Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/064,968

ELECTRONIC COMPONENT AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING ELECTRONIC COMPONENT

Final Rejection §102§112
Filed
Dec 13, 2022
Examiner
PATERSON, BRIGITTE A
Art Unit
2896
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Murata Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
76%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 76% — above average
76%
Career Allow Rate
283 granted / 371 resolved
+8.3% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+23.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
402
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
45.1%
+5.1% vs TC avg
§102
30.1%
-9.9% vs TC avg
§112
22.2%
-17.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 371 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 19 recites “…wherein both the first low temperature co-fired material and the second low temperature co-fired ceramic material have a same or substantially a same ceramic composition.” The term "substantially" is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite; it is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. “Substantially” is defined as "being largely but not wholly that which is specified” (see Merriam Webster online dictionary). This language is indefinite as the specification does not describe what is required of the ceramic compositions of the first low temperature ceramic material and second low temperature ceramic material in order to be considered “substantially a same ceramic composition”. The term “substantially” modifies a target, and implicitly requires boundaries at some maximum value above the target and at some minimum value below the target beyond which one is not “substantially” the target any more. Neither the claims, nor the specification, defines these boundaries. Thus, it is unclear whether one must be within some small percentage of deviation of the target (such as 0.01 %, 0.1 %, 1 %, 2 %, 5 %, 10 %, or some other percentage) or within a certain number of units of the target, and specifically which of these possible values defines the boundaries. For example, if the first low temperature ceramic layer is alumina, what characteristics of the second low temperature ceramic material are required in order to be substantially the same as alumina? Does the second material need to merely be an oxide? Does it need to contain aluminum? Does it need to have the same crystal structure or firing temperature? If one were to poll 100 people having ordinary skill in the art, there would be many different responses for the boundaries. Thus, determining whether one is infringing the limitation is subjective, rather than objective, and thus the claim is unclear. Therefore, the claim is rejected as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. 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. Claim(s) 1-4, 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2010/0301459 A1 (Akiba). Re claim 1, Akiba teaches an electronic component comprising: an electronic component body (semiconductor element layer 12a); at least one electrode (conductive structure including surface wiring 14 and redistribution wiring 17) on a surface of the electronic component body; and a cover layer (insulating structure including insulation layers 2, 3, 16) having insulating properties on at least a part of a periphery of the electrode and extending across a boundary between the periphery of the electrode and the surface of the electronic component body (Figs. 1 and 2), wherein the electrode includes, on the at least part of the periphery, a lower electrode (surface wiring 14) closer to the surface of the electronic component body and an upper electrode (redistribution wiring 17) on the lower electrode, the lower electrode is in direct contact with the upper electrode, the cover layer is not disposed between the lower electrode and the upper electrode (layer 3 of the cover layer is not between the lower or upper electrode and in the highlighted portion where the lower and upper electrodes are connected there is not intervening layer see Fig. 2 below), PNG media_image1.png 438 562 media_image1.png Greyscale the lower electrode extends more outward than the upper electrode to create a step at the at least part of the periphery of the electrode, and at the step at the periphery of the electrode, the cover layer extends from a surface of the upper electrode to a portion with no electrodes on the surface of the electronic component body (Figs. 1 and 2). PNG media_image2.png 587 496 media_image2.png Greyscale PNG media_image3.png 327 749 media_image3.png Greyscale Re claim 2, Akiba teaches wherein the at least one electrode includes multiple electrodes on the surface of the electronic component body (Fig. 1), the multiple electrodes include an outermost peripheral electrode most peripherally disposed on the surface of the electronic component body and an inner electrode inward of the outermost peripheral electrodes, the outermost peripheral electrode includes the step, and the cover layer is on the step (the upper and lower electrode layers comprising a step due to the difference in area is present in all electrodes Fig. 1). Re claim 3, Akiba teaches wherein the outermost peripheral electrode includes the step at its edge most peripherally disposed on the surface of the electronic component body, and the cover layer is on the step (lower electrode layer 14 extends further to the rightmost and leftmost edge of the substrate than the upper electrode layer 17 Fig. 1 and 2). Re claim 4, Akiba teaches wherein the at least one electrode includes multiple electrodes on the surface of the electronic component body, at least one of the multiple electrodes includes the step at its edge facing adjacent electrode of the multiple electrodes, and the cover layer is on the step (lower electrode layer 14 extends further outward the upper electrode 17 around all sides of the electrode Fig. 1 and 2). Re claim 17, Akiba teaches wherein the surface of the electronic component body includes a ceramic layer, and the cover layer is a ceramic cover layer (insulating layer 16 of the cover layer can be a ceramic like SiO or SiN [0070]). Re claim 18, Akiba teaches wherein the surface of the electronic component body includes a ceramic layer containing a first low temperature co-fired ceramic material, and the cover layer contains a second low temperature co-fired ceramic material (insulating layer 16 of the cover layer extends across the terminating surface of the device and can be a ceramic like SiO or SiN [0070]). Re claim 19, Akiba teaches wherein both the first low temperature co-fired ceramic material and the second low temperature co-fired ceramic material have a same or substantially a same ceramic composition (insulating layer 16 of the cover layer extends across the terminating surface of the device and can be a ceramic like SiO or SiN [0070]). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2020/0273764 A1 (Chen). PNG media_image4.png 299 566 media_image4.png Greyscale US 2020/0006263 A1 (Seidmann) PNG media_image5.png 345 573 media_image5.png Greyscale US 2014/0284790 A1 (Matsumoto) PNG media_image6.png 414 471 media_image6.png Greyscale Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIGITTE A PATERSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1752. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:00PM. 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. BRIGITTE A. PATERSON Primary Examiner Art Unit 2896 /BRIGITTE A PATERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 13, 2022
Application Filed
Dec 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Feb 23, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 06, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12588352
ENERGY LEVELS AND DEVICE STRUCTURES FOR PLASMONIC OLEDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588495
BONDING ALIGNMENT MARKS AT BONDING INTERFACE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12583740
INTER-POLY CONNECTION FOR PARASITIC CAPACITOR AND DIE SIZE IMPROVEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581709
TELLURIUM OXIDE, AND THIN FILM TRANSISTOR COMPRISING SAME AS CHANNEL LAYER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12568866
SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
76%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+23.4%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 371 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