Appeal 2007-2503
Application 10/225,978
The Examiner states that Asazu describes a semiconductor die having
an active surface and a back surface with the active surface having a
plurality of bond pads. The Examiner states that Asazu’s bumps are
substantially homogeneous, nickel-containing bumps having gold over the
nickel. (Answer at 3-4). The Examiner states that Asazu fails to teach the
use of a wire lead encapsulated in resin. (Id. at 4). The Examiner cites
Shibasaki as teaching the use of wires encapsulated in resin to protect a
semiconductor device. (Id. at 5). The Examiner states that one of ordinary
skill in the art would have employed an encapsulated wire in the device of
Asazu in order to protect the device. (Id.).
Micron generally contends that the prior art references fail to provide
a suggestion or motivation to arrive at the claimed invention. (Appeal Br. at
8). In particular, Micron contends that Asazu fails to teach or suggest a
bond wire extending from a substantially homogeneous bump. Micron
states that Asazu is directed to a tape carrier package (TCP) utilizing
conductor leads. Micron alleges that substitution of wire bonds for Asazu’s
conductor leads would not form a less compact semiconductor device. (Id.
at 9). Micron also contends that Shinogi, Walker, Iwasaki and Shibasaki
likewise fail to teach or suggest a bond wire extending from a substantially
homogeneous bump. (Id. at 9-10).
We affirm the Examiner’s rejections.
ISSUE
The issue is whether Micron has shown that the Examiner erred in
rejecting the claims. Specifically, the issue is:
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013