Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/846,086

PACKAGE ARCHITECTURE WITH VERTICAL STACKING OF INTEGRATED CIRCUIT DIES HAVING PLANARIZED EDGES

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Jun 22, 2022
Examiner
TRAN, THANH Y
Art Unit
2817
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Intel Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
791 granted / 919 resolved
+18.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
935
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
41.1%
+1.1% vs TC avg
§102
41.9%
+1.9% vs TC avg
§112
7.1%
-32.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 919 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or 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 . Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-15) and Species A including Species A1 (claims 1-9, 11-12, and 14-15) in the reply filed on 12/05/2025 is acknowledged. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-2, 5-7, 9, 11, and 14-15 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5-6, 8-10, and 13-14 of copending Application No. 17/846,109 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the limitations recited in claims 1-2, 5-7, 9, 11, and 14-15 of the present invention are recited within claims 1, 5-6, 8-10, and 13-14 of copending Application No. 17/846,109. Claim 5 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of copending Application No. 17/846,129 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the limitations recited in claim 5 of the present invention are recited within claim 1 of copending Application No. 17/846,129. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 3-4, 8, and 12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THANH Y TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2110. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 10am-10pm (flex) (PST). Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kretelia Graham can be reached at (571)272-5055. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /Thanh Y. Tran/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817 March 21, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 22, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 10, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603124
METHODS OF FORMING MICROELECTRONIC DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599032
BILAYER MEMORY STACKING WITH LINES SHARED BETWEEN BOTTOM AND TOP MEMORY LAYERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593732
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588550
INTEGRATED CIRCUIT INTERCONNECT WITH EMBEDDED DIE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12557614
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE, SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE MANUFACTURING METHOD, AND SUBSTRATE REUSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+9.1%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 919 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