Ex Parte Ha et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jan 10, 2014

11307382 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 10, 2014)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
____________

BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL
AND APPEAL BOARD
____________

Ex parte JONG-WOO HA, SANG-HO LEE, and SOO-SAN PARK
____________

Appeal 2011-011998
Application 11/307,382
Technology Center 2800
____________

Before CHUNG K. PAK, TERRY J. OWENS, and
BEVERLY A. FRANKLIN, Administrative Patent Judges.

FRANKLIN, Administrative Patent Judge.

DECISION ON APPEAL

Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 from the Examiner's
rejection of claims 1-10. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Claim 1 is representative of the subject matter on appeal and is set
forth below:
1. A method for manufacturing a stacked integrated circuit
package system comprising:
forming a first molded chip comprises:
attaching a conductor on a die,
Appeal 2011-011998
Application 11/307,382

2
applying an encapsulant around the conductor, and
exposing a surface of the conductor in the encapsulant with a plane
formed by all of the exposed portion coplanar to a plane formed by a side of
the encapsulant opposite the die;
attaching a first electrical interconnect on the conductor of the first
molded chip; and
stacking an integrated circuit device on the first molded chip with an
electrical connector of the integrated circuit device connected to the
conductor of the first molded chip with the first electrical interconnect.

The prior art relied upon by the Examiner in rejecting the claims on
appeal is:
Huang US 6,414,385 B1 Jul. 2, 2002
Kim US 2006/0284298 A1 Dec. 21, 2006

THE REJECTION
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103(a) as being
unpatentable over Kim in view of Huang.
ISSUE
Did the Examiner err in determining that it would have been obvious
to have replaced Kim’s tape 41 with Huang’s encapsulant 116 to arrive at
Appellants’ claimed subject matter?
We answer this question in the affirmative and REVERSE.

ANALYSIS

On page 8 of the Answer, it is the Examiner position that

[f]urther, the exposed surface of Huang (118b in Fig. 1) can be used
for an electrical connection in the chip stack. The lead (102) disclosed
Appeal 2011-011998
Application 11/307,382

3
by Huang and the bump (26) disclosed by Kim can be used for similar
purpose, e.g. for electrical connections. Therefore, Examiner
respectfully submits that, with respect to Kim's tape i.e. 41 in Fig. 2, it
would have been obvious to have substituted Huang's encapsulant 116
(see Fig. 1 of Huang) in order to increase the bond- ability between
die (24 of Kim ) and encapsulant i.e. resin ( 27 of Kim) as taught in
Huang in (col. 1, lines 55-65). And such substitution (replace tape 41
with encapsulant 116) will be coplanar with all exposed portion of
conductor 26 for substituting equivalents known for the same purpose
e.g. for an electrical connection in the chips stack. See MPEP
2144.06.

However, we are in agreement with Appellants that
it would not be obvious to substitute the Huang encapsulant 116 to
replace the Kim insulation tape 41 because the references, taken as a
whole, teach away from each other.
Kim teaches that the Kim insulation tape 41 is an integral part of the
Kim pattern tape 40 and that the Kim pattern tape 40 has the Kim
bond leads 43 extending away from the insulation tape 41. This is
shown in Kim FIG. 2 and confirmed in Kim paragraph [0019],
which states:
"[0019] ... An electrical connection member, i.e. a pattern tape
41) has a rearranged electrical connection pattern which
includes insulation tapes 41, exposed pads 42 having upper and
lower surfaces exposed, and bond leads 43 extending outward
from both ends thereof..." [bold in original; deletions and
underlining for clarity]
Huang, however, teaches away from Kim by teaching that the Huang
encapsulant must fully cover the Huang chip 104 and the Huang
bonding wires 114, which serve the same function as the Kim bond
leads 43. This is shown in Huang FIG. 1 and confirmed in Huang
col. 1, lines 48-51, which state:
... a molding compound 116 normally encapsulates the whole
chip 104, the die pad 100, the bonding wires 114, and the top
Appeal 2011-011998
Application 11/307,382

4
surface ll8a of the lead 102." [bold and italics in original;
deletion for clarity]
Reply Br. 7.
We add that a proposed modification or combination of the prior art
that would change the principle of operation of the prior art invention being
modified, weighs against a conclusion of prima facie obviousness. In re
Ratti, 270 F.2d 810, 813 (CCPA 1959). In the instant case, the Examiner’s
position does not take into account how an encapsulant will provide for the
necessary arrangement in Kim of a rearranged electrical connection pattern
including insulation tapes 41, exposed pads 42 having upper and lower
surfaces exposed, and bond leads 43 extending outward from both ends
thereof. As Appellants explain, it is the insulation tape 41 that is critical to
such an arrangement.
In view of the above, we reverse the rejection.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND DECISION
Each rejection is reversed.

REVERSED

sld