Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/459,014

SENSOR ASSEMBLY AND METHOD FOR FORMING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 30, 2023
Examiner
KUPP, BENJAMIN MICHAEL
Art Unit
2893
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Stats Chippac Pte. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allow Rate
9 granted / 10 resolved
+22.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
47
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
61.5%
+21.5% vs TC avg
§102
2.4%
-37.6% vs TC avg
§112
34.9%
-5.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 10 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION This correspondence is in response to the communications received 01/07/2026. Claims 10-14 have been withdrawn. Claims 1-14 are pending. 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 of claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 01/07/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claims 10-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.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 01/07/2026. Priority Certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55 have not been received. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 08/30/2023, 02/01/2024, and 08/06/2024 have been considered by the examiner and made of record in the application file. Specification The lengthy 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. Applicant’s Claim to Figure Comparison It is noted that this comparison is merely for the benefit of reviewers of this office action during prosecution, to allow for an understanding of the examiner’s interpretation of the Applicant’s independent claims as compared to disclosed embodiments in Applicant’s Figures. No response or comments are necessary from Applicant. PNG media_image1.png 238 450 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, a sensor assembly (100), comprising: a sensor (110), wherein the sensor comprises a sensor front surface (111) comprising a sensor area (112) and an interconnect area (113); at least one filter layer (120) formed on top of the sensor front surface (see Fig. 1), wherein the at least one filter layer covers and is in direct contact with the sensor area of the sensor (see Fig. 1); a first encapsulant layer (130) formed on top of the at least one filter layer (see Fig. 1), wherein the first encapsulant layer is transmissive to light (see [0026]); and wherein the interconnect area is at least partially exposed from the at least one filter layer and the first encapsulant layer (see Fig. 1). 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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oganesian (US 8,692,344 B2) in view of Kinsman (US 7,541,658 B2) in view of Glenn et al. (US 6,492,699 B1). t PNG media_image2.png 691 1060 media_image2.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, Figs. 1A-1G of Oganesian disclose a sensor assembly (“image sensor chip 10”, col. 4, line 25), comprising: a sensor (together “absorption compensation material 32”, col. 5, line 41, “photo detectors 14”, col. 4, lines 26-27, “supporting circuitry 16”, col. 4, line 27, and a portion of “substrate 12”, col. 4, line 26, form a sensor), wherein the sensor comprises a sensor front surface (the portion of 12 above “bonding interface 22”, col. 4, line 44, and below “optically transparent substrate (e.g. glass) 38”, col. 5, line 62, is a sensor front surface) comprising a sensor area (“as seen in Fig. 1G, the region denoted “SENA” is a sensor area”) and an interconnect area (“contact pads 18”, col. 4, lines 27-28); at least one filter layer (“color filter 34”, col. 5, line 52) formed on top of the sensor front surface (as seen in Fig. 1G, 34 is on top of the front surface of 12), wherein the at least one filter layer covers and is in direct contact with the sensor area of the sensor (as seen in Fig. 1G, 34 covers and is in direct contact with SENA); and wherein the interconnect area is at least partially exposed from the at least one filter layer (as seen in Fig. 1G, 18 is at least partially exposed from 34). Oganesian fails to disclose “a first encapsulant layer formed on top of the at least one filter layer, wherein the first encapsulant layer is transmissive to light; and wherein the interconnect area is at least partially exposed from the first encapsulant layer.” PNG media_image3.png 272 622 media_image3.png Greyscale However, in a similar field of endeavor, Figs. 8 and 9 of Kinsman teach a first encapsulant layer (“transparent encapsulant material 67 may be used to fill chip cavities 28”, col. 7, lines 23-24) formed on top of the at least one filter layer (after modifying Oganesian with 67 of Kinsman by filling “cavity 28”, col. 5, line 11, of Oganesian, 67 of Kinsman will be formed on top of 34 of Oganesian), wherein the first encapsulant layer is transmissive to light (as discussed previously, 67 is transparent). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “a first encapsulant layer formed on top of the at least one filter layer, wherein the first encapsulant layer is transmissive to light” as taught by Kinsman in the system of Oganesian for the purpose of providing “a transitional index of refraction between the image sensor chip 52 and the index of refraction of the unitary transparent cover 62” (col. 7, lines 27-28), where 52 and 62 of Kinsman are equivalent to 10 and 38 of Oganesian respectively. Oganesian in combination with Kinsman fails to disclose “wherein the interconnect area is at least partially exposed from the first encapsulant layer.” PNG media_image4.png 370 603 media_image4.png Greyscale However, in a similar field of endeavor, Fig. 10 of Glenn teaches wherein the interconnect area is at least partially exposed from the first encapsulant layer (as seen in Fig. 10, “bond pads 106”, col. 16, lines 24-25, are at least partially exposed from “medium 120”, col. 6, line 47, where 106 of Glenn are equivalent to 18 of Oganesian and 120 of Glenn is equivalent to 67 of Kinsman). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “wherein the interconnect area is at least partially exposed from the first encapsulant layer” as taught by Glenn in the system of Oganesian in combination with Kinsman for the purpose of enabling convenient access to the interconnect area for ease of further manufacturing steps. Regarding claim 2, Figs. 1A-1G of Oganesian in combination with Figs. 8 and 9 of Kinsman and Fig. 10 of Glenn disclose the sensor assembly according to claim 1, Figs. 1A-1G of Oganesian further disclose wherein the at least one filter layer comprises an optical filter film (34 is a color filter and is therefore an optical filter). Regarding claim 3, Figs. 1A-1G of Oganesian in combination with Figs. 8 and 9 of Kinsman and Fig. 10 of Glenn disclose the sensor assembly according to claim 1, Figs. 8 and 9 of Kinsman further disclose wherein the first encapsulant layer comprises a clear epoxy molding material (“Example materials for transparent encapsulant material 67 may include clear epoxy, silicone, acrylic or other suitably transparent resin type materials”, col. 7, lines 33-35). Regarding claim 4, Figs. 1A-1G of Oganesian in combination with Figs. 8 and 9 of Kinsman and Fig. 10 of Glenn disclose the sensor assembly according to claim 1, Figs. 1A-1G of Oganesian further disclose wherein the at least one filter layer aligns vertically with the first encapsulant layer (as seen in Fig. 1G of Oganesian, 34 vertically aligns with 28, where 28 of Oganesian will be filled with 67 of Kinsman). Claims 5 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oganesian (US 8,692,344 B2) in view of Kinsman (US 7,541,658 B2) in view of Glenn et al. (US 6,492,699 B1) in view of Lim et al. (US 7,582,954 B1). Regarding claim 5, Figs. 1A-1G of Oganesian disclose an electronic device (see title), comprising: a substrate (“host board (e.g. a printed circuit board) 42”, col. 6, line 13) comprising a substrate front surface (the upper surface of 42 as seen in Fig. 1G is a substrate front surface) and a set of conductive pads (“contact pads 44”, col. 6, line 14) on the substrate front surface (as seen in Fig. 1G, 14 is on the upper surface of 42); a sensor assembly (“image sensor chip 10”, col. 4, line 25) mounted on the substrate front surface (as seen in Fig. 1G, 10 mounted on the upper surface of 12), the sensor assembly comprising: a sensor (together “absorption compensation material 32”, col. 5, line 41, “photo detectors 14”, col. 4, lines 26-27, “supporting circuitry 16”, col. 4, line 27, and a portion of “substrate 12”, col. 4, line 26, form a sensor), wherein the sensor comprises a sensor front surface (the upper surface of 12 exposed to “cavity 28”, col. 5, line 11, is a sensor front area) comprising a sensor area (“as seen in Fig. 1G, the region denoted “SENA” is a sensor area”) and an interconnect area (“supporting circuitry 16”, col. 4, line 27); at least one filter layer (“color filter 34”, col. 5, line 52) formed on top of the sensor front surface (as seen in Fig. 1G, 34 is on top of the front surface of 12), wherein the at least one filter layer covers and is in direct contact with the sensor area of the sensor (as seen in Fig. 1G, 34 covers and is in direct contact with SENA); wherein the interconnect area is at least partially exposed from the at least one filter layer (as seen in Fig. 1G, 18 is at least partially exposed from 34) a set of connection wires (“Wires 46”, col. 6, line 15) for electrically connecting the set of conductive pads with the interconnect area, respectively (“Wires 46 are connected between (and provide an electrical connection between) the contact pads 18 of the image sensor chip 10 and the respective contact pads 44 of host board 42”, col. 6, lines 15-18). Oganesian fails to disclose “the sensor assembly comprising: a first encapsulant layer formed on top of the at least one filter layer, wherein the first encapsulant layer is transmissive to light; and wherein the interconnect area is at least partially exposed from the first encapsulant layer; a second encapsulant layer formed on top of the substrate for encapsulating the sensor assembly and the set of connection wires.” However, in a similar field of endeavor, Figs. 8 and 9 of Kinsman teach “the sensor assembly comprising: a first encapsulant layer (“transparent encapsulant material 67 may be used to fill chip cavities 28”, col. 7, lines 23-24) formed on top of the at least one filter layer (after modifying Oganesian with 67 of Kinsman by filling “cavity 28”, col. 5, line 11, of Oganesian, 67 of Kinsman will be formed on top of 34 of Oganesian), wherein the first encapsulant layer is transmissive to light (as discussed previously, 67 is transparent); and Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “a first encapsulant layer formed on top of the at least one filter layer, wherein the first encapsulant layer is transmissive to light” as taught by Kinsman in the system of Oganesian for the purpose of providing “a transitional index of refraction between the image sensor chip 52 and the index of refraction of the unitary transparent cover 62” (col. 7, lines 27-28), where 52 and 62 of Kinsman are equivalent to 10 and 38 of Oganesian respectively. Oganesian in combination with Kinsman fails to disclose “wherein the interconnect area is at least partially exposed from the first encapsulant layer.” However, in a similar field of endeavor, Fig. 10 of Glenn teaches wherein the interconnect area is at least partially exposed from the first encapsulant layer (as seen in Fig. 10, “bond pads 106”, col. 16, lines 24-25, are at least partially exposed from “medium 120”, col. 6, line 47, where 106 of Glenn are equivalent to 18 of Oganesian and 120 of Glenn is equivalent to 67 of Kinsman). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “wherein the interconnect area is at least partially exposed from the first encapsulant layer” as taught by Glenn in the system of Oganesian in combination with Kinsman for the purpose of enabling convenient access to the interconnect area for ease of further manufacturing steps. Oganesian in combination with Kinsman and Glenn fails to disclose “a second encapsulant layer formed on top of the substrate for encapsulating the sensor assembly and the set of connection wires.” PNG media_image5.png 295 460 media_image5.png Greyscale PNG media_image6.png 316 462 media_image6.png Greyscale However, in a similar field of endeavor, Figs. 2A-4B of Lim teach a second encapsulant layer (“first opaque encapsulant 145”, col. 5, lines 60-61, where “It is preferable that the disclosed first encapsulant 145 be a good stress and thermal shock absorber”, col. 6, lines 15-16) formed on top of the substrate (“leadless leadframe 133”, col. 5, line 11, as seen in Fig. 3A, 145 is on top of 133) for encapsulating the sensor assembly and the set of connection wires (as seen in Fig. 2C and 3A, 145 encapsulates “die 110”, col. 5, line 7, which includes “light sensing regions 115”, col. 5, lines 7-8, and “Wire bonds 131”, col. 5, lines 11-12). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “a second encapsulant layer formed on top of the substrate for encapsulating the sensor assembly and the set of connection wires” as taught by Lim in the system of Oganesian in combination with Kinsman and Glenn for the purpose of protecting the sensor assembly from stress and thermal damage. Regarding claim 9, Figs. 1A-1G of Oganesian in combination with Figs. 8 and 9 of Kinsman, Fig. 10 of Glenn, and Figs. 2A-4B of Lim disclose the electronic device according to claim 5, Figs. 2A-4B of Lim further disclose wherein the second encapsulant layer is of a material different from the first encapsulant layer (as discussed above, 145 of Lim is opaque and 67 of Kinsman is transparent, therefore they must be of different materials). Claims 6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oganesian (US 8,692,344 B2) in view of Kinsman (US 7,541,658 B2) in view of Glenn et al. (US 6,492,699 B1) in view of Lim et al. (US 7,582,954 B1) in view of Venkataraman et al. (US 9,049,391 B2). Regarding claim 6, Figs. 1A-1G of Oganesian in combination with Figs. 8 and 9 of Kinsman, Fig. 10 of Glenn, and Figs. 2A-4B of Lim disclose the electronic device according to claim 5. Oganesian in combination with Kinsman, Glenn, and Lim fails to disclose “further comprising: a mother board on which the substrate is mounted, and at least one electronic component mounted on the mother board.” However, in a similar field of endeavor, Venkataraman teaches further comprising: a mother board on which the substrate is mounted (“camera arrays may be formed on separate substrates and mounted on the same motherboard”, col. 21, lines 8-9, where the camera arrays and substrates of Venkataraman are equivalent to 10 and 42 of Oganesian respectively), and at least one electronic component mounted on the mother board (as discussed above, Venkataraman teaches mounting a plurality of camera arrays on the same motherboard). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “further comprising: a mother board on which the substrate is mounted, and at least one electronic component mounted on the mother board” as taught by Venkataraman in the system of Oganesian in combination with Kinsman, Glenn, and Lim for the purpose of increasing the resolution of the electronic device. Regarding claim 8, Figs. 1A-1G of Oganesian in combination with Figs. 8 and 9 of Kinsman, Fig. 10 of Glenn, Figs. 2A-4B of Lim, and Venkataraman disclose the electronic device according to claim 6, Venkataraman further discloses wherein the at least one electronic component has the same structure as the sensor assembly (as discussed above, Venkataraman teaches mounting a plurality of camera arrays on the same motherboard, when this teaching is applied to the system of Oganesian, there will be a plurality of the electronic device of Oganesian mounted on the motherboard taught by Venkataraman) and is mounted on the mother board via another substrate (as discussed previously, Venkataraman teaches that the camera arrays are formed on sperate substrates then mounted on the motherboard). Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oganesian (US 8,692,344 B2) in view of Kinsman (US 7,541,658 B2) in view of Glenn et al. (US 6,492,699 B1) in view of Lim et al. (US 7,582,954 B1) in view of Venkataraman et al. (US 9,049,391 B2) in view of Yeh et al. (US 8,724,983 B2). Regarding claim 7, Figs. 1A-1G of Oganesian in combination with Figs. 8 and 9 of Kinsman, Fig. 10 of Glenn, Figs. 2A-4B of Lim, and Venkataraman disclose the electronic device according to claim 6. Oganesian in combination with Kinsman, Glenn, Lim, and Venkataraman fail to disclose “wherein the at least one electronic component comprises a light source.” PNG media_image7.png 529 458 media_image7.png Greyscale However, in a similar field of endeavor, Fig. 2 of Yeh teaches wherein the at least one electronic component comprises a light source (“light-emitting elements 14”, col. 3, lines 27-28). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to implement “wherein the at least one electronic component comprises a light source” as taught by Yeh in the system of Oganesian in combination with Kinsman, Glenn, Lim, and Venkatraman for the purpose of illuminating the target of the sensor assembly. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN M KUPP whose telephone number is (571)272-5608. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7:00 am - 4:00 pm PT. 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, Yara Green can be reached at (571) 270-3035. 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. /BENJAMIN MICHAEL KUPP/Examiner, Art Unit 2893 /YARA B GREEN/Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 30, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12588199
NON-VOLATILE MEMORY DEVICE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEM INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581669
VERTICAL MEMORY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12497710
METHOD FOR PRODUCING SEMICONDUCTOR WAFERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 16, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 3 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
90%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+12.5%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 10 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