarding claim 10, the claimed controller and steps are addressed in the rejection of claim 9 above.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Katkar et al. (US 2015/0325543) A1 in view of Somaki et al. (US 5,641,113), Sakurai et al. (US 6,455,785 B1), Azdasht (US 2010/0051589 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hashimoto et al. (US 5,906,309).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Katkar does not teach:
comprising the step of measuring a height of the monolithic solder contact pins; and
wherein the measuring of the height of the monolithic solder contact pins is carried out optically and/or by force reading.
Hashimoto teaches measuring the height of a solder bump using an optical means; abstract.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the Hashimoto measuring concept into Katkar in order to control the quality of the solder columns.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference as applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
/CARLOS J GAMINO/Examiner, Art Unit 1735
/KEITH WALKER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights