IP Landscape for MEMS Packaging Marc Papageorge Semiconductor Outsourcing Solutions Herbert J. Neuhaus, Ph.D. Charles E. Bauer, Ph.D. Raymond A. Fillion TechLead Corporation

Outline Overview IP Landscape Filing Date Analysis Assignee Analysis Value Analysis Subject Matter Analysis / Enabling Technologies Industry Spotlights -Overview of the landscape process & methodology; Whole focus of the IP landscape is to learn how to value (valuation of the patent) the patent and who the key players are. (how much worth and who owns them and how we go through this analysis)

MEMS Packaging Matrix Source: Amkor Just to show the complexity of the landscape….. Lots of MEMS devices, microphones…. Etc. from ceramic to plastic, pre-molded…. Very complex arena…. We need to take a structure approach to the IP landscape Source: Amkor

IP Landscape Questions Who owns MEMS Packaging patents? When patents filed? Where filed? What technology types covered? Valuation of leading portfolios? What are the questions regarding to the IP Landscape… how much are they worth? Best way to understand is to look at the IP landscape and these are the type questions that the IP landscape should be answering. Its not to identify the IP; what we are trying to communicate is the value of an I.P. Landscape (Important points)

TechLead Methodology Develop comprehensive database of patents Follow reference & citation trails for each patent Assess relevance of each patent Classify each patent by critical subject matter Assign relative value to each patent through citation analysis What is th TechLead Methodology…? We look at a various patent data bases…WPT, Taiwan Patent office, Japanese Patent office, USPTO (easy to search, it is legal, and best protection in the World). Difficult step in the process is develop a comprehensive search of relevant patents (use the 3-D example ..pez candy, to tires. Etc.) …Step 1. Most difficult part is get the comprehensive data base together. Step 2 Go into the sorting and category process.. Steps 2-4 ; Step 3 item 5. we provide value… based on relative Citations (slide 11).

Filing Date Analysis – MEMS Packaging Patents Sharp increase in late 1990s observed for many technologies reflects global high tech boom 4-6 year patent prosecution window limits visibility after 2004 Filing data Analysis… show the sharp increase in the late 90’s [4-5 years to prosecute a patent]. When you used the patent office as your data base we are only accessed to Issued Patents. Patent filings are not shown but accessed… 1. Ambigious in terms of their Claims; the claims are hard to search have not been reviewed or categorized. POINT: Not only the MEMS arena shows this but a similar trend in many other areas… (do not be mislead due to the spike… we see this in other similar technologies that show strong trends- dramatic increase globally in the value of IP.) Any business field.

Filing Date Analysis – PV Patents Timing is influenced by market conditions..

Filing Date Analysis – 3D Semiconductor Assembly Timing is influenced by market conditions--

Geographic Distribution Strong US Leadership USPTO filings reasonable indicator of the world-wide IP landscape Previous IP landscape studies demonstrate the minimal US bias in spite of reliance on USPTO database Basically saying what geography owns the most patents. [Not specified = Individual Inventors] ; USPTO data base is difficult to identify where they are from. It is not mandatory to check the box to what country belongs… ONLY FOR individual filers. Everyone files in the U.S. and home country for protection.

Assignees By Number of Patents IP ownership dominated by large vertically integrated corporations High-profile start-ups present but hold relatively few patents & applications Many of the companies are recogognized (Silverbrook is a consolidator)

Assignees by Portfolio Value Relative portfolio value based on citation analysis Harhoff, Trajtenberg, others showed citations reflect market value Adjusted for age (new patents have fewer citations regardless of value) Silicon Genesis & academic institutions move up Higher than average rate of citation Higher value per patent Relative value of the portfolio. All citations matter but most important citations comes from the patent examiner. Many detail methodologies that do this Citation analysis and we utilized the methods for several of these techniques that have been summarized by Harnhoff, Trajtenberg [a. how is the value analysis is done based on Citations & b. show how the small companies jump from number of patents to Asignees by Portfolio value.

Enabling Technologies Wafer Bonding Package Sealing Low Damage Wafer Dicing Through Silicon Vias (TSV) What the analysis was able for us to find and now the Next phase of the IP landscape… now we know who owns the technology portfolio. We begin doing segmentation based on the patents (what is the IP)

Wafer Bonding Providing an alternative to molding compound encapsulation, wafer bonding also permits the fabrication of 3D structures. Viable approaches include fusion bonding, anodic bonding, glass frit bonding, metal bonding, and polymer bonding. Source: Ziptronix

Wafer Bonding Viable sealing approaches. Seal Method Assembly Hermetic Silex novel capping approach comprises a proprietary SOI device layer transfer process in combination with a CMOS compatible hermetic wafer bond seal Seal Method Assembly Hermetic Comments Epoxy Wafer/Wafer No Low Cost, Volume Production, Consumer Products BCB Cap/Wafer Good Electricals, Controlled ATM. Glass Frit Yes High-Volume History, Automotive Metal Plug No Known Commercial Devpt. Solder Reflow Controlled ATM, Proto-types Covalent Au-Au - Good Process Viable sealing approaches. Source: Silex Microsystems & Advanced Packaging Magazine

Package Sealing MEMs IC packaging systems at times require sealing to protect core elements from the environment. MEMs Cavity packages, the predominant approach, requires a lid using an epoxy, solder, welding, or other novel process technique. Source: Silex Microsystems & Advanced Packaging Magazine

Low Damage Wafer Dicing The intense water jets used to cool convention wafer dicing saws and remove debris easily damages delicate microstructures and lowers yield. An Alternative includes backside sawing, sawing after protective encapsulation, microstructure release after sawing, or laser dicing. Source: Jenoptik

Subject Matter Analysis Where the patents land in number of attention and shows cleaning the most important areas is bonding and sealing to protect the MEMS device.

Subject Matter Analysis As a function of time. All four areas show strong activity.

TECHNOLOGY SPOTLIGHT: Hamamatsu Photonics Stealth Dicing Technology: Dry, “Kerf-less”, chip-free, cutting based on laser induced damage Market Focus Distributed by Disco and Tokyo Seimitsu Low-K & Ultra Thin Wafers Source: Hamamatsu

TECHNOLOGY SPOTLIGHT: Silex Microsystems Technologies: Thru Silicon Via: ASIC To MEMS Market Focus: Handsets Silex TSI™ technology consists of a through wafer trench created by DRIE then filled with an isolating dielectric. Source: Silex Microsystems

TECHNOLOGY SPOTLIGHT: Ziptronix- 3D I.C. ‘s Technologies: Direct Oxide Bonding (Zi-Bond) Direct Bond Interconnect (DBI) Market Focus: Chip Stacking 3D ICs Silicon Interconnect with Embedded Components MEMS Encapsulation Scalable 3D integration technology via covalent bonding Room temperature, non-adhesive wafer-to-wafer & die-to-wafer bonding Enables multiple material bonding using thin layer of SiO2 (Direct Oxide Bonding) Ergonomically layers chips to enable high volume manufacturing of vertically integrated circuits. US Patents: Zi Bond (7109092 7387944) and DBI® direct bond interconnect (US Patent 6962835)

TECHNOLOGY SPOTLIGHT: AKUSTICA –MEMS Microphone Technologies: 100% CMOS MEMS Noise Immunity Leverages Fab Infrastructure Market Focus: Mobile Phones Video Cameras Lap Top PC’s Head Sets 1X1mm Microphone Die 2x2mm Final Package Covered by one or more of U.S. Patents: 5,717,631; 5,970,315; 7,215,527; 7,019,955; 6,829,131; 7,089,069; 7,026,184; 7,202,101; 7,049,051; 6,943,448; and 6,936,524 Source: Akustica

Summary Deep understanding of the IP landscape for any technology arena provides a powerful basis for Strategic planning Technology development Investment decisions Comprehensive translation of the existing data and knowledge into useful and valuable information and understanding Few technology examples demonstrated significant commonality based on compiled patents Some of these you may have found anyway but in a structured manner you will find what is important and what is not. Or interest in your specific area that you are working on.

Summary Powerful tools applied to the IP landscape Identify leading participants & technologies Establish portfolio value Citations Analysis Reveal core capabilities & strategies Verify technological advances versus time

Acknowledgements Thanks to Dr Herb Neuhaus & Ray Fillion for IP Research IP Landscape software developed by TechLead Corporation