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 are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “a plurality of lines arranged along a lateral direction perpendicular to the vertical direction” of claim 10 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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) 1-5 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (US2025/0087624A1) (hereafter Lin) in view of JP-WO2012165313A1 (hereafter JP ‘313).
With respect to claim 1, Lin teaches a bonding head comprising: the collet (100) comprising a metal plate (110) and a deformation plate (120) on a lower surface of the metal plate (figures 7B-C; and paragraph 26 and 88-95), wherein the collet defines an aperture (140) and a plurality of vacuum lines (131/135/150), the aperture extends through the metal plate and a portion of the deformation plate (figures 7B-C), and the plurality of vacuum lines extend through the metal plate and the deformation plate (figures 7B-C), wherein the deformation plate comprises a protrusion (120b) that protrudes in a vertical direction from a lower surface of the deformation plate, and wherein a lower surface of the protrusion comprises a first area that has a curved surface with a convex shape (figures 7B-C; and paragraphs 88-95).
With respect to claim 1, Lin does not teach a head body; and the collet detachably attached to a lower surface of the head body.
However, JP ‘313 teaches a head body (6); and the collet (4) detachably attached (with screws) to a lower surface of the head body (figures; and machine translation).
At the time of filing the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the frame/bead body of JP ‘313 on the device of Lin in order to removably connect the device of Lin to a Z-axis moving apparatus.
With respect to claim 2, Lin teaches wherein a distance in the vertical direction between an uppermost end and a lowermost end of the first area of the lower surface of the protrusion is 30 μm to 80 μm (figure 7B; and paragraph 95).
With respect to claim 3, Lin teaches wherein the aperture (140) of the collet vertically overlaps (broadest reasonable interpretation) a lowermost end of the first area of the lower surface of the protrusion (120b) (figures 7B-C).
With respect to claim 4, Lin is silent with respect to the degree o the curvature of the first area of the lower surface of the protrusion; however, is the examiner’s position that the curvature is merely an obvious design choice. Accordingly, the artisan would have been motivated to utilize a protrusion of 0.002 mm.sup.−1 to 0.005 mm.sup.−1 in order to obtain the desired contact area.
With respect to claim 5, Lin teaches wherein an elastic modulus of the deformation plate
is 3 MPa to 5 MPa (paragraph 92), and an elastic modulus of the metal plate (110) is greater than the elastic modulus of the deformation plate (120) (paragraph 26). Note that the materials described by Lin for the metal plate (110) intrinsically have an elastic modulus great than that of the deformation plate.
With respect to claim 11, Lin teaches a semiconductor chip bonding apparatus comprising: the collet (100) comprises a metal plate (110) and a deformation plate (120) (figures 7B-C; and paragraph 26 and 88-95); a vacuum pump (paragraphs 31-32 and 64); and a pressurizer (pneumatic pressure) connected to the head body of the bonding head (figure 7B; and paragraph 90), wherein the collet of the bonding head defines: an aperture (140) extending through the metal plate and a portion of the deformation plate; and a plurality of vacuum lines (131/135/150) extending through the metal plate and the deformation plate, wherein the deformation plate of the collet comprises a protrusion (120b) that protrudes in a vertical direction from a lower surface of the deformation plate, wherein a lower surface of the protrusion of the deformation plate comprises a first area that has a curved surface with a convex shape, and wherein the aperture of the collet and each of the plurality of vacuum lines of the collet vertically overlap (broadest reasonable interpretation) the protrusion of the deformation plate of the collet (figures 7B-C; and paragraphs 88-95).
With respect to claim 11, Lin does not teach a head body, wherein the collet is attached to a lower surface of the head body; and a vacuum pump connected to the head body of the bonding head.
However, JP ‘313 teaches a head body (6); and the collet (4) is attached (with screws) to a lower surface of the head body (figures; and machine translation); and a vacuum pump (suction pump 12) connected to the head body (6) of the bonding head (figures; and machine translation).
At the time of filing the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the frame/head body of JP ‘313 on the device of Lin in order to removably connect the device of Lin to a Z-axis moving apparatus.
With respect to claim 12, JP ‘313 teaches wherein the vacuum pump (suction pump 12) is connected to the plurality of vacuum lines (10a, 10b) of the collet (7) through the head body (6), and the vacuum pump is configured to generate a negative pressure in the plurality of vacuum lines of the collet (figures; and machine translation).
Claim(s) 1-5, 11, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (US2025/0087624A1) (hereafter Lin) in view of Choi et al. (US2023/0163094 A1) (hereafter Choi).
With respect to claim 1, Lin teaches a bonding head comprising: the collet (100) comprising a metal plate (110) and a deformation plate (120) on a lower surface of the metal plate (figures 7B-C; and paragraph 26 and 88-95), wherein the collet defines an aperture (140) and a plurality of vacuum lines (131/135/150), the aperture extends through the metal plate and a portion of the deformation plate (figures 7B-C), and the plurality of vacuum lines extend through the metal plate and the deformation plate (figures 7B-C), wherein the deformation plate comprises a protrusion (120b) that protrudes in a vertical direction from a lower surface of the deformation plate, and wherein a lower surface of the protrusion comprises a first area that has a curved surface with a convex shape (figures 7B-C; and paragraphs 88-95).
With respect to claim 1, Lin does not teach a head body; and the collet detachably attached to a lower surface of the head body.
However, Choi teaches a head body (162); and the collet (180) detachably attached (with screws) to a lower surface of the head body (figures 5-12; paragraph 36).
At the time of filing the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the head body of Choi on the device of Lin in order to sturdily connect the device of Lin to the Z-axis driver of the apparatus.
With respect to claim 2, Lin teaches wherein a distance in the vertical direction between an uppermost end and a lowermost end of the first area of the lower surface of the protrusion is 30 μm to 80 μm (figure 7B; and paragraph 95).
With respect to claim 3, Lin teaches wherein the aperture (140) of the collet vertically overlaps (broadest reasonable interpretation) a lowermost end of the first area of the lower surface of the protrusion (120b) (figures 7B-C).
With respect to claim 4, Lin is silent with respect to the degree o the curvature of the first area of the lower surface of the protrusion; however, is the examiner’s position that the curvature is merely an obvious design choice. Accordingly, the artisan would have been motivated to utilize a protrusion of 0.002 mm.sup.−1 to 0.005 mm.sup.−1 in order to obtain the desired contact area.
With respect to claim 5, Lin teaches wherein an elastic modulus of the deformation plate
is 3 MPa to 5 MPa (paragraph 92), and an elastic modulus of the metal plate (110) is greater than the elastic modulus of the deformation plate (120) (paragraph 26). Note that the materials described by Lin for the metal plate (110) intrinsically have an elastic modulus great than that of the deformation plate.
With respect to claim 11, Lin teaches a semiconductor chip bonding apparatus comprising: the collet (100) comprises a metal plate (110) and a deformation plate (120) (figures 7B-C; and paragraph 26 and 88-95); a vacuum pump (paragraphs 31-32 and 64); and a pressurizer (pneumatic pressure) connected to the head body of the bonding head (figure 7B; and paragraph 90), wherein the collet of the bonding head defines: an aperture (140) extending through the metal plate and a portion of the deformation plate; and a plurality of vacuum lines (131/135/150) extending through the metal plate and the deformation plate, wherein the deformation plate of the collet comprises a protrusion (120b) that protrudes in a vertical direction from a lower surface of the deformation plate, wherein a lower surface of the protrusion of the deformation plate comprises a first area that has a curved surface with a convex shape, and wherein the aperture of the collet and each of the plurality of vacuum lines of the collet vertically overlap (broadest reasonable interpretation) the protrusion of the deformation plate of the collet (figures 7B-C; and paragraphs 88-95).
With respect to claim 11, Lin does not teach a head body, wherein the collet is attached to a lower surface of the head body; and a vacuum pump connected to the head body of the bonding head.
However, Choi teaches a head body (162); and the collet (180) is attached to a lower surface of the head body (figures 5-12; and paragraphs 36-37); and a vacuum pump (vacuum generating means) connected to the head body (162) of the bonding head (160) (figures 5-12; and paragraphs 36-37).
At the time of filing the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the head body of Choi on the device of Lin in order to sturdily connect the device of Lin to the Z-axis driver of the apparatus.
With respect to claim 13, Choi teaches wherein the head body (162) of the bonding head (160) comprises a pressurizing pin (176) configured to be inserted into the aperture of the collet, and the pressurizer is configured to move the pressurizing pin of the head body to enable the pressurizing pin to push a bottom of the aperture of the collet (figures 5-12; and paragraphs 37 and 47-49).
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin and JP ‘313 or Choi as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jo et al. (US2025/0226354A1) (hereafter Jo).
With respect to claim 6, Lin and JP ‘313 or Choi do not teach wherein the lower surface of the protrusion comprises the first area and a second area surrounding the first area, and the second area of the lower surface of the protrusion is at least partially planar.
However, Jo teaches wherein the lower surface of the protrusion comprises the first area and a second area surrounding the first area, and the second area of the lower surface of the protrusion is at least partially planar (figures 5-6; and paragraphs 27-28).
At the time of filing the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to utilize the protrusion shape of Jo on the collective apparatus of Lin and JP ‘313 or Choi in order to obtain the desired pressing surface.
With respect to claim 7, Jo teaches wherein the aperture (124) of the collet (120) vertically overlaps (broadest reasonable interpretation) the first area of the lower surface of the protrusion of the collet, and each of the plurality of vacuum lines (122) of the collet vertically overlaps the second area of the lower surface of the protrusion of the collet (figures 5-6; and paragraphs 27-28).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-20 are allowed.
Claims 8-10 and 14-18 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KILEY SHAWN STONER whose telephone number is (571)272-1183. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-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, Keith Walker can be reached on 571-272-3458. 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 PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KILEY S STONER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights