Appeal No. 2001-1700 Page 5
Application No. 09/160,964
the rounded edge as taught by Farnworth in order to
avoid any interference that would result in any
damages caused by sharp edges (e.g., delamination of
passivation layer, or scratches on the inserted
connectors). Therefore, to one skilled in the art,
it would be obvious that any damages, including
residue of adhesive, caused by sharp edges could be
avoided when the edges are rounded.
Farnworth is directed to a packaging semiconductor device
wherein an additional protective layer (36, figure 3) is
formed on a die and the die is placed in a die cavity (76,
figure 5) of a multi-die holder. See, for example, the
abstract, column 3, lines 1-10 and column 4, lines 31-39 of
Farnworth. Farnworth (column 4, line 49 through column 5,
line 9) is concerned with protecting the face of the die and
circuitry formed thereon from damage during insertion of the
die in the die cavity of the die holder.
As found by the examiner and noted above, Peng does not
disclose using a rounding step as herein claimed for avoiding
adhesive residues from a taping process remaining on a wafer
surface at sharp edges of an opening formed in the wafer
surface by anisotropic etching. Nor has the examiner fairly
explained why the disparate teachings of Farnworth concerning
protecting a die during a packaging process would have led one
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007