Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/179,126

DIRECT BONDING METHODS AND STRUCTURES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 06, 2023
Examiner
NGUYEN, NIKI HOANG
Art Unit
2818
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Adeia Semiconductor Bonding Technologies Inc.
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
91%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 91% — above average
91%
Career Allow Rate
833 granted / 919 resolved
+22.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +5% lift
Without
With
+5.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
939
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
39.2%
-0.8% vs TC avg
§102
35.7%
-4.3% vs TC avg
§112
12.0%
-28.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 919 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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/27/2025 was filed after the mailing date of the Non-Final Office Rejection on 07/25/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Allowable Subject Matter The indicated allowability of claims 1,3,5-9,12,14-17 and 19 is withdrawn in view of the newly discovered reference(s) to Uzoh (US 20220139867) which is submitted by the Applicant filed on 10/24/2025 and Takao (JP 7235523A). Rejections based on the newly cited reference(s) follow. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claims 1,3,5-9,12,14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uzoh (US 20220139867), and further in view of Takao (JP 7235523A). Regarding claim 1, Uzoh teaches a process in figs. 1-2, comprising: providing an element (18,20) having a dielectric bonding surface (24) and a conductive feature (23) exposed at the dielectric bonding surface (24), the dielectric bonding surface (24) having a planarity suitable for direct bonding (see fig. 2A); exposing the dielectric bonding surface to products of [[a]] the water vapor plasma prior to direct bonding (see par. 35 and fig. 2C). Uzoh does not mention about generating water vapor plasma with a plasma generation apparatus by supplying water vapor to a plasma generating apparatus without supplying additional reactive species to the plasma generation apparatus. Takao teaches generating water vapor plasma with a plasma generation apparatus by supplying water vapor to a plasma generating apparatus without supplying additional reactive species to the plasma generation apparatus (see par. 13). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art before the invention was made to include generating water vapor plasma with a plasma generation apparatus by supplying water vapor to a plasma generating apparatus without supplying additional reactive species to the plasma generation apparatus by Takao in the teaching of Uzoh so that it is capable of removing deposition reaction products deposited in a region where plasma is not irradiated much or not at all by dry cleaning (see par. 0007). Regarding claim 3, Uzoh and Takao teach all the limitations of the claimed invention for the same reasons as set forth above. Besides, figs. 2A-2D of Uzoh teaches the element (18,20) comprises a first element, the dielectric bonding surface (24) comprises a first dielectric bonding surface (24), and the conductive feature (23) comprises a first conductive feature (23), the process further comprising: providing a second element (20,18) having a second dielectric bonding surface (24) and a second conductive feature (23) exposed at the second dielectric bonding surface (24), wherein the second dielectric bonding surface has a planarity suitable for direct bonding (see figs. 2A-2B); and directly bonding the first element to the second element by directly bonding the first dielectric bonding surface to the second dielectric bonding surface (see fig. 2D). Regarding claim 5, Uzoh and Takao teach all the limitations of the claimed invention for the same reasons as set forth above. Besides, figs. 2A-2D of Uzoh teaches after directly bonding the first element to the second element (18,20), annealing the directly bonded first and second elements to form metallic bonds between the first and second conductive features (see par. 38). Regarding claim 6, Uzoh and Takao teach all the limitations of the claimed invention for the same reasons as set forth above. Besides, figs. 2A-2D of Uzoh teaches before directly bonding the first element to the second element, positioning the second element over the first element such that the first dielectric bonding surface is facing the second dielectric bonding surface and the first conductive feature is aligned with the second conductive feature (see par. 39 and fig. 2D). Regarding claim 7, Uzoh and Takao teach all the limitations of the claimed invention for the same reasons as set forth above. Besides, fig. 2D of Uzoh teaches the first conductive feature (refer to conductive feature 23 of 18) is recessed below the first dielectric bonding surface and the second conductive feature (refer to conductive feature 23 of 20) is recessed below the second dielectric bonding surface (see par. 24). Regarding claim 8, Uzoh and Takao teach all the limitations of the claimed invention for the same reasons as set forth above. Besides, Uzoh teaches before annealing the directly bonded first and second elements, a distance between the first and second conductive features is 12 nm or less (see par. 24). Regarding claim 9, Uzoh and Takao teach all the limitations of the claimed invention for the same reasons as set forth above. Besides, Uzoh teaches annealing the directly bonded first and second elements comprises annealing the first and second elements at a temperature less than 200°C (see par. 24). Regarding claim 12, Uzoh and Takao teach all the limitations of the claimed invention for the same reasons as set forth above. Besides, Uzoh teaches forming a protective layer (refer to protective layer in par. 23) over a back surface of the first element; and after directly bonding the first element to the second element, singulating the directly bonded first and second elements into a plurality of bonded dies (see par. 23). Regarding claim 14, Uzoh and Takao teach all the limitations of the claimed invention for the same reasons as set forth above. Besides, Uzoh teaches the conductive feature comprises copper (see par. 31). Regarding claim 15, Uzoh teaches a process in figs. 1-2, comprising: providing a first element (18,20) having a first dielectric bonding surface (24) and a first conductive feature (23) exposed at the first dielectric bonding surface (24); supplying products of a water vapor plasma to the first element and exposing the first dielectric bonding surface to the products of the water vapor plasma (see par. 35); providing a second element (18) having a second dielectric bonding surface (24) and a second conductive feature (23) exposed at the second dielectric bonding surface (24); and directly hybrid bonding the first element to the second element after supplying the products of the water vapor plasma to the first element (see par. 20), wherein directly hybrid bonding comprises room temperature bonding the first dielectric bonding surface to the second dielectric bonding surface to form an initial bonded structure and subsequently annealing the initial bonded structure to form metallic bonds between the first and second conductive features (see par. 20). Regarding claim 17, Uzoh teaches all the limitations of the claimed invention for the same reasons as set forth above except for exposing the first dielectric bonding surface to the products of the water vapor plasma comprises supplying water vapor to a plasma generation apparatus without supplying additional reactive species to the plasma generation apparatus. Takao teaches generating water vapor plasma with a plasma generation apparatus by supplying water vapor to a plasma generating apparatus without supplying additional reactive species to the plasma generation apparatus (see par. 13). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skills in the art before the invention was made to include generating water vapor plasma with a plasma generation apparatus by supplying water vapor to a plasma generating apparatus without supplying additional reactive species to the plasma generation apparatus by Takao in the teaching of Uzoh so that it is capable of removing deposition reaction products deposited in a region where plasma is not irradiated much or not at all by dry cleaning (see par. 0007). Allowable Subject Matter Claim 16 is 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, since the prior art of record and considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure does not teach or suggest “supplying the products of the water vapor plasma to the first element comprises supplying the products of a mixture of the water vapor plasma and a carrier gas to the first element.” Claim 19 is 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, since the prior art of record and considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure does not teach or suggest “before supplying the products of the water vapor plasma to the first element, supplying products of an oxygen plasma to the first element to expose the first dielectric bonding surface to the products of the oxygen plasma.” Claims 23-25 and 27-29 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Regarding claim 23, the prior art of record alone or in combination neither teaches nor makes obvious the invention of a method of forming a bonded structure, the method comprising: “supplying water vapor and oxygen to a plasma generation apparatus to generate a plasma” in combination of all of the limitations of claim 23. Claims 24-25 and 27-29 include all of the limitations of claim 23. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Niki Tram Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 272-5526. The examiner can normally be reached on 6:00am-4:00pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Steven Loke can be reached on (703)872-9306. 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. /NIKI H NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 06, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 27, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 14, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598757
STRUCTURE AND FORMATION METHOD OF PACKAGE WITH HYBRID INTERCONNECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598962
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR BONDING TRANSPARENT CONDUCTOR SUBSTRATES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593711
Bonding Structure with Stress Buffer Zone and Method of Forming Same
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593472
INTEGRATED CIRCUIT INCLUDING GATE-ALL-AROUND TRANSISTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581975
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICES AND RELATED METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
91%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+5.1%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
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