Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 18, 2026
Application No. 18/242,991

MOLDED CORE SUBSTRATE FOR EMBEDDING COMPONENTS

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Sep 06, 2023
Examiner
KOLB, THADDEUS J
Art Unit
2817
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Advanced Micro Devices Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
8m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allowance Rate
25 granted / 30 resolved
+15.3% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
69
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
57.7%
+17.7% vs TC avg
§102
26.5%
-13.5% vs TC avg
§112
15.8%
-24.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 30 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Response to Amendment/Argument Applicant's arguments filed 06/02/2026 with regard to the rejection of claims 1-11 under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a specific arrangement of components and specific connectivity between each component) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). The broadest reasonable interpretation of amended claim 1 is read upon by ¶0091 of Bishop. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 1-2, 4-9 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bishop et al. (US-20240404840-A1 – hereinafter Bishop). Regarding claim 1, Bishop teaches an integrated circuit (IC) molded core substrate (Fig.10 1160; ¶0102), comprising: a plurality of components (Fig.10 14; ¶0091) including an integrated voltage regular (IVR) (¶0091) disposed adjacent to an inductor (¶0091), the IVR (¶0091) and the inductor (206b) having circuit connections (shown but not labeled in Fig.10) on first (top) and/or second (bottom) sides thereof; mold material (Fig.10 1060; ¶0091) surrounding the plurality of components (14), wherein first (top) and second (bottom) surfaces of the mold material (1060) are coplanar with the circuit connections (top and bottom connections of 14); and a copper pattern (Figure 10 depicts wiring patterns disposed on 1060) disposed on the mold material (1060) and interconnecting the circuit connections (top and bottom connections of 14) of the IVR (¶0091) and the inductor (¶0091). Regarding claim 2, Bishop teaches the IC molded core substrate according to claim 1, wherein the mold material (1160) has a low coefficient of thermal expansion (¶0091 cites epoxy mold, which is known to have a low coefficient of thermal expansion). Regarding claim 4, Bishop teaches the IC molded core substrate according to claim 1, wherein the plurality of components (14) include a deep trench capacitor (¶0091). Regarding claim 5, Bishop teaches the IC molded core substrate according to claim 1, further comprising plated through holes (Fig.3A 250; ¶0064 and ¶0015) in the mold material (1060) from the first surface (top surface) to the second surface (bottom surface) thereof. Regarding claim 6, Bishop teaches the IC molded core substrate according to claim 1, further comprising multilayer dielectric film (Fig.10 1130 and 1140; ¶0105) including an adhesive coated polyester layer laminated to the first (top) and second (bottom) surfaces of the mold material (1060). Regarding claim 7, Bishop teaches the IC molded core substrate according to claim 6, further comprising vias in the multilayer dielectric film laminated to the first and/or second surfaces of the mold material (1140 depicts but does not label vias for connecting 14 to external connections which are also not labeled in Fig.10). Regarding claim 8, Bishop teaches the IC molded core substrate according to claim 7, wherein connections to the plurality of components in the molded core substrate are made through the vias (1140 depicts but does not label vias for connecting 14 to external connections which are also not labeled in Fig.10). Regarding claim 9, Bishop teaches an integrated circuit (IC) (Fig.10 1200; ¶0122), comprising: a molded core substrate (Fig.10 1160; ¶0102) having a plurality of components (Fig.10 14; ¶0091) having circuit connections (shown but not labeled in Fig.10) on first (top) and/or second (bottom) sides thereof, mold material (Fig.10 1060; ¶0091) surrounding the plurality of components (14), wherein first (top) and second (bottom) surfaces of the mold material (1060) are coplanar with the circuit connections (top and bottom connections of 14), and a copper pattern (Fig.9L 1068; ¶0103) interconnecting the circuit connections (top and bottom connections of 14); an IC package (1200 is an IC package) containing the IC molded core substrate (1160); and external connections (external connections not labeled but are depicted on the bottom of substrate 1160) on the IC package (1200) coupled to the circuit connections (top and bottom connections of 14) of the plurality of components (14) in the molded core substrate (1160). Regarding claim 11, Bishop teaches the IC according to claim 9, wherein the external connections (shown but not labeled in Fig.10) on the IC package are selected from the group consisting of ball grid array, land grid array and pin grid array (the depicted external connections appear to meet this limitation, as is broadly covers common methods of connecting an IC package to a board). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bishop. Regarding claim 3, Bishop teaches the IC molded core substrate according to claim 1. Bishop does not explicitly teach wherein the mold material is formed in a compression mold. The limitation “is formed in a compression mold” does not structurally distinguish claim 3 over claim 1 because it is a claiming a method of making an apparatus rather than the apparatus itself in an apparatus claim. Accordingly, the claim is rejected as being unpatentable over claim 1. Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bishop in view of Wu et al. (US-20240355762-A1 – hereinafter Wu). Regarding claim 10, Bishop teaches the IC according to claim 9. Bishop does not teach wherein the IC package contains at least two molded core substrates. Wu teaches an IC package (Fig.29 700; ¶0083 of Wu) comprising two molded core substrates (Fig.29 200A and 200B; ¶0054 of Wu). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include the molded core substrate of Bishop (Fig.10 of Bishop) in an IC package similar to that of Wu (Fig.29 of Wu) where two molded core substrates are used to arrive at the claimed invention. This combination is obvious because it is a matter of design choice for different IC package applications. Conclusion THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 THADDEUS J KOLB whose telephone number is (571)272-0276. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:30am - 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, Eliseo Ramos-Feliciano can be reached at (571) 272-7925. 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. /T.J.K./ Examiner, Art Unit 2817 /ELISEO RAMOS FELICIANO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 06, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Jun 02, 2026
Response Filed
Jun 23, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12696599
LIGHT EMITTING DIODE PACKAGE STRUCTURE, MANUFACTURING METHOD OF LIGHT EMITTING DIODE PACKAGE STRUCTURE AND LIGHT EMITTING PANEL
3y 11m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12696805
DISPLAY DEVICE
3y 9m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Patent 12690279
ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVE DETECTOR, ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVE DETECTOR ARRAY, AND MANUFACTURING METHOD OF ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVE DETECTOR
4y 0m to grant Granted Jul 21, 2026
Patent 12681236
COUPON WAFER AND METHOD OF PREPARATION THEREOF
3y 10m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12666997
SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURE AND METHOD FOR FORMING THE SAME
3y 11m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+25.0%)
3y 7m (~8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 30 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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