Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/325,117

MOLDING COMPOSITION, SEMICONDUCTOR PACKAGE AND METHOD OF FABRICATING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 30, 2023
Examiner
SHOOK, DANIEL P
Art Unit
2896
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
555 granted / 637 resolved
+19.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
14 currently pending
Career history
651
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
44.2%
+4.2% vs TC avg
§102
33.0%
-7.0% vs TC avg
§112
15.6%
-24.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 637 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 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. Claim(s) 7-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tai et al. (US 2020/0058626 A1) in view of Bae et al. (US 2008/0131702 A1) and further evidenced by Arkles et al. (Silanes and Silicones for Epoxy Resins). Regarding claim 7, Tai discloses a semiconductor package (Fig 1I, 100), comprising: a first package (PK1), comprising: a semiconductor die (114); an insulating encapsulant (116’) surrounding the semiconductor die, wherein the insulating encapsulant is formed from a molding composition (¶24); and a redistribution layer (118) disposed on the insulating encapsulant and electrically connected to the semiconductor die. PNG media_image1.png 466 764 media_image1.png Greyscale Tai discloses a variety of materials for the insulating encapsulant including epoxy resin (¶25), but does not specify the composition comprising a stress relaxation agent. Bae discloses a molding composition suitable for forming the encapsulation of a semiconductor package having desirable molding properties (¶29), which includes the use of modified silicon oils having an epoxy group as a stress relaxing agent (¶50-¶52). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the composition of Bae in the package of Tai in order to realize the desirable molding properties of Bae and as a matter of selecting a suitable material for the application. Neither Tai nor Bae disclose the silicone oil of formula (1), being epoxypropoxypropyl PDMS (abbreviated e-PDMS hereinafter). However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to select e-PDMS for the modified silicon oil of Bae as it is an example of a commercially available modified silicon oil having an epoxy group which one of skill in the art could select on the basis of its known properties and availability. See Arkles pg. 11, DMS-E09, DMS-E11, DMS-E12 and DMS-E21. Regarding claim 8, Tai discloses through insulator vias (112) embedded in the insulating encapsulant and electrically connected to the redistribution layer. Regarding claim 9, Tai discloses a second package (PK2) disposed on the first package, wherein the second package is electrically connected to the first package by electrically connecting a plurality of electrical connectors (470) of the second package to the through insulator vias of the first package. Regarding claim 10, Tai discloses that the first package further comprises a backside redistribution layer (106) disposed on and electrically connected to the through insulator vias, wherein the second package is electrically connected to the first package by electrically connecting a plurality of electrical connectors of the second package to the backside redistribution layer and the through insulator vias of the first package. Regarding claim 11, Bae discloses that the silicone oil comprises about 0.05% to 1.5% of the total weight of the molding composition (¶52). While the disclosed silicone oil weight percentage overlaps with the claimed 0.5% to 5%, the range is sufficiently close to render the claimed composition obvious over the disclosure of Bae. Regarding claim 12, as can be seen from Arkles, e-PDMA and is sold by a range of molecular weights (as is typical of polymers), where DMS-E12 contains molecular weights of 1000-14000 and e-PDMA with n=10 has a molecular weight of approximately 1100. Therefore, a significant fraction of DMS-E12 contains the compound represented by formula (1-A), it being obvious to select such a product as described in regards to claim 7. Regarding claims 13, Bae discloses that the molding composition further comprises: fillers in an amount of 80% to about 95% by weight (¶47); a resin in an amount of 3% to 12% by weight (¶40); and a hardener in an amount of 0.1% to 10% by weight (¶45). While the hardener weight percentage of Bae overlaps with the claimed weight percentage of 1% to 15%, they are deemed sufficiently close to render the claimed composition obvious over the disclosure of Bae. Regarding claim 14, the resin and hardener are disclosed in the ranges discussed in regards to claim 13, however the overlapping ranges presently claimed do not patentably distinguish over the Bae due to the substantial overlap in the ranges. Regarding claim 15, Tai discloses a method of fabricating a semiconductor package (Fig 1A-1I), comprising: forming a first package (PK1) by: placing a semiconductor die (114) on a carrier (102); forming an insulating encapsulant (116) on the carrier and surrounding the semiconductor die (¶24); forming a redistribution layer (118) disposed on the insulating encapsulant and electrically connected to the semiconductor die; and debonding the carrier (¶34). Tai discloses a variety of materials for the insulating encapsulant including epoxy resin (¶25), but does not specify the composition comprising a stress relaxation agent. Bae discloses a molding composition suitable for forming the encapsulation of a semiconductor package having desirable molding properties (¶29), which includes the use of modified silicon oils having an epoxy group as a stress relaxing agent (¶50-¶52). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the composition of Bae forming in the package of Tai in order to realize the desirable molding properties of Bae and as a matter of selecting a suitable material for the application. Neither Tai nor Bae disclose the silicone oil of formula (1), being e-PDMS. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to select e-PDMS for the modified silicon oil of Bae as it is an example of a commercially available modified silicon oil having an epoxy group which one of skill in the art could select on the basis of its known properties and availability. See Arkles pg. 11, DMS-E09, DMS-E11, DMS-E12 and DMS-E21. Regarding claim 16, Tai discloses forming a plurality of through insulator vias (112) on the carrier and surrounding the semiconductor die; and forming the insulating encapsulant to encapsulate the semiconductor die and the plurality of through insulator vias (¶24). Regarding claim 17, Tai discloses that, after debonding the carrier, the method further comprises stacking a second package (PK2; ¶35) on the first package by electrically connecting a plurality of electrical connectors of the second package (470) to the plurality of through insulator vias. Regarding claim 18, Tai discloses forming a backside redistribution layer (106) on the carrier prior to placing the semiconductor die (Fig 1C); placing the semiconductor die over the backside redistribution layer and on the carrier; and forming a plurality of through insulator vias (112) disposed on and electrically connected to the backside redistribution layer (¶18). Regarding claim 19, Bae discloses that the silicone oil comprises about 0.05% to 1.5% of the total weight of the molding composition (¶52). Regarding claim 20, Bae discloses that the molding composition further comprises: fillers in an amount of 80% to about 95% by weight (¶47); a resin in an amount of 3% to 12% by weight (¶40); and a hardener in an amount of 0.1% to 10% by weight (¶45). While the weight percentage of Bae overlaps with the claimed weight percentage of 1% to 15%, they are deemed sufficiently close to render the claimed composition obvious over the disclosure of Bae. Regarding claim 21, Tai discloses a semiconductor package (Fig 1I, 100), comprising: an insulating encapsulant (¶24) for encapsulating semiconductor components, wherein the insulating encapsulant is formed by curing a molding composition (¶24 & ¶25, the disclosed resins must be cured); and a redistribution layer (118) disposed on the insulating encapsulant and electrically connected to the semiconductor components. Tai discloses a variety of materials for the insulating encapsulant including epoxy resin (¶25), but does not specify the composition. Bae discloses a molding composition suitable for forming the encapsulation of a semiconductor package having desirable molding properties (¶29), having a resin in an amount of 3% to 12% by weight (¶40); a hardener in an amount of 0.1% to 10% by weight (¶45) and a stress relaxation agent composed of silicone oil in an amount about 0.05% to 1.5% of the total weight of the molding composition (¶52). The weight percentages of Bae substantially overlap with those and are deemed sufficiently close to render the claimed composition obvious over the disclosure of Bae. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the composition of Bae in the package of Tai in order to realize the desirable molding properties of Bae and as a matter of selecting a suitable material for the application. Regarding claim 22, neither Tai nor Bae disclose the silicone oil of formula (1), being e-PDMS. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to select e-PDMS for the modified silicon oil of Bae as it is an example of a commercially available modified silicon oil having an epoxy group which one of skill in the art could select on the basis of its known properties and availability. See Arkles pg. 11, DMS-E09, DMS-E11, DMS-E12 and DMS-E21. Regarding claim 23, as can be seen from Arkles, e-PDMA and is sold by a range of molecular weights (as is typical of polymers), where DMS-E12 contains molecular weights of 1000-14000 and e-PDMA with n=10 has a molecular weight of approximately 1100. Therefore, a significant fraction of DMS-E12 contains the compound represented by formula (1-A), it being obvious to select such a product as described in regards to claim 7. Regarding claim 24, Bae discloses that the hardener is an amine-based hardener (¶46). Regarding claim 25, Bae discloses that the molding composition further comprises a filler, and the filler is a silicon oxide filler (¶47-¶48, silica being silicon oxide). Regarding claim 26, Bae discloses that the resin is a diepoxy resin (Fig 4A, Structure 2). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL P SHOOK whose telephone number is (571)270-7890. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am - 5:00 pm, Mon-Fri. 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 P SHOOK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 30, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604605
DISPLAY SUBSTRATE, METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING DISPLAY SUBSTRATE, METHOD FOR DRIVING DISPLAY SUBSTRATE, DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598869
IMAGING DEVICE, DISPLAY APPARATUS, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12581680
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SONOS MEMORY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575127
TFET WITH OR-AND LOGIC FUNCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12568729
ORGANIC PHOTODIODE DEVICE
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+8.3%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 637 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