Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/050,010

STACKED STRUCTURES WITH CAPACITIVE COUPLING CONNECTIONS

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 26, 2022
Examiner
LUKE, DANIEL M
Art Unit
2896
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Adeia Semiconductor Bonding Technologies Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
478 granted / 678 resolved
+2.5% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+20.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
36 currently pending
Career history
714
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
47.0%
+7.0% vs TC avg
§102
27.3%
-12.7% vs TC avg
§112
22.9%
-17.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 678 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION This office action is in response to the election filed 1/2/2026. Currently, claims 1-2, 5, 10-12, 15, 17-18, 23, 26-28 and 30-36 are pending. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of the species represented by FIG. 4 is acknowledged. Drawings The drawings are objected to because FIG. 4 does not accurately portray its description from the specification. Para. [0035] states “a first die 302 and can include first communication pads 304, a second die 312 can include second communication pads 314”. However, FIG. 4 instead does not show any communication pads associated with the first die 302, but rather only a signal pad 344. The communication pad 304 is instead associated with the second die 312 (line 330 is defined by the border of the front surface 340 of the first die 302 and the rear surface 350 of the second die 312; as shown in FIG. 4, 304 is on the side of 330 that is within the bonding layer 319 of the second die 312). Further, (right-most) “314” is used to label a signal pad of the third die 322, which is presented in the disclosure as “324”. Similarly, the capacitive communication of a pad from one die to a pad of another die through a bulk semiconductor is not shown in FIG. 4. In the elected embodiment shown in FIG. 4, the only pads that communicate a signal capacitively with a semiconductor layer intervening therebetween are pads of a same die, formed on opposite sides thereof. Further, (right-most) “314” is used to label a signal pad of the third die 322, which is presented in the disclosure as “324”. Furthermore, the drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. The embodiment represented by FIG. 4 has been elected, and while there is support in the specification for the claimed feature “at least one of the first communication pads communicates a non-noise signal capacitively with at least one of the second communication pads” (claim 1) in this embodiment (see para. [0036]), this is not shown in FIG. 4. Therefore, this feature must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). Further still, the limitations “wherein the first bonding layer comprises a field bonding layer material between first communication pads and a first capacitive communication tuning dielectric material over the at least one first communication pad” (claim 11), “a second capacitive communication tuning dielectric over the at least one second communication pad” (claim 12), “at least one of the third communication pads capacitively communicates with at least one of the second communication pads” (claim 17) and “wherein the at least one of the first communication pads communicates capacitively with a first pad of the at least one of the second communication pads, and wherein a second pad of the at least one of the second communication pads communicates capacitively with the at least one of the third communication pads” (claim 18) are not shown in the drawings. FIG. 4 is the only figure to show a third die comprising third communication pads, but FIG. 4 does not show any capacitive communication between pads of different dies. Therefore, this feature must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Finally, the drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: “318” (para. [0040]). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1-2, 5, 10, 17-18, 23, 26-27 and 30-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ghosh (US 2020/0266158). Pertaining to claim 1, Ghosh shows, with reference to FIG. 1 or 2, a multi-die electronic apparatus comprising: a first die (16 or 30) comprising first communication pads (22 or 42), the first die having a first device surface (top) including first devices, and a first back surface (bottom) opposite the first device surface; a second die (14 or 28) comprising second communication pads (20 or 40), the second die having a second device surface (top) including second devices, and a second back surface (bottom) opposite the first device surface; wherein the first and second dies are vertically stacked with the second back surface facing the first device surface (FIG. 1 or 2), and at least one of the first communication pads communicates a non-noise signal capacitively with at least one of the second communication pads (para. [0035], [0038]). Pertaining to claim 2, Ghosh shows the dies may be bonded by e.g. hybrid bonding (para. [0043] which, by definition, requires dielectric layers at the bonding surfaces so that they can be directly bonded without an intervening adhesive. Pertaining to claim 5, Ghosh shows the at least one first communication pad is proximate the first device surface and the at least one second communication pad is proximate the second device surface, wherein the at least one first communication pad communicates capacitively with the at least one second communication pad through a bulk semiconductor material of the second die (para. [0035], FIG. 1). Pertaining to claim 10, in the case that the bonding layers are present, communication is only possible by traversing the bonding layers. Pertaining to claim 17, Ghosh shows a third die (12) comprising third communication pads (18), the third die having a third device surface (top) including third devices, and a third back surface opposite the third device surface, wherein the second and third dies are vertically stacked with the third back surface facing the second device surface (FIG. 1), and at least one of the third communication pads capacitively communicates with at least one of the second communication pads (para. [0034] – [0035]). Pertaining to claim 18, Ghosh shows the at least one of the first communication pads communicates capacitively with a first pad of the at least one of the second communication pads, and wherein a second pad of the at least one of the second communication pads communicates capacitively with the at least one of the third communication pads (para. [0035]). Pertaining to claim 23, Ghosh shows, again with reference to either FIG. 1 or 2, an electronic apparatus, comprising: a first die (16 or 30); a second die stacked (14 or 28) on the first die; and a third die (12 or 26) stacked on the second die; wherein the first and second dies are configured to communicate non-noise signals capacitively (para. [0035], [0038]); and the second and third die are configured to communicate non-noise signals capacitively (para. [0035], [0038]). Pertaining to claims 26 and 27, Ghosh shows the dies may be bonded by direct bonding (para. [0043]). Pertaining to claim 30, Ghosh shows the first and second dies are configured to capacitively communicate signals between first and second signal pads, wherein a bulk semiconductor layer of the second die physically intervenes between the first and second signal pads (para. [0035], FIG. 1). Pertaining to claim 31, Ghosh shows the second and third dies are configured to capacitively communicate signals between second and third signal pads, wherein a bulk semiconductor layer of the third die physically intervenes between the second and third signal pads (para. [0035], FIG. 1). Pertaining to claim 32, Ghosh shows, with reference to FIG. 1, a stack of dies, comprising: a first die (16) comprising first communication pads (22); and a second die (14) vertically stacked with the first die, the second die comprising second communication pads (20); wherein at least one of the first communication pads communicates a signal capacitively with at least one of the second communication pads with a semiconductor layer (substrate of 14) intervening between the at least one first communication pad and the at least one second communication pad (para. [0035]). Pertaining to claim 33, Ghosh shows the first and second dies are stacked with a front (top) surface of the first die facing a back (bottom) surface of the second die, and the semiconductor layer comprises a bulk substrate of the second die (para. [0036]). Pertaining to claim 34, Ghosh shows a third die (12) stacked on the second die with a front (top) surface of the second die facing a back (bottom) surface of the third die, the third die comprising third communication pads (18), at least one of the third communication pads communicating capacitively with at least one of the second communication pads with a bulk substrate of the third die intervening between the at least one third communication pad and the at least one second communication pad (para. [0035], FIG. 1). Pertaining to claim 35, Ghosh shows the second die is directly bonded to the first die (FIG. 1). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghosh in view of Haba et al. (US 10,811,388). Ghosh shows the apparatus of claim 5, but fails to show the claimed arrangement of the field bonding layer materials and the tuning dielectric materials. However, Haba teaches in col. 6, lines 37-48 and FIG. 5 that, for a similar apparatus having directly bonded dies in capacitive communication with one another, each die has a field bonding layer material 110 between communication pads and a first capacitive communication tuning dielectric material 514 over the communication pads, such that the capacitive communication is through the tuning dielectric materials. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Ghosh to include the tuning dielectric material, as taught by Haba, with the motivation that the tuning dielectric protects against charge and voltage leakage, or dielectric breakdown (col. 6, lines 45-48). Claims 15, 28 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ghosh. Ghosh shows the dies are directly hybrid bonded to one another (para. [0043]), which, by definition, requires metal-to metal pad bonding. Although Ghosh does not specify a power or ground connection, these are ones of a limited number of connection types. In such instances, the court has held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success is prima facie obvious. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Zeng et al. (US 2023/0402415), Ghosh (US 2019/0171931), Yang et al. (US 2023/0049255), Li et al. (US 11,114,414), Lai et al. (US 8,072,064), and Davidson (US 5,880,010) disclose inventions similar to Applicant’s. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL M LUKE whose telephone number is (571)270-1569. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-5pm, EST. 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, William Kraig can be reached at (571) 272-8660. 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. /DANIEL LUKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 26, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604725
INTERLEVEL DIELECTRIC STRUCTURE IN SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598977
FILL OF VIAS IN SINGLE AND DUAL DAMASCENE STRUCTURES USING SELF-ASSEMBLED MONOLAYER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12575310
DISPLAY APPARATUS HAVING A REPAIR WIRING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12568815
WIRINGS FOR SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE ARRANGED AT DIFFERENT INTERVALS AND HAVING DIFFERENT WIDTHS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12564025
Interconnect with Redeposited Metal Capping and Method Forming Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
70%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+20.5%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 678 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