Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/449,502

SELECTIVE WIRE COATING DURING WIRE BONDING

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 14, 2023
Examiner
SUN, YU-HSI DAVID
Art Unit
2817
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Sandisk Technologies Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
85%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
648 granted / 845 resolved
+8.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
872
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.0%
-37.0% vs TC avg
§103
45.9%
+5.9% vs TC avg
§102
25.5%
-14.5% vs TC avg
§112
16.6%
-23.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 845 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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention II in the reply filed on 11/3/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 1-4 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/3/2025. 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. Claims 5-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KIM (US PG Pub 2022/0189906, hereinafter Kim) in view of Lamson et al. (US PG Pub 2002/0089069, hereinafter Lamson). Regarding claim 5, figures 1A-2C and 4A-4B of Kim disclose a method for assembling a semiconductor device, the method comprising: bonding segments of a bond wire (123) between a vertical stack of semiconductor dies (110) and a first main surface of a substrate (100), the segments of the bond wire providing electrical connections between the semiconductor dies and the substrate, the vertical stack being supported on the first main surface of the substrate and having the semiconductor dies thereof horizontally offset with respect to one another; and encapsulating, with a molding compound (130, ¶ 67), the vertical stack of semiconductor dies, the segments of the bond wire (123) attached between the vertical stack of semiconductor dies and the first main surface of the substrate, and at least a portion of the first main surface of the substrate (100). Kim does not explicitly disclose coating a selected subset of the segments of the bond wire with an electrically insulating polymer. In the same field of endeavor, figures 4a-4c of Lamson disclose coating a selected subset of the segments of a bond wire (41) with an electrically insulating polymer (45, ¶ 30-32). In light of such teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to coat a selected subset of the segments of the bond wire with an electrically insulating polymer as taught by Lamson for the purpose of minimizing capacitance coupling between wires and thus improve reliability and performance of circuits (¶ 6). Regarding claim 6, Lamson disclose selecting said selected subset of the segments of the bond wire based a bond-wire pitch in a corresponding part of the semiconductor device (¶ 6, coating is to minimize capacitance issues between neighboring wires.. Regarding claim 7, figure 1A of Kim discloses attaching a plurality of solder balls (140, ¶ 32) to the second main surface of the substrate (100). Regarding claim 8, figures 1A-2C and 4A-4B of Kim in view of Lamson disclose a semiconductor device, comprising: a substrate (100) having a first main surface and an opposing second main surface; one or more semiconductor dies (110) attached to the first main surface; a plurality of bond wires (123) electrically connecting at least one of the one or more semiconductor dies to the first main surface of the substrate, and a molding compound (130, ¶ 67) encapsulating the one or more semiconductor dies, the plurality of bond wires, and at least a portion of the first main surface of the substrate. Kim does not explicitly disclose one or more of the plurality of bond wires have been selectively coated with a polymer. In the same field of endeavor, figures 4a-4c of Lamson disclose coating a selected subset of the segments of a bond wire (41) with an electrically insulating polymer (45, ¶ 30-32). In light of such teachings, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to coat one or more of the plurality of bond wire with an electrically insulating polymer as taught by Lamson for the purpose of minimizing capacitance coupling between wires and thus improve reliability and performance of circuits (¶ 6). Regarding claim 9, figure 1A of Kim in view of Lamson discloses the entire claimed invention as noted in the above rejection of claim 7. Regarding claim 10, figure 2C of Kim discloses the plurality of bond wires includes a first bond wire (123-1) and a second bond wire (123-2) in physical contact with one another; and wherein at least one of the first bond wire and the second bond wire has one or more polymer coats in an area of the physical contact (see Lamson and rejection of claim 5). Regarding claim 11, figure 2C of Kim discloses the first bond wire (123-1) has a first loop height; and wherein the second bond wire (123-2) has a second loop height different from the first loop height. Regarding claim 14, figure 2C of Kim discloses the first bond wire (123-1) and the second bond (123-2) wire have different respective loop shapes. Regarding claim 15, figure 2C of Kim discloses the first bond wire (123-1) and the second bond wire (123-2) have different respective lengths. Regarding claim 16, figure 1B of Kim discloses the plurality of bond wires includes a third bond wire and a fourth bond wire (additional wires that are spaced apart in the second direction) in another physical contact with one another; and wherein at least one of the third bond wire and the fourth bond wire has another polymer coat in an area of said another physical contact (Lamson and rejection of claim 5 above). Regarding claims 17-18, Lamson discloses a polymer coat of the one or more polymer-coated bond wires comprises a thermosetting polymer (i.e. polyimide)(¶ 32). Regarding claim 19, Lamson discloses a polymer coat of the one or more polymer-coated bond wires comprises a first dielectric material (polyimide, ¶ 32).; and Kim discloses the molding compound (130) comprises a different second dielectric material (EMC, ¶ 31). Regarding claim 20, figure 2C of Kim discloses the semiconductor dies (110) are arranged in a vertical stack attached to the first main surface and are horizontally offset with respect to one another. Claims 10, 12, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (alternative interpretation, hereinafter Kim-2) in view of Lamson. Regarding claim 10, figure 1B of Kim discloses the plurality of bond wires includes a first bond wire (leftmost 120) and a second bond wire (120 second from the left); and wherein at least one of the first bond wire and the second bond wire has one or more polymer coats in an area of the physical contact (see Lamson and rejection of claim 5). Kim does not explicitly disclose the first and second bond wires in physical contact with one another. However, it’s obvious that during the molding process, the first and second wires may get deformed due to the mold flow and end up in physical contact with one another. This is confirmed by applicant’s specification to be a possible outcome of the molding process. Regarding claim 12, figure 1B of Kim discloses the first bond wire (leftmost 120) is connected between a first contact pad located on a first one of the semiconductor dies (110) and a second contact pad located on the first main surface of the substrate; and wherein the second bond wire (120 second from the left) is connected between a third contact pad located on one of the semiconductor dies and a fourth contact pad located on the first main surface of the substrate. Regarding claim 13, figure 1B of Kim discloses the first bond wire (leftmost 120) is connected between a first contact pad located on a first semiconductor die (110) of the one or more semiconductor dies and a second contact pad located on the first main surface of the substrate; and wherein the second bond wire (120 second from the left) is connected between a third contact pad located on the first semiconductor die and a fourth contact pad located on the first main surface of the substrate. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YU-HSI DAVID SUN whose telephone number is (571)270-5773. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am-4pm ET. 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, Marlon Fletcher can be reached at 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 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. /YU-HSI D SUN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2817
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 14, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604693
METHOD OF MANUFACTURING CHIPS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598821
CHIP PACKAGE STRUCTURE AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593717
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12581982
BONDING WIRE FOR SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12582016
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
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
77%
Grant Probability
85%
With Interview (+8.4%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 845 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