1. 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

2. 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)

3. 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

4. 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)

5. 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).

6. 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.

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

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

9. 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.

10. 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)

11. 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.

12. 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)

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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.

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

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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 ( ) and DBI® direct bond interconnect (US Patent )

22. 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

23. 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.

24. 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

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