Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/421,158

SHIELDING STRUCTURE FOR ULTRA-HIGH VOLTAGE SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 28, 2024
Examiner
ERDEM, FAZLI
Art Unit
2812
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacuturing Company Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
895 granted / 1050 resolved
+17.2% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
1082
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
48.4%
+8.4% vs TC avg
§102
39.1%
-0.9% vs TC avg
§112
7.4%
-32.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1050 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 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. Claims 1-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tada et al. (20010048122) in view of Yamaji (20140217466) Regarding Claim 1, in Figs 3 and 4 and paragraphs 0018, 0019, 0025, 0082, 0087, 0120 and 0126 Tada discloses a method for manufacturing a device, the method comprising: forming a shielding structure 10 (see paragraph 0025) for a high voltage semiconductor device; forming a high voltage interconnection 12/13 that connects to a first (right) portion of the shielding structure 10 and to a first terminal associated with a drain region 6 of the hv semiconductor device; and forming a metal routing 13 that connects a second (left) portion of the shielding structure 10 and a second terminal associated with a source region 25 of the hv semiconductor device. Tada et fails to disclose the device to be ultra-high voltage device rather than high voltage device. However, Yamaji discloses a semiconductor device where Figs. 1, 2, 4 and 5 and in paragraph 0005, 0008, 0012, 0148, 0150 and 0172 the required ultra-high voltage device is disclosed. It would have been obvious to one of having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed in invention to have the required ultra-high voltage device rather than high voltage device in Tada et al. as taught by Yamaji in order to be able to use the device in industrial applications. Regarding Claim 2, Tada et al. discloses forming the shielding structure includes forming a winding-type polysilicon material 10. (Please note that “implant” polysilicon material is disclosed in paragraph 0047, 0116 and 0117 of Yamaji). Regarding Claim 3, in Tada et al, in Figs. 3 and 4, forming the shielding structure includes forming a single winding polysilicon line 10 with a first end (left) that connects to the source region 25 and a second (right) end that connects to the drain region 6. Regarding Claim 4, in Fig 3 of Tada eta l. forming the shielding structure 10 includes forming a single winding polysilicon line with one or more U-turns. Regarding Claim 5, in Figs 3 and 4 of Tada et al,,the shielding structure 10 includes forming two winding polysilicon lines. Regarding Claim 6, in Figs. 3 and 4 of Tada et al. forming the shielding structure 10 includes forming four winding polysilicon lines. Regarding Claim 6, in Figs. 3 and 4 of Tada et al, doping an oxide layer 8 of the device to form a source contact 25/p+, a drain contact 6, and a central contact (see paragraph 0075, 0087)(Please also note that the high side driver contact as shown in Fig. 1 of Yamaji also could be considered a central contact) Regarding Claim 8, in Figs 3 and 4 and paragraphs 0018, 0019, 0025, 0082, 0087, 0120 and 0126 Tada discloses a high voltage (HV) semiconductor device, comprising: a source region 25/p+; a drain region 6; a shielding structure 10; a high voltage interconnection 12/31 coupled to a first (right) portion of the shielding structure 10 and to a first terminal associated with the drain region 6; and a metal routing 12/31 that couples a second (left) portion of the shielding structure 10 and a second terminal 31 associated with the source region 25/p+. Tada et fails to disclose the device to be ultra-high voltage device rather than high voltage device. However, Yamaji discloses a semiconductor device where Figs. 1, 2, 4 and 5 and in paragraph 0005, 0008, 0012, 0148, 0150 and 0172 the required ultra-high voltage device is disclosed. It would have been obvious to one of having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed in invention to have the required ultra-high voltage device rather than high voltage device in Tada et al. as taught by Yamaji in order to be able to use the device in industrial applications. Regarding Claim 9, the shielding structure 10 includes a winding-type polysilicon material. (Please note that “implant” polysilicon material is disclosed in paragraph 0047, 0116 and 0117 of Yamaji). Regarding Claim 10, in Figs 3 and 4 of Tada et al, the shielding structure 10 includes a single winding polysilicon line with a first end that connects to the source region 25/p+ and a second end that connects to the drain region 6. Regarding Claim 11, in Figs. 3 and 4 of Tada et al, the shielding structure 10 includes a single winding polysilicon line with one or more U-turns. Regarding Claim 12, in Figs. 3 and 4, the shielding structure 10 includes two winding polysilicon lines. Regarding Claim 13, in Figs. 3 and 4, the shielding structure 10 includes four winding polysilicon lines. Regarding Claim 14, in Figs. 3 and 4 of Tada et al, doping an oxide layer 8 of the device to form a source contact 25/p+, a drain contact 6, and a central contact (see paragraph 0075, 0087)(Please also note that the high side driver contact as shown in Fig. 1 of Yamaji also could be considered a central contact) Regarding Claim 15, in Figs 3 and 4 and paragraphs 0018, 0019, 0025, 0082, 0087, 0120 and 0126 Tada discloses a method for manufacturing a device, the method comprising: providing an high voltage (HV) component that includes a source region 25/p+ and a drain region 6; forming a shielding structure 10 above the drain region; forming a high voltage interconnection 12/31 that connects to a first (right) portion of the shielding structure 10 and to a first terminal associated with the drain region 6; and forming a metal routing 12/31 that connects a second (left) portion of the shielding structure 10 and a second terminal associated with the source region 25/p+. Tada et fails to disclose the device to be ultra-high voltage device rather than high voltage device. However, Yamaji discloses a semiconductor device where Figs. 1, 2, 4 and 5 and in paragraph 0005, 0008, 0012, 0148, 0150 and 0172 the required ultra-high voltage device is disclosed. It would have been obvious to one of having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed in invention to have the required ultra-high voltage device rather than high voltage device in Tada et al. as taught by Yamaji in order to be able to use the device in industrial applications. Regarding Claim 17, in Figs. 3 and 4 of Tada et al, doping an oxide layer 8 of the device to form a source contact 25/p+, a drain contact 6, and a central contact (see paragraph 0075, 0087)(Please also note that the high side driver contact as shown in Fig. 1 of Yamaji also could be considered a central contact) Regarding Claim 18, in Figs. 1-4 of Yamaji, connecting a third terminal (i.e. for example an OUT terminal) to a central region of the device (i.e. high side driver, please see paragraph 0010, 0029, 0030 and 0088) Regarding Claim 19, in Figs. 3 and 4 of Tada et al., the shielding structure 10 includes one of: a single winding polysilicon line, two winding polysilicon lines, or four winding polysilicon lines. Regarding Claim 20, in Figs. 3 and 4 of Tada et al, the shielding structure 10includes a single winding polysilicon line with one or more U-turns. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tada et al. (20010048122) in view of Yamaji (20140217466) as applied above further in view of Yamaji (20120286829). Regarding Claim 16, in combination Tada et al. and Yamaji (‘466) discloses everything except to disclose the required gate poly structure. However, Yamaji ‘829 discloses a semiconductor device and associated driving circuitry where in paragraph 0059, 0136, 0189 and 0195 the required gate poly structure is disclosed. It would have been obvious to one of having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the required gate poly in Tada et al. and Yamaji (‘466) combination as taught by Yamaji (‘829) in order to have increased breakdown voltage. Cited Prior Art That Are NOT Relied Upon Examiner is including Karino et al. (20170207296) (paragraphs 0044, 0050, 0063, 0093) and Huo et al. (20150262995) (paragraph 0030) as pertinent prior arts that are NOT relied upon on this rejection but that do disclose spiral/winding polysilicon resistance/field plate structure for high voltage applications Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FAZLI ERDEM whose telephone number is (571)272-1914. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8am-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, Davienne Monbleau can be reached at 571-272-1945. 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. /FAZLI ERDEM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2812 3/7/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 28, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593563
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593631
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588498
FINFET STRUCTURE WITH CONTROLLED AIR GAPS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581679
SPLIT-GATE POWER MOS DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581877
SELECTIVE DEPOSITION OF METAL OXIDES USING SILANES AS AN INHIBITOR
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+15.9%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1050 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