Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/374,582

INTEGRATING AND ACCESSING PASSIVE COMPONENTS IN WAFER-LEVEL PACKAGES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Sep 28, 2023
Examiner
SYLVIA, CHRISTINA A
Art Unit
2817
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Intel Corporation
OA Round
6 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
6-7
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
648 granted / 739 resolved
+19.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +9% lift
Without
With
+9.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
776
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
54.6%
+14.6% vs TC avg
§102
25.0%
-15.0% vs TC avg
§112
19.2%
-20.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 739 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 . 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 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. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/06/2026 has been entered. Status of Application In response to Office action mailed 11/06/2025, Applicants amended claims 1, 8, 14 and 20 in and cancelled claims 15-16 in the response filed 02/06/2026. Claim(s) 1-14 and 17-20 are pending examination. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-14 and 17-20 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply to the new rejection being used in the current rejection. 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. 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. 1. Claim(s) 1-5, 8-12 and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (PG Pub 2018/0122772; hereinafter Kim) and Lin et al. (PG Pub 2016/0343685; hereinafter Lin). PNG media_image1.png 312 510 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 220 702 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, refer to Fig. 3b and Examiner’s mark-up of Fig. 14 (Primary emphasis on Fig. 14), Kim teaches a device (para [0021-0069]) comprising: an upper package P200 comprising a first die (800; die-1) laterally spaced apart from a second die (800; die-2) by a first mold compound 900, the mold compound having a portion between the first die and the second die with an uppermost surface above an uppermost surface of the first die and above an uppermost surface of the second die (see Fig. 14), and a first redistribution layer 700 beneath the first die and the second die and the first mold compound (see Fig. 14); a lower package P100, wherein the first redistribution layer of the upper package is coupled to the lower package by first solder balls 690 (as shown in Fig. 3b; see para [0063]), wherein the lower package comprises a third die 300, and vias 230 (para [0035]) adjacent to the third die (see Fig. 14), the vias having an uppermost surface (surface above 293) at a different level than an uppermost surface of the third die (see Fig. 14); wherein the lower package comprises a second redistribution layer 500 beneath the third die and the vias (see Fig. 14), wherein the lower package comprises a second mold compound 400 (para [0024]) in contact with sidewalls and a top of the third die (see Fig. 14), and the second die of the upper package extends laterally beyond a second one of the sidewalls of the third die (beyond the right sidewall of 300), the second one of the sidewalls laterally opposite the first one of the sidewalls (see Fig. 14); and second solder balls 550 coupled to the second redistribution layer (see Fig. 14), the second solder balls beneath the third die and the vias (see Fig. 14). Although, Kim teaches the first die of the upper package and a first one of the sidewalls of the third die, he does not teach “the first die of the upper package extends laterally beyond a first one of the sidewalls of the third die”, and “a first one of the first solder balls is vertically between the third die and the first die along a first vertical axis, and a second one of the first solder balls is vertically between the third die and the second die along a second vertical axis;” and “wherein a first one of the first solder balls is vertically between the third die and the first die along a first vertical axis, and a second one of the first solder balls is vertically between the third die and the second die along a second vertical axis.” PNG media_image3.png 312 548 media_image3.png Greyscale In the same field of endeavor, refer to the Examiner’s mark-up of Fig. 5 provided above, Lin teaches a semiconductor package 500 comprising: an upper package (annotated “upper pkg” in Fig. 5 above) comprising a first die 110b (“die-1”) laterally spaced apart from a second die 110b (“die-2”) by a first mold compound 120b, the mold compound having a portion (annotated “portion” in Fig. 5 above) between the first die and the second die (see Fig. 5), and a first redistribution layer 130b beneath the first die and the second die and the first mold compound (see Fig. 5); a lower package (annotated “lower pkg” in Fig. 5 above), wherein the first redistribution layer of the upper package is coupled to the lower package by first solder balls 170, wherein the lower package comprises a third die 110 (“die-3”), and vias 160 adjacent to the third die (see Fig. 5), wherein a first one of the first solder balls (annotated “ball-1”) is vertically between the third die and the first die along a first vertical axis (see Fig. 5), and a second one of the first solder balls (annotated “ball-2”) is vertically between the third die and the second die along a second vertical axis (see Fig. 5), wherein the lower package comprises a second redistribution layer 200 beneath the third die and the vias (see Fig. 5), wherein the lower package comprises a second mold compound 120b in contact with sidewalls of the third die (see Fig. 5), and wherein the first die of the upper package extends laterally beyond a first one of the sidewalls of the third die (left sidewall of die-1 extends beyond the left sidewall of die-3), and the second die of the upper package extends laterally beyond a second one of the sidewalls of the third die (right sidewall of die-2 extends beyond the right sidewall of die-3), the second one of the sidewalls laterally opposite the first one of the sidewalls (see Fig. 5); and second solder balls 210 coupled to the second redistribution layer, the second solder balls beneath the third die and the vias (see Fig. 5). In light of such teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to attach the upper package to the lower package with solder balls, as taught by Lin, to provide electrical communication throughout the package. Regarding claim 2, refer to the cited figures above, in the combination of Kim and Lin, Kim teaches the upper package P200 has a first sidewall (ex. left sidewall) and a second sidewall (ex. right sidewall) laterally opposite the first sidewall (see Fig. 14), wherein the lower package P100 has a first sidewall (ex. left sidewall) and a second sidewall (ex. right sidewall) laterally opposite the first sidewall (see Fig. 14), wherein the first sidewall of the upper package is in vertical alignment with the first sidewall of the lower package (see Fig. 14), and wherein the second sidewall of the upper package is in vertical alignment with the second sidewall of the lower package (see Fig. 14). Regarding claim 3, refer to the cited figures above, in the combination of Kim and Lin, Lin teaches the upper package (“upper pkg”) has a first sidewall (ex. left sidewall) and a second sidewall (ex. right sidewall) laterally opposite the first sidewall (see Fig. 5), wherein the lower package (lower pkg) has a first sidewall (ex. left sidewall) and a second sidewall (ex. right sidewall) laterally opposite the first sidewall (see Fig. 4), wherein the first die (110b; die-1) is closer to the first sidewall of the upper package than the third die (110a; die-3) is to the first sidewall of the lower package (see Fig. 5), and wherein the second die (110b; die-2) is closer to the second sidewall of the upper package than the third die is to the second sidewall of the lower package (see Fig. 5). Regarding claim 4, refer to the cited figures above, in the combination of Kim and Lin, Kim teaches the upper package P200 further comprises an additional die (para [0067]). Regarding claim 5, refer to the cited figures above, in the combination of Kim and Lin, Kim teaches a portion of one or more of the vias 230 of the lower package P100 has a vertical thickness (vertical length of 230). He does not teach the portion of one or more of the vias of the lower package has a vertical thickness “less than a vertical thickness of the second mold compound.” However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to choose from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, (i.e. to have the vertical thickness of the via in the lower package be either greater than, less than or equal to that of the vertical thickness of the second mold compound) to achieve the same desired outcome (see MPEP 2143 (I)(E) and KSR, 550 U.S. at 421, 82 USPQ2d at 1397). Regarding claim 8, refer to Fig. 3b and Examiner’s mark-up of Fig. 14 (Primary emphasis on Fig. 14), Kim teaches a device (para [0021-0069]) comprising: an upper package P200 comprising a first die (800; die-1) laterally spaced apart from a second die (800; die-2) by a first region of encapsulant 900 (portion between the dies), the first region of encapsulant having an uppermost surface above an uppermost surface of the first die and above an uppermost surface of the second die (portion about the dies; see Fig. 14), and a first layer of connections (within 700) beneath the first die and the second die and the first region of encapsulant (see Fig. 14); a lower package P100, wherein the first layer of connections of the upper package is coupled to the lower package by first solder balls (690 of Fig. 3b), wherein the lower package comprises a third die (300; die-3), and vias 230 adjacent to the third die (see Fig. 14), the vias having an uppermost surface at a different level than an uppermost surface of the third die (the top of the vias is higher than the height of die-3), wherein the lower package comprises a second layer of connections (connections within 500) beneath the third die and the vias (see Fig. 14), and wherein the lower package comprises a second region of encapsulant 400 in contact with sidewalls and a top of the third die (see Fig. 14), and the second die of the upper package extends laterally beyond a second one of the sidewalls of the third die (beyond the right sidewall of 300), the second one of the sidewalls laterally opposite the first one of the sidewalls (see Fig. 14); and second solder balls 550 coupled to the second layer of connections, (see Fig. 14), the second solder balls beneath the third die and the vias (see Fig. 14). Kim does not teach the first die of the upper package extends laterally beyond a first one of the sidewalls of a third die; and a first one of the first solder balls is vertically between the third die and the first die along a first vertical axis, and a second one of the first solder balls is vertically between the third die and the second die along a second vertical axis, In the same field of endeavor, refer to the Examiner’s mark-up of Fig. 5 provided above, Lin teaches a semiconductor package 500 comprising: an upper package (annotated “upper pkg” in Fig. 5 above) comprising a first die 110b (“die-1”) laterally spaced apart from a second die 110b (“die-2”) by a first mold compound 120b, the mold compound having a portion (annotated “portion” in Fig. 5 above) between the first die and the second die (see Fig. 5), and a first redistribution layer 130b beneath the first die and the second die and the first mold compound (see Fig. 5); a lower package (annotated “lower pkg” in Fig. 5 above), wherein the first redistribution layer of the upper package is coupled to the lower package by first solder balls 170, wherein the lower package comprises a third die 110 (“die-3”), and vias 160 adjacent to the third die (see Fig. 5), wherein a first one of the first solder balls (annotated “ball-1”) is vertically between the third die and the first die along a first vertical axis (see Fig. 5), and a second one of the first solder balls (annotated “ball-2”) is vertically between the third die and the second die along a second vertical axis (see Fig. 5), wherein the lower package comprises a second redistribution layer 200 beneath the third die and the vias (see Fig. 5), wherein the lower package comprises a second mold compound 120b in contact with sidewalls of the third die (see Fig. 5), and wherein the first die of the upper package extends laterally beyond a first one of the sidewalls of the third die (left sidewall of die-1 extends beyond the left sidewall of die-3), and the second die of the upper package extends laterally beyond a second one of the sidewalls of the third die (right sidewall of die-2 extends beyond the right sidewall of die-3), the second one of the sidewalls laterally opposite the first one of the sidewalls (see Fig. 5); and second solder balls 210 coupled to the second redistribution layer, the second solder balls beneath the third die and the vias (see Fig. 5). In light of such teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to attach the upper package to the lower package with solder balls, as taught by Lin, to provide electrical communication throughout the package. Regarding claim 9, refer to the cited figures above, in the combination of Kim and Lin, Kim teaches the upper package P200 has a first lateral width (horizontal distance), wherein the lower package P100 has a second lateral width (horizontal distance), and wherein the second lateral width is the same as and is aligned with the first lateral width (see Fig. 14). Regarding claim 10, refer to the cited figures above, in the combination of Kim and Lin, Lin teaches the first die 110b (“die-1”) is closer to a first edge of the upper package (left sidewall of upper pkg) than the third die (110a) is to the first sidewall of the lower package (left sidewall of lower pkg) (see Fig. 5), and wherein the second die 110b (“die-2”) is closer to the second sidewall of the upper package (right sidewall of upper pkg) than the third die is to the second sidewall of the lower package (right sidewall of lower pkg) (see Fig. 5). Regarding claim 11, refer to the cited figures above, in the combination of Kim and Lin, Kim teaches the upper package P200 further comprises an additional die (para [0067]). Regarding claim 12, refer to the cited figures above, in the combination of Kim and Lin, Kim teaches a portion of one or more of the vias 230 of the lower package P100 has a vertical thickness (vertical length of 230). He does not teach the portion of one or more of the vias of the lower package has a vertical thickness “less than a vertical thickness of the second mold compound.” However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to choose from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, (i.e. to have the vertical thickness of the via in the lower package be either greater than, less than or equal to that of the vertical thickness of the second mold compound) to achieve the same desired outcome (see MPEP 2143 (I)(E) and KSR, 550 U.S. at 421, 82 USPQ2d at 1397). Regarding claim 14, refer to Fig. 3b and Examiner’s mark-up of Fig. 14 (Primary emphasis on Fig. 14), Kim teaches a device (para [0021-0069]) comprising: a first die (800; die-1) laterally spaced apart from a second die (800; die-2) by a first mold compound 900, the first mold compound having a portion between the first die and the second die with an uppermost surface above an uppermost surface of the first die and above an uppermost surface of the second die (see Fig. 14); a first redistribution layer 700 beneath the first die and the second die and the first mold compound (see Fig. 14); a third die 300 beneath the first redistribution layer (see Fig. 14), wherein the first die extends laterally beyond a first sidewall of the third die, and the second die extends laterally beyond a second sidewall of the third die (beyond the right sidewall of 300), the second sidewall laterally opposite the first sidewall (see Fig. 14); vias adjacent to the third die 230, the vias having an uppermost surface at a different level than an uppermost surface of the third die (see Fig. 14); a second redistribution layer 500 beneath the third die and the vias (see Fig. 14); a second mold compound 400 in contact with sidewalls and a top of the third die (see Fig. 14); and solder balls 550 coupled to the second redistribution layer, the solder balls beneath the third die and the vias (see Fig. 14). Kim does not teach the first die of the upper package extends laterally beyond a first one of the sidewalls of a third die; and a first one of the first solder balls is vertically between the third die and the first die along a first vertical axis, and a second one of the first solder balls is vertically between the third die and the second die along a second vertical axis. In the same field of endeavor, refer to the Examiner’s mark-up of Fig. 5 provided above, Lin teaches a semiconductor package 500 comprising: an upper package (annotated “upper pkg” in Fig. 5 above) comprising a first die 110b (“die-1”) laterally spaced apart from a second die 110b (“die-2”) by a first mold compound 120b, the mold compound having a portion (annotated “portion” in Fig. 5 above) between the first die and the second die (see Fig. 5), and a first redistribution layer 130b beneath the first die and the second die and the first mold compound (see Fig. 5); a lower package (annotated “lower pkg” in Fig. 5 above), wherein the first redistribution layer of the upper package is coupled to the lower package by first solder balls 170, wherein the lower package comprises a third die 110 (“die-3”), and vias 160 adjacent to the third die (see Fig. 5), wherein a first one of the first solder balls (annotated “ball-1”) is vertically between the third die and the first die along a first vertical axis (see Fig. 5), and a second one of the first solder balls (annotated “ball-2”) is vertically between the third die and the second die along a second vertical axis (see Fig. 5), wherein the lower package comprises a second redistribution layer 200 beneath the third die and the vias (see Fig. 5), wherein the lower package comprises a second mold compound 120b in contact with sidewalls of the third die (see Fig. 5), and wherein the first die of the upper package extends laterally beyond a first one of the sidewalls of the third die (left sidewall of die-1 extends beyond the left sidewall of die-3), and the second die of the upper package extends laterally beyond a second one of the sidewalls of the third die (right sidewall of die-2 extends beyond the right sidewall of die-3), the second one of the sidewalls laterally opposite the first one of the sidewalls (see Fig. 5); and second solder balls 210 coupled to the second redistribution layer, the second solder balls beneath the third die and the vias (see Fig. 5). In light of such teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to attach the upper package to the lower package with solder balls, as taught by Lin, to provide electrical communication throughout the package. Regarding claim 17, refer to the cited figures above, in the combination of Lin, Hung and Kim, Lin teaches the first mold compound 120b has a first sidewall (ex. left sidewall) and a second sidewall (ex. right sidewall) laterally opposite the first sidewall (see Fig. 5), wherein the second mold compound 120a has a first sidewall (ex. left sidewall) and a second sidewall (ex. right sidewall) laterally opposite the first sidewall (see Fig. 5), wherein the first sidewall of the first mold compound is in vertical alignment with the first sidewall of the second mold compound (see Fig. 5), and wherein the second sidewall of the first mold compound is in vertical alignment with the second sidewall of the second mold compound (see Fig. 5). Regarding claim 18, refer to the cited figures above, in the combination of Kim and Lin, Lin teaches the first mold compound 120b has a first sidewall (ex. left) and a second sidewall (ex. right) laterally opposite the first sidewall (see Fig. 5), wherein the second mold compound 120a has a first sidewall (ex. eft) and a second sidewall (ex. right) laterally opposite the first sidewall (see Fig. 5), wherein the first die 110b (“die-1”) is closer to the first sidewall of the first mold compound than the third die 110a is to the first sidewall of the second mold compound (see Fig. 5), and wherein the second die 110b (“die-2”) is closer to the second sidewall of the first mold compound than the third die is to the second sidewall of the second mold compound (see Fig. 5). Regarding claim 19, refer to the cited figures above, in the combination of Kim and Lin, Kim teaches the first mold compound 900 has a first lateral width (horizontal length of 900), wherein the second mold compound 400 has a second lateral width (horizontal length of 400), and wherein the second lateral width is the same as and is aligned with the first lateral width (see Fig.14). 2. Claim(s) 6-7,13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim and Lin, as applied to claim 1, 8 and 14 respectively above, and further in view of Katkar et al. (PG Pub 2015/0348873; hereinafter Katkar). Regarding claim 6 and claim 7, refer to the figures provided above, in the combination of Kim and Lin, Lin teaches (claim 6) the second solder balls 210 (see Fig. 5), he does not explicitly teach “a board beneath the second solder balls; (claim 7) wherein a package substrate intervening between the board and the second solder balls.” PNG media_image4.png 306 476 media_image4.png Greyscale In the same field of endeavor, refer to the Examiner’s mark-up of Fig. 1a-provided above, Katkar teaches a device 100 (para [0049-0085]) comprising: (claim 6) a board 50 (para [0055]) beneath a second solder balls (annotated “balls” in Fig. 1a above); (claim 7) wherein a package substrate 20 (para [0053]) intervening between the board and the second solder balls (see Fig. 1a). In light of such teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a board and package substrate below the second solder balls of the combined invention, as taught by Katkar, for the purpose of providing means to transmit signals to and from the device. Regarding claim 13, refer to the figures provided above, in the combination of Lin and Kim, Lin teaches the second solder balls 210 (see Fig. 5), he does not explicitly teach “a board beneath the second solder balls. In the same field of endeavor, refer to the Examiner’s mark-up of Fig. 1a-provided above, Katkar teaches a device 100 (para [0049-0085]) comprising: a board 50 (para [0055]) beneath a second solder balls (annotated “balls” in Fig. 1a above). In light of such teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a board and package substrate below the second solder balls, as taught by Katkar, for the purpose of providing means to transmit signals to and from the device. Regarding claim 20, refer to the figures provided above, in the combination of Lin and Kim, Lin teaches the second solder balls 210 (see Fig. 5), he does not explicitly teach “a board beneath the second solder balls. In the same field of endeavor, refer to the Examiner’s mark-up of Fig. 1a-provided above, Katkar teaches a device 100 (para [0049-0085]) comprising: a board 50 (para [0055]) beneath a second solder balls (annotated “balls” in Fig. 1a above). In light of such teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate a board and package substrate below the second solder balls, as taught by Katkar, for the purpose of providing means to transmit signals to and from the device. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christina A Sylvia whose telephone number is (571)272-7474. The examiner can normally be reached on 8am-4pm (M-F). 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 on (571) 272-2063. 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. /CHRISTINA A SYLVIA/Examiner, Art Unit 2817 /MARLON T FLETCHER/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 28, 2023
Application Filed
May 14, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Aug 15, 2024
Response Filed
Sep 27, 2024
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 26, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 02, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 27, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 06, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 06, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Oct 23, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 04, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 09, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 06, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 16, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599004
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE WITH ACTIVE MOLD PACKAGE AND METHOD THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593705
HYBRID CORE SUBSTRATE WITH EMBEDDED COMPONENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593702
SEMICONDUCTOR PACKAGE AND METHOD OF FABRICATING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12575465
SEMICONDUCTOR PACKAGE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12564028
Dielectric Layers Having Nitrogen-Containing Crusted Surfaces
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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

6-7
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+9.1%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 739 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