Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/480,936

MEMS MODULE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 04, 2023
Examiner
KUSUMAKAR, KAREN M
Art Unit
2897
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Rohm Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
825 granted / 949 resolved
+18.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+9.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
965
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
46.4%
+6.4% vs TC avg
§102
32.4%
-7.6% vs TC avg
§112
9.4%
-30.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 949 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/4/23 and 3/19/25 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are 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, 4, 5, and 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pahl (US 2021/0139317). As to claim 1, Pahl teaches a MEMS module (fig. 9) comprising: a substrate (1, [0027]); a semiconductor chip (2) in which a MEMS including a mechanical movable portion is formed ([0027]); and a soft member (30,3) that is interposed between the substrate (1) and the semiconductor chip (2) and has a lower hardness than the substrate ([0031]), wherein the soft member (30.3) is disposed in a partial region of a first main surface (bottom) of the semiconductor chip (2) facing the substrate (1, any one of the configurations shown in fig. 14A-14D). As to claim 2, Pahl further teaches a hard member (24,40) configured to mechanically connect the substrate (1) and the semiconductor chip (2) and have a higher hardness than the soft member ([0036] – [0037], 24 is a bump with the purpose of mechanically and electrically connecting the substrate and the chip, whereas the flexible mounting material 3 has the express purpose of “providing sufficient flexibility” [0031]), As to claim 4, Pahl further teaches the hard member is a bump electrode configured to electrically connect the substrate and the semiconductor chip ([0036]), and wherein the soft member is disposed in a region other than the one corner portion where the bump electrode is disposed (any of figures 14A-14D). As to claim 5, Pahl further teaches the soft member (3) is disposed at another corner portion diagonal to the one corner portion where the bump electrode is disposed (fig. 14B, the soft member 3 is in all corners, as are the hard members 24, thus, they are also in diagonal corners from each other). As to claims 8-10, Pahl further teaches the soft member (3) is disposed in a corner portion and/or an intermediate portion of a peripheral region of the first main surface, which is a region located within a predetermined distance from a periphery toward a center of the semiconductor chip (figs. 14A-14D, the central portion is the hole 6 for the MEMS device. Soft member 3 is located along the entirety of the periphery region – including the corner and the intermediate area). As to claim 11, Pahl further teaches the soft member includes a portion disposed outside a periphery of the semiconductor chip (fig. 14A, soft member 3 is beyond the periphery region containing the bumps 24). As to claim 12, Pahl further teaches the soft member is disposed in a central region that is separated by a predetermined distance from a periphery toward a center of the semiconductor chip (fig. 14D). 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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Pahl. As to claim 3, Pahl further teaches the semiconductor chip includes a plurality of electrode pads that are formed on at least one selected from the group of the first main surface and a second main surface opposite the first main surface and configured to obtain an electrical connection with an outside (24, [0036], obvious, if not inherent, that the stud bump is connected to an electrode/bonding/landing pad within the chip so as to pass electrical signals to and from the active devices within the chip), and wherein when the MEMS module is viewed from a normal direction of the first main surface, the plurality of electrode pads are arranged at one of a plurality of corner portions of the first main surface or the second main surface (figs. 14A-14D). Claim(s) 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Pahl, as applied to claim 3, and in further view of Pahl (US 2016/0345106, herein “Pahl2”). As to claim 6, Pahl does not teach the plurality of electrode pads are formed on the second main surface of the semiconductor chip, wherein the MEMS module further comprises a metal wire electrically connected to the plurality of electrode pads, and wherein the semiconductor chip is mounted on the substrate via the soft member. However, Pahl2 does teach a semiconductor MEMs device on a substrate and having electrode pads/terminals on both sides of the chip (figs. 7 and 8, [0043] – [0048], there are multiple types of chips and connections). Having a wire bonding electrode on the second main surface of the chip would have been obvious so as to form multiple different types of devices. As to claim 7, Pahl2 further teaches the MEMS module is viewed from the normal direction of the first main surface, the soft member overlaps with the plurality of electrode pads (Pahl2, fig. 7). Conclusion Any response to this Office Action should be faxed to (571) 273-8300 or mailed to: Commissioner for Patents P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, VA 22313-1450 Hand-Delivered responses should be brought to: Customer Service Window Randolph Building 401 Dulany Street Alexandria, VA 22313 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAREN M KUSUMAKAR whose telephone number is (571)270-3520. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday from 7:30a – 4:30p EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Fernando Toledo can be reached on 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 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. /KAREN KUSUMAKAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897 2/15/26
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 04, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 15, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599002
SUBSTRATE-INTEGRATED WAVEGUIDE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12598882
LIGHT EMITTING DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588564
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588212
INTEGRATED ASSEMBLIES, AND METHODS OF FORMING INTEGRATED ASSEMBLIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581927
CONTACT OVER ACTIVE GATE STRUCTURES WITH CONDUCTIVE TRENCH CONTACT TAPS FOR ADVANCED INTEGRATED CIRCUIT STRUCTURE FABRICATION
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
87%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+9.8%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 949 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