Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/398,979

SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 28, 2023
Examiner
DIALLO, MAMADOU L
Art Unit
2897
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Mitsubishi Electric Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
92%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 92% — above average
92%
Career Allow Rate
1207 granted / 1315 resolved
+23.8% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+3.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
1344
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.5%
-36.5% vs TC avg
§103
39.5%
-0.5% vs TC avg
§102
35.2%
-4.8% vs TC avg
§112
9.8%
-30.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1315 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file. Specification The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/28/2023, 02/03/2026 and 02/04/2026 is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale , or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1,3,5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by SHIMOSAWA et al, ( US 20220013645 A1 ) . Pertaining to claim 1, SHIMOSAWA teaches ( see fig.9A above) A semiconductor device comprising a transistor [70] and a diode [80] formed at a common semiconductor substrate [10] , wherein the semiconductor substrate [10] includes: a transistor region [70] in which the transistor is formed; a plurality of diode regions [80] in which the diode is formed; and a terminal region [162] around a cell region covering the transistor region [70] and the plurality of diode regions [80] , the transistor region [70] includes: a second transistor region [70]( which is the left-most and the right-most transistor 70) contacting the terminal region [162 ] at least partially; and a first transistor region [70] ( of the transistor region 70 located between two diode regions 80) arranged in a region other than the second transistor region [70] and between the plurality of diode regions [80] , in a plan view, the first transistor region [70] has a first width that is uniform in a first direction corresponding to a direction of arrangement of the plurality of diode regions [80] and each of the plurality of diode regions [80] has a second width that is uniform in the first direction, and the second transistor region [70] ]( which is the left-most and the right-most transistor 70) has a third width in the first direction that is smaller than the first width of the first transistor region [70] ( of the transistor region 70 located between two diode regions 80) . Pertaining to claim 3, SHIMOSAWA teaches ( see fig.9A above) The semiconductor device according to claim 1, wherein in a plan view, a sum of the areas of the plurality of diode regions [80] is less than a sum of the area of the transistor region [70] . Pertaining to claim 5, SHIMOSAWA teaches ( see fig.9A above) The semiconductor device according to claim 1, wherein the transistor region [70] and the plurality of diode regions [80] each have a stripe shape in a plan view, the first transistor region 70] ( of the transistor region 70 located between two diode regions 80) includes a plurality of the first transistor regions [70] , the plurality of first transistor regions [70] and the plurality of diode regions [80] are arranged alternately with and parallel to each other, the diode region [80] is arranged in a final row of arrangement of the plurality of first transistor regions [70] and the plurality of diode regions [80] , and the second transistor region 70] ]( which is the left-most and the right-most transistor 70) is arranged next to the diode region [80] in the final row of the arrangement. 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. Claim (s) 2,4, 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over SHIMOSAWA et al, ( US 20220013645 A1 ) in view of Naito ( US 20200058803 A1 ) . Pertaining to claim 6, SHIMOSAWA teaches ( see fig.9A above) The semiconductor device according to claim 1, but is silent wherein each of the plurality of diode regions has an island shape in a plan view, arrangement of the plurality of diode regions is in a matrix, the first transistor region is arranged between the plurality of island-shape diode regions, the second transistor region is arranged in an outer periphery of a region where the first transistor region and the plurality of diode regions are arranged, and some of the plurality of diode regions are arranged next to the second transistor region. However , in the same field of endeavor, Naito (see paragraphs [0018] - [0040] and Figs. 2-5) describes an invention of a semiconductor device having an active region B provided on a semiconductor substrate 20 and a guard ring 3 surrounding the active region B, wherein the active region B has a plurality of diode regions C and a transistor region D outside the diode region C, and the plurality of diode regions C are arranged in a matrix so as to be uniformly distributed over the entire area of the active region B. Then, it can be seen from Fig. 2 of Cited Naito that the width of the transistor region B arranged between the guard ring 3 and the diode region C is smaller than the width of the transistor region B arranged between the plurality of diode regions C. In view of Naito, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate this design structure of Naito into that of SHIMOSAWA for an improved device structure. Pertaining to claim 2 and 4, SHIMOSAWA teaches ( see fig.9A above) t he semiconductor device according to claim 1 with certain ratios , but is silent to specifically teach about wherein a ratio of the third width of the second transistor region to the first width of the first transistor region is equal to or less than 0.5 or The semiconductor device according to claim 1, wherein the third width of the second transistor region is equal to or greater than a thickness of the semiconductor substrate. However , in the same field of endeavor, Naito teaches that the sum of the areas of a plurality of diode regions C is smaller than the area of the transistor region B . Since the width between the guard ring 3 and the diode region C is sufficiently wide, it is recognized that the width is equal to or larger than the thickness of the semiconductor substrate. In view of Naito, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate this design structure of Naito into that of SHIMOSAWA for an improved device structure. Allowable Subject Matter Claim7-14 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. The closest prior art of record of SHIMOSAWA et al, ( US 20220013645 A1 ) teaches the limitation of claim1, but it does not teach or suggest, singularly or in combination, at least the limitations of the independent claim 7 including “ wherein the plurality of diode regions includes a first diode region and a second diode region where forward voltage drop is lower than that in the first diode region, and the second diode region is arranged next to the second transistor region ” in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO 892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT MAMADOU L DIALLO whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-5449 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F: 9:00AM-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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT FERNANDO TOLEDO can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-1867 . 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. /MAMADOU L DIALLO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 28, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604773
ELECTRONIC DEVICE HAVING OPAQUE LAYER WITH OPENING FOR LIGHT TRANSMISSION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598758
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE INCLUDING DUMMY PAD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598850
DISPLAY MODULE AND AN ELECTRONIC DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593467
THIN FILM SEMICONDUCTOR SWITCHING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588221
THREE-DIMENSIONAL FLASH MEMORY WITH HIGH DEGREE OF INTEGRATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
92%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+3.0%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1315 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