Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/090,140

SOCKET INTERFACE FRAMES FOR DEVICES WITH IMPROVED-PERFORMANCE SUBSTRATES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Dec 28, 2022
Examiner
ARMAND, MARC ANTHONY
Art Unit
2813
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Intel Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
861 granted / 1037 resolved
+15.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+3.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
1070
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.2%
-36.8% vs TC avg
§103
57.0%
+17.0% vs TC avg
§102
21.7%
-18.3% vs TC avg
§112
9.7%
-30.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1037 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arrington et al., (Arrington) US 2021/0202348 in view of Terhune IV US 2014/0099827. Regarding claim 1, Arrington shows in FIG. 5D-13, an integrated circuit (IC) device, comprising: a substrate (310), comprising a first surface, wherein the substrate (310) comprises glass [0024]; an IC die (305)[0050], comprising a second surface, wherein the second surface is coupled to a first portion of the first surface (of 310), and the first portion is surrounded by a second portion of the first surface; and a frame (860), wherein the frame (860) is affixed to the second portion. Arrington differs from the claimed invention because he does not explicitly disclose a device wherein the frame comprising a feature beyond an outer perimeter of the first surface, wherein the feature comprises a notch, an opening, or a protrusion. Terhune discloses and shows in FIG. 2, a device wherein the frame (40,10) [0019] comprising a feature beyond an outer perimeter of the first surface, wherein the feature comprises a notch (401) [0019], an opening, or a protrusion. Terhune is evidence that ordinary workers skilled in the art would find reasons, suggestions or motivations to modify the device of Arrington. Therefore, at the time the invention was made; It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Terhune in the device of Arrington because it will reduce damage in the electronic package [0008]. Regarding claim 2, Arrington in view of Terhune discloses an IC device wherein the feature (40,10) [0019] is to mate with a complementary structure of a socket [0006] to receive the IC device (41). Terhune is evidence that ordinary workers skilled in the art would find reasons, suggestions or motivations to modify the device of Arrington. Therefore, at the time the invention was made; It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Terhune in the device of Arrington because it will reduce damage in the electronic package [0008]. Regarding claims 3,4, Arrington in view of Terhune discloses an IC device wherein the frame (1060) comprises a material other than glass [0070]; wherein the frame is a continuous metal structure coupled to the first surface and encircling an edge of the substrate (310). Regarding claim 5, Arrington in view of Terhune discloses an IC device wherein the feature (40,10) comprises an opening to receive a keying feature (14) of the socket (it could also be via hooks 321 and receiving portion 110). Terhune is evidence that ordinary workers skilled in the art would find reasons, suggestions or motivations to modify the device of Arrington. Therefore, at the time the invention was made; It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Terhune in the device of Arrington because it will reduce damage in the electronic package [0008]. Regarding claim 6, Arrington in view of Terhune discloses an IC device wherein the frame (1060) [0050] is affixed to the second portion by an epoxy [0050]. Regarding claim 7, Arrington in view of Terhune discloses an IC device further comprising a heat spreader (980) coupled to a third surface of the IC die (305), the third surface distal the second surface, wherein the heat spreader (980) comprises a metal [0070]. Regarding claim 8, Arrington in view of Terhune discloses an IC device, wherein the heat spreader (980) extends laterally beyond the outer perimeter of the first surface (surface where die 305 makes the contact). Regarding claims 9-11 Arrington in view of Terhune discloses an IC device, wherein the heat spreader (980) is coupled to the frame (860); wherein the heat spreader (980) comprises a heat pipe [0046,0047]; a thermal interface material (1050)[0050] between the third surface and the heat spreader (980). Regarding claim 12, Arrington shows in FIG. 5D-13, an integrated circuit (IC) device, comprising: an IC die (305); a substrate (310), comprising an upper surface coupled to a lower surface of the IC die (305), the substrate comprising glass [0024]; a frame (1060) coupled to an outer portion of the upper surface. Arrington differs from the claimed invention because he does not explicitly disclose a device having a socket, wherein the socket is configured to mate to the frame. Terhune shows and discloses a device having a socket [0006], wherein the socket (portions 14, 321, 110, are configured to mate) is configured to mate to the frame. Terhune is evidence that ordinary workers skilled in the art would find reasons, suggestions or motivations to modify the device of Arrington. Therefore, at the time the invention was made; It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Terhune in the device of Arrington because it will reduce damage in the electronic package [0008]. Regarding claims 13-15, Arrington in view of Terhune discloses an IC device, wherein the frame (40,10) comprises an inner perimeter and an outer perimeter, the inner perimeter around the IC die (41), and the outer perimeter around the inner perimeter, and the socket comprises a structure configured to mate with a void (shown by Arrington) in the frame. Terhune is evidence that ordinary workers skilled in the art would find reasons, suggestions or motivations to modify the device of Arrington. Therefore, at the time the invention was made; It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Terhune in the device of Arrington because it will reduce damage in the electronic package [0008]. Regarding claim 16, Arrington shows in FIG. 5D-13, an integrated circuit (IC) system, comprising: a first substrate (810); a second substrate (310), wherein the second substrate (310) is coupled to the first substrate by a socket (socket mount technology can be used as 811 [0046]), wherein the second substrate (310) comprises glass [0024]; an IC die (305) coupled to a surface of the second substrate (310) distal the first substrate (310); and a frame (860) coupled to the surface and extending beyond an outer perimeter of the second substrate. Arrington differs from the claimed invention because he does not explicitly disclose a device wherein the frame has an opening configured to pair with the socket. Terhune shows and discloses a device wherein the frame has an opening configured to pair with the socket [0006], (portions 14, 321, 110, are configured to pair). Terhune is evidence that ordinary workers skilled in the art would find reasons, suggestions or motivations to modify the device of Arrington. Therefore, at the time the invention was made; It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the teaching of Terhune in the device of Arrington because it will reduce damage in the electronic package [0008]. Regarding claims 17-20, Arrington in view of Terhune discloses an IC device, wherein a portion of the surface surrounds the IC die (305) and is between the IC die and the frame; a heat spreader (980), wherein the heat spreader is coupled to an upper surface of the IC die (305), the upper surface distal the second substrate (310); wherein a lateral dimension of the heat spreader (980) is greater than a lateral dimension of the second substrate (310)(contact portion of 305) ; wherein the heat spreader (980) comprises a heat pipe. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC-ANTHONY ARMAND whose telephone number is (571)272-5178. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm. 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, Steven B Gauthier can be reached at 571-270-0373. 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. MARC - ANTHONY ARMAND Examiner Art Unit 2813 /STEVEN B GAUTHIER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2813
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 28, 2022
Application Filed
Jul 05, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604476
MEMORY DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12603628
SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURE AND METHOD FOR PREPARING SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURE, FILM BULK ACOUSTIC RESONATOR AND METHOD FOR PREPARING FILM BULK ACOUSTIC RESONATOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604420
SENSOR PACKAGE STRUCTURE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12597769
ELECTROSTATIC DISCHARGE PROTECTION DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593686
POWER ELECTRONICS MODULE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
83%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+3.9%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1037 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