Appeal No. 2007-0068
Application No. 10/230,452
of chip 28 (col. 3, lines 18-24). As the upper device rests upon the discrete
conductive elements, Wu does disclose the claimed arrangement of the
second chip in relation with the discrete conductive elements and therefore,
anticipates claims 1 and 13, as well as dependent claims 2-4, 9, 10, 14, 15,
18, 19, 21, and 22.
35 U.S.C. § 102(e) rejection of claims over Shim
Appellant argues that Shim does not anticipate the claims since it
shows upper device 16 resting upon adhesive 44 or spacer strip 50C instead
of upon the bond wires (Br. 11). The Examiner points out that the adhesive
or the spacer strips are attached to and a part of the upper die, which together
rest upon the bond wires 38B (Answer 11).
We again agree with the Examiner that the strips are a part of the
upper device since they are attached to the bottom surface of the upper die.
We also find that the arrangement disclosed in Shim is consistent with the
Appellant’s disclosure and claims, which require the second device rest upon
the discrete conductive elements in electrical isolation therefrom keeping
the discrete conductive elements of the first semiconductor die from short
circuiting with other elements.
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013