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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Specie A in the reply filed on 7/28/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
Claim 20 is 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.
Claim 20 is indefinite because it is unclear what is meant by “comprising at least two of: first holes arranged in a circular shape, second holes arranged in a semicircular arrangement and adjacent to a first subset of the first holes, third holes arranged in an asymmetric pattern in an x-direction and a y-direction, or slots, having a curved top surface and a curved bottom surface, around a second subset of the first holes”. The claim requires two of the claimed structures. It is unclear what is meant by first, second, third holes. Does this mean that there are first holes, second holes, and third holes, or is this just a list stating that there are different groups of holes arranged in different configurations. It would not make sense to call them first, second, third holes because not all are required. There can be second holes and third holes, but no first holes. How can there be second holes without first holes? The Examiner requests that the Applicant please reword this claim.
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) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiyama et al. (2015/0382482A1) in view of Matsuura et al. (JP2007-204175A).
Regarding claim 1, Hiyama discloses a method, comprising: providing a semiconductor onto a conveyor device of a reflow solder tool; providing, using the conveyor device 302, the semiconductor package to a heating zone B of the reflow solder tool 300; and bonding semiconductor components to the semiconductor package using a process gas that is provided to the heating zone, wherein the process gas is provided to the heating zone using a zone heater assembly that comprises a single-layer gas deflector 3 (paragraphs 0001, 0053, 0135, figure 2A, 11).
Hiyama discloses using a reflow oven for bonding a semiconductor package (paragraph 0001), but does not specifically disclose plurality of semiconductor package substrates. However, Matsuura discloses bonding a plurality of semiconductor package substrates in a reflow oven (figures 3-5, abstract). To one skilled in the art at the time of the invention it would have been obvious to reflow a plurality of packages on a conveyor as it cuts down on production costs and time.
Regarding claim 2, Hiyama discloses providing the process gas through a gas exhaust 52 of the zone heater assembly, wherein the process gas is provided to the gas exhaust through the single-layer gas deflector 3 (figure 12).
Regarding claim 3, Hiyama discloses that the process gas is provided to the gas exhaust through a first gas-permeating pattern in the single-layer gas deflector, and through a second gas-permeating pattern in the single-layer gas deflector (figures 10, 12).
Regarding claim 4, Matsuura discloses providing the plurality of semiconductor package substrates (figures 3-4) onto the conveyor device of the reflow solder tool comprises: arranging the plurality of semiconductor package substrates in a plurality of rows of semiconductor package substrates on the conveyor device, wherein each row of semiconductor package substrates, of the plurality of rows of semiconductor package substrates, includes two or more of the plurality of semiconductor package substrates; and wherein providing the plurality of semiconductor package substrates to the heating zone comprises: providing a row of semiconductor package substrates, of the plurality of rows of semiconductor package substrates, to the heating zone, wherein each semiconductor package substrate, in the row of semiconductor package substrates, is exposed to the process gas in the heating zone at a same time (figures 3-5 of Matsuura).
Claim(s) 13-14, 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hiyama et al. (2015/0382482A1) in view of Becker (2022/0181177A1).
Regarding claim 13, Hiyama discloses a method of operating a semiconductor processing tool, comprising: causing a semiconductor package substrate, having one or more semiconductor components, to move through a heating zone B of the semiconductor processing tool; causing a zone heater assembly 104 to provide a process gas through a gas deflector 3 into the heating zone to provide convection heat to the semiconductor package substrate; and coordinating movement of the semiconductor package substrate with directing of the process gas (paragraphs 0001, 0053, 0135, figure 2A, 11).
Hiyama does not specifically disclose directing the processing gas according to a reflow profile to bond the one or more semiconductor components to the semiconductor package substrate. However, Becker discloses a reflow system with a conveyor for bonding electronic components wherein the process uses a pre-defined temperature profile and temperature set points and conveyor speeds to define a heating profile (paragraph 0030-0031). To one skilled in the art at the time of the invention it would have been obvious use a reflow profile because Becker states that it helps prevent overheating that may damage the components and result in solder defects (paragraph 0030).
Regarding claim 14, Hiyama discloses that the semiconductor package substrate is moved along a direction of travel through a plurality of heating zones including the heating zone (paragraphs 0001, 0053, 0135, figure 2A, 11).
Regarding claim 16, Hiyama discloses causing a gas blower device to direct the process gas from the zone heater assembly through the gas deflector 3 to the heating zone (paragraphs 0001, 0053, 0135, figure 2A, 11).
Regarding claim 17, Becker discloses wherein coordinating movement of the semiconductor package substrate with the directing of the process gas with the directing of the process gas comprises: at least one of: adjusting at least one of a fan speed or a heating element output to maintain a desired gas flow uniformity in the heating zone, or adjusting temperature setpoints of a plurality of heating zones, including the heating zone, to follow the reflow profile (paragraphs 0030-0031).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-12 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: prior art was not found that taught or suggested causing one or more zone heater assemblies to: heat an incoming ambient gas based on temperature setpoints for the one or more zone heater assemblies, generate a process gas by mixing the heated ambient gas with an inert gas, an direct the process gas through a single-layer gas deflector into the at least one heating zone while the plurality of semiconductor package substrates moves through the heating zone; and causing solder paste on the plurality of semiconductor package substrates to reflow, based on heating the process gas, to bond one or more semiconductor components to the plurality of semiconductor package substrates.
Claims 15, 18-19 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 claim 15, prior art was not found that taught or suggested causing the zone heater assembly to generate the process gas by heating an ambient gas and mixing the heated ambient gas with an inert gas. Regarding claim 18, prior art was not found that taught or suggested wherein the gas deflector comprises a single- layer plate having a gas-permeating pattern, wherein the gas-permeating pattern comprises: a plurality of holes spaced apart from each other; and a plurality of slots spaced apart from each other, wherein each of the plurality of slots has a curved top surface and a curved bottom surface, and wherein at least one of: a first subset of slots, of the plurality of slots, circumscribes a first subset of holes of the plurality of holes, or a second subset of slots, of the plurality of slots, forms a circle with a second subset of holes of the plurality of holes. Regarding claim 19, prior art was not found that taught or suggested wherein the gas deflector comprises a single- layer plate having a plurality of gas-permeating patterns and a single slot between the plurality of gas-permeating patterns, wherein the single slot extends along an entire length of the plurality of gas-permeating patterns.
Claim 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Prior art was not found that taught or suggested wherein the gas deflector comprises a single- layer plate having a gas-permeating pattern comprising at least two of: first holes arranged in a circular shape, second holes arranged in a semicircular arrangement and adjacent to a first subset of the first holes, third holes arranged in an asymmetric pattern in an x-direction and a y-direction, or slots, having a curved top surface and a curved bottom surface, around a second subset of the first holes.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN B SAAD whose telephone number is (571)270-3634. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30a-6p.
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 at 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 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.
/ERIN B SAAD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights