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) 1-4, 6, 8-9, 11-13, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Baek et al. (Pub. No. US 2018/0053732).
As to claim 1, Baek discloses an electronic device 100C, comprising:
a substrate structure 110 having a first conductive via 113, a second conductive via 113, and a dummy via pattern 110B;
a first circuit structure 142;
a control unit 120 electrically connected to the first conductive via through a first part of the first circuit structure; and
a first electronic unit 230 electrically connected to the second conductive via through a second part of the first circuit structure,
wherein the dummy via pattern is electrically insulated from the first conductive via and the second conductive via (fig. 14).
As to claim 2, Baek discloses a protection layer 261 surrounding the first electronic unit.
As to claim 3, Baek discloses that the first conductive via, the second conductive via, and the dummy via pattern comprise the same material (¶0092 discloses that each of the vias may be a conductive material).
As to claim 6, Baek discloses that the first electronic unit comprises a chip, a die, an integrated circuit, a diode, a capacitor, a resistor, an inductor, or a sensing element (¶0107; 0043).
As to claim 8, Baek discloses that a width of the substrate structure is greater than a width of the first electronic unit (fig. 14).
As to claim 9, Baek discloses a second electronic unit 210, wherein the first electronic unit and the second electronic unit are on the same side of the substrate structure (fig. 13).
As to claim 11, Baek discloses a method for forming an electronic device 100C, comprising:
forming a substrate structure 110 having a first conductive via 113, a second conductive via 113, and a dummy via pattern 110b;
forming a first circuit structure 142;
forming a control unit 121 electrically connected to the first conductive via through a first part of the first circuit structure;
forming a first electronic unit 230 electrically connected to the second conductive via through a second part of the first circuit structure,
wherein the dummy via pattern is electrically insulated from the first conductive via and the second conductive via (fig. 14).
As to claim 12, Baek discloses forming a protection layer 261 surrounding the first electronic unit.
As to claim 13, Baek discloses forming a second electronic unit 210, wherein the first electronic unit and the second electronic unit are on the same side of the substrate structure (fig. 13).
As to claim 15, Baek discloses that the first conductive via, the second conductive via, and the dummy via pattern comprise the same material (¶0092 discloses that each of the vias may be a conductive material).
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) 4 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek et al. (Pub. No. US 2018/0053732).
As to claim 4, Baek does not explicitly disclose that the first conductive via and the second conductive via comprise copper (Cu), tin (Sn), nickel (Ni), silver Ag), gold (Au), titanium (Ti), molybdenum (Mo), tungsten (W), or aluminum (Al).
Baek discloses that the material of each of the vias is a 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 first conductive via and the second conductive via of Baek comprise copper (Cu), tin (Sn), nickel (Ni), silver Ag), gold (Au), titanium (Ti), molybdenum (Mo), tungsten (W), or aluminum (Al) since 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.
As to claim 7, Baek does not disclose that a thickness of the substrate structure is greater than a thickness of the first electronic unit.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the thickness of the substrate structure be greater than a thickness of the first electronic unit, 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).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baek et al. (Pub. No. US 2018/0053732) in view of Chen (Pub. No. US 2016/0093572).
As to claim 5, Baek does not disclose that the control unit comprises a transistor element.
Chen discloses a chip 202 (fig. 4) comprising a transistor element (¶0016).
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 control unit of comprise a transistor element as similarly taught by Chen in order to provide a chip capable of controlling circuits.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 and 14 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 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 claim 10, a combination of limitations that a conductive material disposed between the control unit and the substrate structure, wherein the conductive material has a curved edge. None of the reference art of record discloses or renders obvious such a combination.
Regarding dependent claim 14, 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 11, a combination of limitations that disclosing forming a conductive material disposed between the control unit and the substrate structure, wherein the conductive material has a curved edge. 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.
Liu et al. (Pub. No. US 2024/0063098) discloses a substrate having a first via, a second via, and a dummy via pattern.
Kim et al. (Pub. No. US 2012/0292621) discloses a substrate having a first via and a dummy via.
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