Ex Parte Cotte et al

Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Jul 30, 2012

11690682 (B.P.A.I. Jul. 30, 2012)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www.uspto.gov
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
11/690,682 05/08/2007 John Michael Cotte YOR920060850US1(8728-819) 4228
7590 07/31/2012
F. CHAU & ASSOCIATES, LLC
130 Woodbury Road
Woodbury, NY 11797
EXAMINER
GORDON, MATTHEW E
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2892
MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE
07/31/2012 PAPER
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE BOARD OF PATENT APPEALS
AND INTERFERENCES
____________

Ex parte JOHN MICHAEL COTTE, HANYI DING, KAI DI FENG,
ZHONG-XIANG HE, NILS D. HOIVIK, and XUEFENG LIU
____________

Appeal 2010-004797
Application 11/690,682
Technology Center 2800
____________

Before MARC S. HOFF, CARLA M. KRIVAK, and
ELENI MANTIS MERCADER, Administrative Patent Judges.

KRIVAK, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a final rejection of
claims 1-20. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We reverse.

Appeal 2010-004797
Application 11/690,682

2
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants’ claimed invention is directed to an integrated circuit (IC)
package including an integrated circuit with one or more on-chip inductors.
A package cover covers the IC. A magnetic material is provided between
the IC and the package cover. (Spec. 4:10-14)
Independent claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative.
1. An integrated circuit package, comprising:

an integrated circuit with one or more on-chip inductors formed on a
top layer thereof;

a package cover covering the integrated circuit; and

a magnetic material provided between the integrated circuit and the
package cover and magnetically shielding the on-chip inductors from
circuitry above the package cover, wherein the magnetic material is not part
of the integrated circuit's stack and the magnetic material is affixed to but
not part of the package cover.

REFERENCES and REJECTIONS
The Examiner rejected claims 1-2, 5, 11-12, and 15 under 35 U.S.C.
§ 102(b) based upon the teachings of Mizoguchi (US Patent No. 6,593,841
B1, July 15, 2003).
The Examiner rejected claims 6, 7, 10, 16, 17, and 20 under 35 U.S.C.
§103(a) based upon the teachings of Mizoguchi in view of Tuckerman (US
Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0029879 A1, February 7, 2008).
The Examiner rejected claims 3 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
based upon the teachings of Mizoguchi in view of Tuttle (US Patent
Application Publication No. 2006/0019422 A1, January 26, 2006).
Appeal 2010-004797
Application 11/690,682

3
The Examiner rejected claim 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based upon
the teachings of Tuckerman in view of Tuttle.
The Examiner rejected claims 4 and 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)
based upon the teachings of Mizoguchi in view of Braunisch (US Patent
Application No. 7,280,024 B2, October 9, 2007).

ANALYSIS
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102
The Examiner finds Mizoguchi teaches an integrated circuit package
that includes a protective layer 50 corresponding to Appellants’ package
cover 24 and magnetic material layers 30A and 30B corresponding to
Appellants’ magnetic material (Ans. 3).
Appellants contend Mizoguchi’s protective layer is not a package
cover. Additionally, the magnetic material layers are not provided between
the IC and the package cover and are part of the IC stack, contrary to
Appellants’ claimed invention. (App. Br. 7-8). Appellants support this
contention by noting Figure 5 of Mizoguchi is an exploded view of a planar
conductor and is thus part of an IC stack (App. Br. 7). We agree with
Appellants that Mizoguchi does not teach an IC package or package cover.
Nor does Mizoguchi teach or suggest providing magnetic material between
the IC and the package cover such that the magnetic material is not part of
the IC’s stack and is affixed to but not part of the package cover, as claimed.
Thus, we find Mizoguchi does not anticipate Appellants’ claimed invention.

Appeal 2010-004797
Application 11/690,682

4
Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103
Mizoguchi in combination with the various other references was used
to reject claims 3, 4, 6-10, 11, 13, 14, and 16-20. As none of the cited
references cures the deficiencies of Mizoguchi, we conclude claims 3, 4,
6-10, 11, 13, 14, and 16-20 are not obvious over these references.

DECISION
The Examiner’s decision rejecting claims 1-20 is reversed.

REVERSED

pgc