Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/683,201

THROUGH WAFER ISOLATION ELEMENT BACKSIDE PROCESSING

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Feb 28, 2022
Examiner
SWANSON, WALTER H
Art Unit
2815
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Texas Instruments Incorporated
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
4-5
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
608 granted / 815 resolved
+6.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
847
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
48.5%
+8.5% vs TC avg
§102
23.5%
-16.5% vs TC avg
§112
21.5%
-18.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 815 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicants’ submission filed on 2 MAR 2026 has been entered. Response To Final Office Action The 28 JAN 2026 amendments to claims 1, 18, and 20 have been entered. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2 MAR 2026 follows provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS is being considered by the examiner. New Grounds of Rejection New grounds of rejection, prior art reference Chen et al. (US 20200006309) and Summerfelt et al. (US 20200203290), appear below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 See previous Office action for a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 102. Claims 1, 4, 5, 7, and 10-25, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen et al. (US 20200006309; below, “Chen” – 2 MAR 2026 IDS noted reference). RE 1, Chen, in FIGS. 1-22 and related text, e.g., paragraphs [0001] to [0068], discloses a packaged integrated circuit (IC), comprising: PNG media_image1.png 896 542 media_image1.png Greyscale a semiconductor substrate having opposing first (touches 54) and second (interfaces 36A) surfaces (Giving the not-in-specification terms “first surface” and “second surface” their broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) consistent with the specification, the noted top surface and bottom surface satisfy these elements because the top surface opposes the bottom surface. MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.), the semiconductor substrate having a first portion (42A), a second portion (42B), and a through trench (46) between the first (42A) and second (42B) portions and extending from the first surface (top) to the second (bottom) surface of the semiconductor substrate, the through trench (46) including a dielectric material (56) that electrically isolates the first portion (42A) and the second portion (42B) of the semiconductor substrate; a dielectric layer (52A, 52B) on the second (bottom) surface; a metallization structure (e.g., 142 – MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) over the first (top) surface (FIG. 21); and a dielectric structure (152 – MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) covering the metallization structure (142) and the through trench (46). Thus, Chen anticipates this claim. RE 4, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 1, wherein the first portion (42A, e.g., [0023]) includes a first device coupled to the metallization structure and configurable to receive a first voltage, the second potion (42B, e.g., [0023]) includes a second device coupled to the metallization structure (142) and configurable to receive a second voltage, and the first voltage and the second voltage have a difference in value of equal to or greater than 50% of a value of a smaller voltage of the first voltage and the second voltage. Regarding the underlined portions of claim 4, the court has held that a recitation of an element “capable of” performing a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform, see In re Schreiber, 44 USPQ2d 1429 (Fed. Cir. 1997). RE 5, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 1, wherein the dielectric material (56) includes a polymer dielectric material, an inorganic dielectric material, or combinations thereof (e.g., [0033]). RE 7, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 5, wherein the inorganic dielectric material includes silicon oxide (SiO2), silicon oxynitride (SiON), silicon nitride (SiN), silicon oxynitrocarbide (SiONC), silicon carbide (SiC), aluminum nitride (AlN), aluminum oxide (Al2O3 or AlOx), boron nitride (BN), boron carbon nitride (BCN), spin-on-glass (SOG), hydrogen silsesquioxane (HSQ), diamond, or combinations thereof (e.g., [0033]). RE 10, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 1, further comprising a layer (54) on the dielectric material (56) and over the second (bottom) surface. RE 11, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 10, wherein the layer (54) covers (e.g., inverted FIG. 21 – no preferred angle or absolute reference frame claimed) the dielectric material (56). RE 12, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 10, wherein the layer (54) and the dielectric material (56) cover the second (bottom) surface (FIG. 21). RE 13, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 12, wherein the dielectric material (56) covers part of the second (bottom) surface, a part of the layer (54) abuts the second (bottom) surface. RE 14, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 10, wherein the layer (54) includes a metal layer, a second dielectric layer, a bonding layer, a diffusion barrier, a polarization dielectric layer, or combinations thereof (e.g., [0031]). RE 15, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 8, further comprising metal structures (36A) on the second (bottom) surface, in which the dielectric layer (52A, 52B) is between adjacent metal structures (FIG. 21). RE 16, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 10, wherein the through trench (46) is a first through trench, the dielectric material (56) is a first dielectric material, and the layer (54) includes a thermal conductive layer (conductivity spectrum/continuum)) having a second through trench (flanking 42A, 42B) connected with the first through trench (46), the second through trench (see FIG. 2) including a second dielectric material (portion of 56). RE 17, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 16, wherein the dielectric layer (52A, 52B) is a first dielectric layer, and the thermal conductive layer (conductivity spectrum/continuum) includes a second dielectric layer, a metal layer, a diffusion barrier, a polarization dielectric layer, or combinations thereof ([0031]). RE 18, Chen, in FIGS. 1-22 and related text, e.g., paragraphs [0001] to [0068], discloses a packaged IC, comprising: a semiconductor substrate having opposing first (touches 54) and second (interfaces 36A) surfaces (Giving the not-in-specification terms “first surface” and “second surface” their BRI, the noted top surface and bottom surface satisfy these elements because the top surface opposes the bottom surface. MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.), the semiconductor substrate having a first portion (42A) and a second portion (42B), and a through trench (46. Giving the not-in-specification term “through trench” its BRI, 46 satisfies this element because 46 passes vertically between 42A and 42B. MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) between the first (42A) and second (42B) portions and extending from the first surface (top) to the second (bottom) surface of the semiconductor substrate, the through trench (46) including a dielectric material (56) that electrically isolates the first portion (42A) and the second portion (42B) of the semiconductor substrate; a metallization structure (e.g., 142. Giving the not-in-specification term “metallization structure” its BRI, 142 satisfies this element because 142 includes a metal. MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) over the first (top) surface; and a structure (150) on the second (bottom) surface and covering the through trench (46). Thus, Chen anticipates this claim. RE 19, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 18, wherein the through trench (46) is a first through trench, the semiconductor substrate includes a second through trench (flanking 42A, 42B – MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131 and FIG. 2.) including the dielectric material (56), and the structure (150) includes a first dielectric portion (middle 152) covering the first through trench (46), a second dielectric portion (edge 152) covering the second through trench (flanking 46, FIG. 2), and a metal portion (154) laterally between the first and second dielectric portions; and wherein the packaged IC includes: a package substrate (20), and a die attach layer (34) coupled between the metal portion (154) and the package substrate (20). RE 20, Chen, in FIGS. 1-22 and related text, e.g., paragraphs [0001] to [0068], discloses a packaged IC, comprising: a semiconductor substrate having opposing first (touches 54) and second (interfaces 36A) surfaces (MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.), the semiconductor substrate having a first portion (42A) and a second portion (42B), and a through trench (46) laterally between the first (42A) and second (42B) portions and extending from the first (top) surface to the second (bottom) surface of the semiconductor substrate, the through trench (46) including a dielectric material (56) that electrically isolates the first portion (42A) and the second portion (42B) of the semiconductor substrate; a metallization structure (e.g., 142. MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) and contact pads on the first (top) surface (metal pads in RDLs 154); a package substrate (20); metal interconnects (132) vertically between the contact pads and the package substrate (20); and a layer (34) on the second (bottom) surface and covering the through trench (46) and the dielectric material (56). Thus, Chen anticipates this claim. RE 21, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 20, wherein the layer (34) includes a dielectric layer (e.g., [0020]). RE 22, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 19, wherein the structure (150) includes a first layer (same-plane atoms – MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) covering two opposing lateral sides and a top side of the first dielectric portion (middle 152), and a second layer (same-plane atoms) covering two opposing lateral sides and a top side of the second dielectric portion (edge 152). RE 23, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 1, wherein the through trench (46) is a first through trench, the semiconductor substrate includes a second through trench (flanking 42A, 42B – FIG. 2), and the dielectric layer (34) includes a first portion covering the first through trench (46) and a second portion covering the second through trench (flanking 42A, 42B), the second portion being spaced from the first portion (FIG. 21). RE 24, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 1, further comprising: metal pads (metal pads in RDLs 154) on the metallization structure (142); a package substrate (20); and metal interconnects (132) coupled between the metal pads (metal pads in RDLs 154) and the package substrate (20). RE 25, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 1, further comprising a package substrate (20) and a die attach layer (e.g., 34) between the dielectric layer (52A, 52B) and the package substrate (20). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 See previous Office action for a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103. Claims 2, 8, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chen. At least “combining prior art elements”, “simple substitution”, “obvious to try”, and “applying a known technique to a known device” rationales support a conclusion of obviousness. MPEP § 2143(A)-(G). RE 2, Chen is silent regarding the packaged IC of claim 1, wherein the dielectric material (56) in the through trench has an aspect ratio of 1:10 to 1:2. However, the claim range of 1:10 to 1:2 is considered to be an obvious matter of finding an optimum workable range for some chosen design requirement utilizing the disclosure of Chen. Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955). Finally, any difference in the claimed invention and the prior art may be expected to result in some differences in properties. The issue is whether the properties differ to such an extent that the difference is really unexpected. In re Merck & Co. Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). RE 8, Chen is silent regarding the packaged IC of claim 1, wherein the dielectric material (56) extends out of the through trench (46) and joins the dielectric layer (52A, 52B). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the device of Chen wherein the dielectric material extends out of the through trench and joins the dielectric layer, as such modification would involve a mere change in configuration. It has been held that a change in configuration of shape of a device is obvious, absent persuasive evidence that a particular configuration is significant. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966). RE 9, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 1, wherein the through trench (46) is a first through trench, the dielectric material (56) is a first dielectric material ([0033]), and the packaged IC includes a second through trench (flanking 42A, 42B) through the dielectric material (56) and connected with the first through trench (46), the second through trench including a second dielectric material (see below for: having an aspect ratio of equal to or greater than 1:10). The claim range of equal to or greater than 1:10 is considered to be an obvious matter of finding an optimum workable range … utilizing the disclosure of Chen. Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed …, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill …. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955). Finally, any difference in the claimed invention and the prior art may be expected to result in some differences in properties. The issue is whether the properties differ to such an extent that the difference is really unexpected. In re Merck & Co. Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chen with evidence from and/or in view of Lin et al. (US 20210013300; below, “Lin” – previously cited). MPEP § 2143(A)-(G). RE 3, Chen discloses the packaged IC of claim 1, wherein the dielectric material (56) covers side surfaces of the through trench. Chen is silent regarding a gap in the through trench. Lin, in Fig. 6 and related text, teaches a dielectric material covers side surfaces of a trench (270) and forms a gap (290) in the trench. (e.g., [0035], Fig. 6). Chen and Lin are analogous art from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify Chen as taught by Lin. This is because: 1. air has a low dielectric constant and the presence of one or more air gaps could improve dielectric properties (Lin [0035]); and 2. all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398 (2007). Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chen with evidence from and/or in view of Summerfelt et al. (US 20200203290; below, “Summerfelt” – 18 SEP 2025 IDS noted reference). MPEP § 2143(A)-(G). RE 6, Chen is silent regarding the packaged IC of claim 5, wherein the polymer dielectric material includes parylene-F, parylene-HTC, parylene-AF4, parylene C, parylene D, polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), polyimide, poly(p-phenylene-2,6-benzobisoxazole) (PBO), benzocyclobutene (BCB), Teflon, or combinations thereof. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to use the claimed materials since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960). As evidence, see Summerfelt’s [0021]. Claims 1, 2, 4-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over PODDAR et al. (US 20190206741; below, “PODDAR” – previously cited) with evidence from and/or in view of Summerfelt. MPEP § 2143(A)-(G). RE 1, PODDAR, in FIG. 7 and related text, e.g., paragraphs [0016] to [0035], discloses a packaged integrated circuit (IC) (700), comprising: PNG media_image2.png 480 721 media_image2.png Greyscale a semiconductor substrate (701, 730) having opposing first (top surface with bond pads) and second (interfaces 702) surfaces (Giving the not-in-specification terms “first surface” and “second surface” their broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) consistent with the specification, 701’s top surface and bottom surface satisfy these elements because the top surface opposes the bottom surface. MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.), the semiconductor substrate (701, 730) having a first portion (710), a second portion (720), and a through trench (750) between the first (710) and second (720) portions and extending from the first surface (top) to the second (bottom) surface of the semiconductor substrate, the through trench (750) including a dielectric material (e.g., [0032]) that (see Summerfelt for: electrically isolates) the first portion (710) and the second portion (720) of the semiconductor substrate (701, 730); a dielectric layer (740 lower – MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) on the second (bottom) surface; a metallization structure (e.g., 722 – MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) over the first (top) surface (FIG. 7, [0033]); and a dielectric structure (740 upper – MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) covering the metallization structure (722) and the through trench (750). PODDAR discloses using a die attach layer to attach die to a lead frame (e.g., [0032], [0034]). PODDAR is silent regarding the die attach layer electrically isolating the first portion (710) and the second portion (720) of the semiconductor substrate (701, 730). Summerfelt, in Abstract, FIGS. 1A to 8K, paragraphs [0001] to [0086], e.g., [0018], [0031], [0035], teaches a dielectric material (e.g., 109, 809) that electrically isolates. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the device of PODDAR as taught by Summerfelt. This is because: 1. die attach polymers are less expensive than other die attach layers, e.g., gold-silicon eutectic alloys; and 2. all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled … could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398 (2007). RE 2, modified PODDAR is silent regarding the packaged IC of claim 1, wherein the dielectric material in the through trench has an aspect ratio of 1:10 to 1:2. However, the claim range of 1:10 to 1:2 is considered to be an obvious matter of finding an optimum workable range for some chosen design requirement utilizing the disclosure of PODDAR. Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955). Finally, any difference in the claimed invention and the prior art may be expected to result in some differences in properties. The issue is whether the properties differ to such an extent that the difference is really unexpected. In re Merck & Co. Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). RE 4, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 1, wherein the first portion (710, e.g., FET operating in a voltage-controlled resistor mode) includes a first device coupled to the metallization structure and configurable to receive a first voltage, the second potion (720, e.g., FET operating in a voltage-controlled resistor mode) includes a second device coupled to the metallization structure (722) and configurable to receive a second voltage, and the first voltage and the second voltage have a difference in value of equal to or greater than 50% of a value of a smaller voltage of the first voltage and the second voltage. Regarding the underlined portions of claim 4, the court has held that a recitation of an element “capable of” performing a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform, see In re Schreiber, 44 USPQ2d 1429 (Fed. Cir. 1997). RE 5, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 1, wherein the dielectric material includes a polymer dielectric material (Summerfelt’s [0033]), an inorganic dielectric material, or combinations thereof (e.g., [0034]). RE 6, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 5, wherein the polymer dielectric material includes parylene-F, parylene-HTC, parylene-AF4, parylene C, parylene D, polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), polyimide, poly(p-phenylene-2,6-benzobisoxazole) (PBO), benzocyclobutene (BCB), Teflon, or combinations thereof (Summerfelt’s [0021]). RE 7, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 5, wherein the inorganic dielectric material includes silicon oxide (SiO2), silicon oxynitride (SiON), silicon nitride (SiN), silicon oxynitrocarbide (SiONC), silicon carbide (SiC), aluminum nitride (AlN), aluminum oxide (Al2O3 or AlOx), boron nitride (BN), boron carbon nitride (BCN), spin-on-glass (SOG), hydrogen silsesquioxane (HSQ), diamond, or combinations thereof (e.g., PODDAR’s [0026] – “ceramic slurry”; Summerfelt’s [0021]). RE 8, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 1, wherein the dielectric material extends out of the through trench (750) and joins the dielectric layer (740 lower). See PODDAR’s [0034] (dielectric material formation dependent) and Summerfelt’s 109, 809. RE 9, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 1, wherein the through trench (750) is a first through trench, the dielectric material is a first dielectric material ([0034]), and the packaged IC includes a second through trench (flanked by 730 and 701) through the dielectric material ([0034]) and connected with the first through trench (750), the second through trench (flanked by 730 and 701) including a second dielectric material (see below for: having an aspect ratio of equal to or greater than 1:10). The claim range of equal to or greater than 1:10 is considered to be an obvious matter of finding an optimum workable range … utilizing the disclosure of PODDAR. Furthermore, it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed …, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill …. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1955). Finally, any difference in the claimed invention and the prior art may be expected to result in some differences in properties. The issue is whether the properties differ to such an extent that the difference is really unexpected. In re Merck & Co. Inc., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). RE 10, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 1, further comprising a layer (740: layer have a same atomic plane) on the dielectric material and over the second (bottom) surface. RE 11, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 10, wherein the layer (740: layer have a same atomic plane – MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) covers the dielectric material (FIG. 7). RE 12, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 10, wherein the layer (740: layer have a same atomic plane) and the dielectric material cover the second (bottom) surface (Summerfelt’s 109, 809). RE 13, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 12, wherein the dielectric material covers (depending on dielectric material formation – [0034]) part of the second (bottom) surface, a part of the layer (740: layer have a same atomic plane – MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) abuts the second (bottom) surface (Summerfelt’s 109, 809). RE 14, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 10, wherein the layer (740: layer have a same atomic plane – MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) includes a metal layer, a second dielectric layer, a bonding layer, a diffusion barrier, a polarization dielectric layer, or combinations thereof ([0034]). RE 15, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 8, further comprising metal structures (702) on the second (bottom) surface, in which the dielectric layer is between adjacent metal structures (702 – FIG. 7). RE 16, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 10, wherein the through trench (750) is a first through trench, the dielectric material is a first dielectric material ([0034]), and the layer (740: layer have a same atomic plane) includes a thermal conductive layer (conductivity spectrum/continuum)) having a second through trench (flanked by 730 and 701) connected with the first through trench (750), the second through trench (flanked by 730 and 701) including a second dielectric material (portion of 740 between 730 and 701). RE 17, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 16, wherein the dielectric layer (740 lower – MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) is a first dielectric layer, and the thermal conductive layer (conductivity spectrum/continuum) includes a second dielectric layer (portion of 740 between 730 and 701), a metal layer, a diffusion barrier, a polarization dielectric layer, or combinations thereof ([0034]). RE 18, PODDAR, in FIG. 7 and related text, e.g., paragraphs [0016] to [0035], discloses a packaged IC (700), comprising: a semiconductor substrate (701, 730) having opposing first (top surface with bond pads) and second (interfaces 702) surfaces (Giving the not-in-specification terms “first surface” and “second surface” their BRI, 701’s top surface and bottom surface satisfy these elements because the top surface opposes the bottom surface. MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.), the semiconductor substrate (701, 730) having a first portion (710) and a second portion (720), and a through trench (750. Giving the not-in-specification term “through trench” its BRI, 750 satisfies this element because 750 passes vertically between 710 and 720. MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) between the first (710) and second (720) portions and extending from the first surface (top) to the second (bottom) surface of the semiconductor substrate, the through trench (750) including a dielectric material ([0032]) that (see Summerfelt for: electrically isolates) the first portion (710) and the second portion (720) of the semiconductor substrate (701, 730); a metallization structure (e.g., 721. Giving the not-in-specification term “metallization structure” its BRI, wire bond 721 satisfies this element because 721 includes a metal. MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) over the first (top) surface; and a structure (740) on the second (bottom) surface and covering the through trench (750). PODDAR discloses using a die attach layer to attach die to a lead frame (e.g., [0032], [0034]). PODDAR is silent regarding the die attach layer electrically isolating the first portion (710) and the second portion (720) of the semiconductor substrate (701, 730). Summerfelt, in Abstract, FIGS. 1A to 8K, paragraphs [0001] to [0086], e.g., [0018], [0031], [0035], teaches a dielectric material (e.g., 109, 809) that electrically isolates. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the device of PODDAR as taught by Summerfelt. This is because: 1. die attach polymers provide good thermal performance, i.e., polymer efficiently transfers heat from die to package; and 2. all the claimed elements were known … and one … could have combined the elements …, and the combination would have yielded predictable results …. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007). RE 19, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 18, wherein the through trench (750) is a first through trench, the semiconductor substrate (701, 730) includes a second through trench (flanked by 730 and 701 – MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) including the dielectric material ([0034]), and the structure (740) includes a first dielectric portion (underneath 710 and 720) covering the first through trench (750), a second dielectric portion (underneath 722) covering the second through trench (flanked by 730 and 701), and a metal portion (722) laterally between the first and second dielectric portions; and wherein the packaged IC includes: a package substrate (703, 731, 732), and a die attach layer ([0032]) coupled between the metal portion (722) and the package substrate (703, 731, 732). RE 20, PODDAR, in FIG. 7 and related text, e.g., paragraphs [0016] to [0035], discloses a packaged IC (700), comprising: a semiconductor substrate (701, 730) having opposing first (top surface with bond pads) and second (interfaces 702) surfaces (MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.), the semiconductor substrate (701, 730) having a first portion (710) and a second portion (720), and a through trench (750) laterally between the first (710) and second (720) portions and extending from the first (top) surface to the second (bottom) surface of the semiconductor substrate, the through trench (750) including a dielectric material ([0032]) that (see Summerfelt for: electrically isolates) the first portion (710) and the second portion (720) of the semiconductor substrate (701, 730); a metallization structure (e.g., 722. MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) and contact pads on the first (top) surface (FIG. 7, [0033]); a package substrate (703, 731, 732); metal interconnects (721, 723) vertically between the contact pads and the package substrate (703, 731, 732); and a layer (740 – MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) on the second (bottom) surface and covering the through trench (750) and the dielectric material. PODDAR discloses using a die attach layer to attach die to a lead frame (e.g., [0032], [0034]). PODDAR is silent regarding the die attach layer electrically isolating the first portion (710) and the second portion (720) of the semiconductor substrate (701, 730). Summerfelt, in Abstract, FIGS. 1A to 8K, paragraphs [0001] to [0086], e.g., [0018], [0031], [0035], teaches a dielectric material (e.g., 109, 809) that electrically isolates. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the device of PODDAR as taught by Summerfelt. This is because: 1. die attach polymers are cost-effective and provide efficient thermal performance; and 2. all the claimed elements were known … and one … could have combined the elements …, and the combination would have yielded predictable results …. KSR, 550 U.S. 398 (2007). RE 21, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 20, wherein the layer (740) includes a dielectric layer ([0034]). RE 22, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 19, wherein the structure (740) includes a first layer (atoms surrounding 710 and 720 – MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) covering two opposing lateral sides and a top side of the first dielectric portion (underneath 710 and 720), and a second layer (atoms surrounding 722 – MPEP §§ 2111 and 2131.) covering two opposing lateral sides and a top side of the second dielectric portion (underneath 722). RE 23, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 1, wherein the through trench (750) is a first through trench, the semiconductor substrate (701, 730) includes a second through trench (flanked by 730 and 701), and the dielectric layer includes a first portion covering the first through trench (750) and a second portion covering the second through trench (flanked by 730 and 701), the second portion being spaced from the first portion (FIG. 7). RE 24, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 1, further comprising: metal pads (FIG. 7, [0033]) on the metallization structure (e.g., 722); a package substrate (703, 731, 732); and metal interconnects (721, 723) coupled between the metal pads and the package substrate (703, 731, 732). RE 25, modified PODDAR discloses the packaged IC of claim 1, further comprising a package substrate (703, 731, 732) and a die attach layer ([0032]) between the dielectric layer (740 lower) and the package substrate (703, 731, 732). Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over PODDAR with evidence from and/or in view of Summerfelt with further evidence from and/or in further view of Lin. MPEP § 2143(A)-(G). RE 3, modified PODDAR is silent regarding the packaged IC of claim 1, wherein the dielectric material covers side surfaces of the through trench and forms a gap in the through trench. Lin, in Fig. 6 and related text, teaches a dielectric material covers side surfaces of a trench (270) and forms a gap (290) in the trench. (e.g., [0035], Fig. 6). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify PODDAR with evidence from and/or in view of Summerfelt as taught by Lin. This is because: 1. air has a low dielectric constant and the presence of one or more air gaps could improve dielectric properties (Lin [0035]); and 2. all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398 (2007). Claims 1-25 are rejected. Response to Applicant’s Amendments and/or Arguments Applicants’ rebuttal arguments filed 28 JAN 2025 (REM pages 7 to 10) have been fully considered, but are found to be unpersuasive in light of the arguments and positions outlined supra. Additionally, the new ground of rejection was necessary due to the applicant’s amendments. Applicant’s arguments regarding patentability have been fully considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Walter Swanson whose telephone number is (571) 270-3322. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday, 8:30 to 17:30 EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Joshua Benitez, can be reached on (571)270-1435. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /WALTER H SWANSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 28, 2022
Application Filed
Aug 10, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Nov 13, 2024
Response Filed
May 12, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
May 13, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 14, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Sep 18, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 25, 2025
Final Rejection — §102, §103
Jan 28, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 02, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 03, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604494
GATE END CAP AND BOUNDARY PLACEMENT IN TRANSISTOR STRUCTURES FOR N-METAL OXIDE SEMICONDUCTOR (N-MOS) PERFORMANCE TUNING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593708
SEMICONDUCTOR PACKAGE INCLUDING STACKED SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICES AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURINGTHE SEMICONDUCTOR PACKAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12563714
Buried Signal Wires for Memory Applications
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12550746
SUBSTRATE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SUBSTRATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12546939
SEMICONDUCTOR PACKAGE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+10.2%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 815 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month