10912602 (B.P.A.I. Apr. 21, 2008)

Ex Parte Chang

Board of Patent Appeals and InterferencesApr 21, 2008

10912602 (B.P.A.I. Apr. 21, 2008)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS AND INTERFERENCES ____________ Ex parte CHIEN-WEI CHANG ____________ Appeal 2008-0562 Application 10/912,602 Technology Center 2800 ____________ Decided: April 21, 2008 ____________ Before BRADLEY R. GARRIS, CHUNG K. PAK, and JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judges. GARRIS, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 134 from the Examiner's decision rejecting claims 1-17. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 6.1 1 As a matter of clarification, our review of the subject appeal does not extend to the Examiner's objection to claim 1 (see Ans. 3 and Br. 10). Such an objection is reviewable by way of petition. See the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) Â§ 1201 (8th Ed., Rev. 3, Aug. 2005); see also Â§ 1002 (Rev. 2, May 2004). Appeal 2008-0562 Application 10/912,602 Appellant claims a method for manufacturing IC substrate comprising providing a substrate 301 having a bump pad circuit layer 316 and a plurality of micro vias 312 filled with a metal 314, the bump pad circuit layer being covered with a solder resist 317 to form a plurality of bump pads 318, and a plurality of micro openings 320 being formed in the solder resist above the micro vias, and forming a plurality of metal columns 321 in the micro openings 320 on the metal 314 of the micro vias 312 (Figs. 3A-R; claim 1). Representative claim 1 reads as follows: 1. A method for manufacturing IC substrate comprising the following steps: providing a substrate having a bump pad circuit layer and a plurality of micro vias filled with a metal, said bump pad circuit layer being covered with a solder resist to form a plurality of bump pads, and a plurality of micro openings being formed through said solder resist above said micro vias; and using bottom plating to form a plurality of metal columns in said micro openings on the metal of said micro vias so that the height of said metal columns is elevated to a surface level of said solder resist. The references set forth below are relied upon by the Examiner as evidence of obviousness: Hock, Jr. 5,055,169 Oct. 8, 1991 Sakamoto 6,909,054 B2 Jun. 21, 2005 All appealed claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103(a) as being unpatentable of Sakamoto in view of Hock. Only claim 1, the sole independent claim on appeal, has been argued by Appellant (Br. 3-4, 10). Therefore, in assessing the merits of the above- 2 Appeal 2008-0562 Application 10/912,602 noted rejection, we will focus on claim 1 only. Dependent claims 2-17 will stand or fall with independent claim 1. For the reasons expressed in the Answer and below, we will sustain the rejection before us. The dispositive issue before us is whether the method of Sakamoto satisfies the claim 1 requirements of providing "a plurality of micro vias filled with a metal" and "a plurality of micro openings being formed through said solder resist above said micro vias" and "a plurality of metal columns in said micro openings on the metal of said micro vias." According to the Examiner, the claim 1 requirement "a plurality of micro vias filled with a metal" is satisfied by Sakamoto's vias holes 160 which are partially filled with the metal of conductor circuit 158 (Figs. 5A- C, 12; col. 10, ll. 4-5; col. 14, ll. 10-23; Ans. 4, 9-10). We agree. Though not expressly stated, Appellant may have a contrary view because the metal of conductor circuit 158 does not completely fill vias holes 160 (Br. 3). However, it is well settled that, during examination, claims are to be given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, and claim language should be read in light of the specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art. In re Am. Acad. Sci. Tech. Ctr., 167 F.3d 1359, 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2004). When so interpreting claim 1, we find that the claim language does not expressly require the vias to be completely filled with a metal and therefore encompasses vias which are only partially filled with a metal. For this latter reason, the claim requirement under consideration is satisfied by Sakamoto's 3 Appeal 2008-0562 Application 10/912,602 vias 160 since they are partially filled with the metal of conductor circuit 158 as clearly shown in Figures 5A-C. The claim 1 requirement "a plurality of micro openings being formed through said solder resist above said micro vias" is satisfied by the micro openings 71 of Sakamoto which extend through solder resist 70 (Figs. 5B-C, 12; col. 10, ll. 12-16). Appellant argues that the afore-quoted requirement is not satisfied by Sakamoto because "the micro openings (71) of Sakamoto (fig. 5c) are formed on the side of filled vias (160) through element (158)" (Br. 3; emphasis deleted). This argument is not convincing. In this regard, we emphasize that claim 1 does not exclude micro openings which are disposed laterally to the side of vias as in Sakamoto. Instead, the claim language under review simply requires the micro openings to be "above said micro vias." This requirement is satisfied by Sakamoto because micro openings 71 are disposed vertically above (albeit laterally to the side) of vias 160 as displayed in Figures 5B-C. Finally, we agree with the Examiner that Sakamoto's Figure 12 embodiment satisfies the claim 1 requirement "a plurality of metal columns in said micro openings on the metal of said micro vias." As correctly explained by the Examiner, patentee's BGAs 76U constitute metal columns which are disposed on and in micro openings 71 and thereby are disposed on the metal of conductor circuit 158 (Figs. 5B-C, 12; col. 19, ll. 43-52; Ans. 10). As previously discussed, the metal of 158 partially fills vias 160 of Sakamoto and therefore satisfies "the metal of said micro vias" recitation in claim 1. The Appellant's opposing contention (Br. 3-4, 10) is unpersuasive 4 Appeal 2008-0562 Application 10/912,602 because it is premised on the incorrect belief that the metal of Sakamoto's conductor circuit 158 does not read on the claim 1 metal of the micro vias. For the reasons set forth above and in the Answer, each of the above- quoted requirements of claim 1 is satisfied by Sakamoto. The Appellant's contrary view is inappropriately based on a narrow construction of the claim which reads into it limitations not required. We sustain, therefore, the Â§ 103 rejection of all appealed claims as being unpatentable over Sakamoto in view of Hock. The decision of the Examiner is affirmed. No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. Â§ 1.136(a)(1)(iv). AFFIRMED cam LIN & ASSOCIATES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, INC. P O BOX 2339 SARATOGA, CA 95070-0339 5