Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/484,304

ELECTRICAL MODULE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING AN ELECTRICAL MODULE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Oct 10, 2023
Examiner
OH, JIYOUNG
Art Unit
2818
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Rolls-Royce
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 5m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
21 granted / 29 resolved
+4.4% vs TC avg
Strong +33% interview lift
Without
With
+32.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 5m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
80
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
59.0%
+19.0% vs TC avg
§102
24.6%
-15.4% vs TC avg
§112
15.5%
-24.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 29 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Response to Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-10 in the reply filed on 12/19/2025 is acknowledged. Group II, claims 11-19 are withdrawn. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application DE 10 2022 128 625.8 filed in German Patent and Trade Mark Office (DPMA) on 10/28/2022 receipt of a certified copy thereof. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) filed on 10/12/2023 and IDS filed on 04/29/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDSs are considered by the examiner. 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites the limitation “an upper side of the electrical module that provides electrical contact area” in line 8 and further recites the limitation “wherein an upper side of each stepped metal structure provides an electrical contact area of the electrical contact areas of the electrical module” in lines 13-14. However, the claim language does not clearly define whether the “electrical contact areas” are limited to the upper sides of the stepped metal structures or whether the upper side of the electrical module may include additional electrical contact areas independent of the stepped metal structures. For best understand and examination purpose, the claim will be best considered based on drawings, disclosure, and/or any applicable prior arts; and the claim limitation “wherein an upper side of each stepped metal structure provides an electrical contact area of the electrical contact areas of the electrical module” will be interpreted as “wherein each electrical contact area is formed by an upper side of a respective stepped metal structure” in the instant Office Action. Claims 2-10 are rejected due to their dependency Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claims 1-7 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Murayama et al. (US 2022/0028774; hereinafter ‘Murayama’). Regarding claim 1, Murayama teaches an electrical module (10, Figs. 1A and 1B, [0026]) comprising: a ceramic circuit carrier (20, [0033]); an electrical component (30, [0027]) having an upper side (a surface of 30 facing away from 20; hereinafter ‘30T’) and an underside (a surface of 30 facing 20; hereinafter ‘30B’), wherein the underside of the electrical component (30B) is arranged on the ceramic circuit carrier (20), and wherein the upper side of the electrical component (30T) provides electrical contacts (32 and 33, [0031]); a substrate (50, [0027]) in which the ceramic circuit carrier (20) and the electrical component (30) are arranged, wherein the substrate (50) comprises a potting material (50 being an encapsulation resin); and an upper side of the electrical module (a surface of 10 facing away from 20; hereinafter ‘20T’) that provides electrical contact areas (a surface of 61 facing away from 30 and defining electrical contact areas, [0054]; hereinafter ‘ECA’) wherein stepped metal structures (61) are arranged on the upper side of the electrical module (10T), wherein each stepped metal structure of the stepped metal structures (61) has regions of different thickness (shown in Figs. 1A and 1B), wherein an upper side of each stepped metal structure (a surface of 61 facing away from 30; hereinafter ‘61T’) provides an electrical contact area of the electrical contact areas of the electrical module (61T forming ECA of 10), and wherein an underside of each stepped metal structure (a surface of 61 facing 30; hereinafter ‘61B’) contacts in a region of increased thickness (in a region having a greater thickness than an adjacent region of 61) an electrical contact of the electrical contacts (electrical contact of 32) on the upper side of the electrical component (30T). Regarding claim 2, Murayama teaches the electrical module of claim 1, wherein the ceramic circuit carrier (20, Fig. 1A) has an insulating ceramic layer (20 including an insulating ceramic layer, such as Al2O3, ZrO2, AlN, or Si3N4, [0033]) and a first metallization layer (21, [0035]) arranged on the upper side of the insulating ceramic layer (the upper side of 20), and wherein the electrical component (30) is arranged on and electrically connected to an upper side of the first metallization layer (the upper side of 21 facing 30; hereinafter ‘21T’). Regarding claim 3, Murayama teaches the electrical module of claim 2, further comprising: a further stepped metal structure (62, Fig. 1A, [0054]) that provides, on an upper side of the further stepped metal structure (a surface of 62 facing away from 30; hereinafter ‘62T’), an electrical contact area of the electrical contact areas of the electrical module (62T forming ECA of 10), wherein an underside of the further stepped metal structure (a surface of 62 facing 30; hereinafter ‘62B’), in a region of increased thickness (in a region having a greater thickness than an adjacent region of 62), contacts the first metallization layer of the ceramic circuit carrier (21) or a spacer (71, [0044]) arranged thereon. Regarding claim 4, Murayama teaches the electrical module of claim 3, wherein the further stepped metal structure (62, Fig. 1A) directly contacts the first metallization layer (21), and wherein the further stepped metal structure (62) has a region of increased thickness (a thickened region of 62 at V4, [0065]) that is higher than regions of increased thickness of the stepped metal structures (a thickened region of 61 at V1). Regarding claim 5, Murayama teaches the electrical module of claim 3, wherein the electrical module (10, Fig. 2) comprises a total of three stepped metal structures (61A, 61B, and 62; hereinafter ‘TT’) that provide three electrical contact areas of the electrical module (three electrical contact areas by TT), wherein a first stepped metal structure (61A) and a second stepped metal structures (61B) of the three stepped metal (TT) contact the upper side of the electrical component (30T) in order to supply a gate potential (33 is a gate electrode, [0031]) and a source potential (32 is a source electrode), and wherein a third stepped metal structure (62) of the three stepped metal structures (TT) contacts the first metallization layer (21) in order to supply a drain potential (31 is a drain electrode). Regarding claim 6, Murayama teaches the electrical module of claim 1, wherein the stepped metal structures (61, Fig. 1A) are formed from a metal foil (61 is metal or metal alloy, [0055]) that is plane on an upper side of the metal foil and stepped on an underside of the metal foil (shown in Fig. 1A). Regarding claim 7, Murayama teaches the electrical module of claim 1, wherein each stepped metal structure of the stepped metal structures (61, Fig. 1A) comprises a plurality of copper layers connected to one another in a materially bonded fashion (61 is copper or copper alloy, [0055]). Regarding claim 9, Murayama teaches the electrical module of claim 1, wherein the electrical component (30, Fig. 1A) is a semiconductor component (30 is a semiconductor elements, [0027]). Regarding claim 10, Murayama teaches the electrical module of claim 9, wherein the semiconductor component (30, Fig. 1A) is a power semiconductor (30 is a power semiconductor element, [0030]). 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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murayama (US 2022/0028774) in view of Fuergut et al. (EP 3300105A1; hereinafter ‘Fuergut’). Regarding claim 8, Murayama teaches the electrical module of claim 1, wherein a region (a region between 30T and the underside ECAB, Fig. 1A) between the upper side of the electrical component (30T) and the underside of the associated electrical contact area (the underside of ECAB) is filled with the potting material (50 being an encapsulation resin). Murayama does not teach the electrical module wherein a spacing between the upper side of the electrical component and the underside of an associated electrical contact area formed on the upper side of the electrical module is greater than 250 μm. Fuergut teaches an electrical module (7, FIG. 23, [0014, 0026]) wherein a spacing (the spacing between the lower surface corresponding to d34 and the lower surface of 3, [0075]) between the upper side of the electrical component (the lower surface corresponding to d34) and the underside of an associated electrical contact area (the lower surface of 3) formed on the upper side of the electrical module (the upper side of 7). Although, Fuergut does not explicitly teach that the spacing is greater than 250 μm. Fuergut, however, provides the metal plate 3 having a thickness in the range of about 100 μm to 2000 μm, from which it can be reasonably inferred that a resulting step height or spacing formed by a reduced-thickness portion would be on the order of hundreds of micrometers [0024]. As taught by Fuergut, one of ordinary skill in the art would utilize and modify the above teaching into Murayama to obtain and achieve the electrical module wherein a spacing between the upper side of the electrical component and the underside of an associated electrical contact area formed on the upper side of the electrical module is greater than 250 μm as claimed, because it has been held that where the criticality of the claimed range is not shown and the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP §2144.05. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to employ the teaching as taught by Fuergut in combination with Murayama due to above reason. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIYOUNG OH whose telephone number is (703)756-5687. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9AM-5PM EST. 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, Eva Montalvo can be reached on (571) 270-3829. 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. /JIYOUNG OH/Examiner, Art Unit 2818 /DUY T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818 1/12/26
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 10, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12568652
FORMING GATE ALL AROUND DEVICE WITH SILICON-GERMANIUM CHANNEL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12538532
METHOD OF FORMING A GAP UNDER A SOURCE/DRAIN FEATURE OF A MULTI-GATE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12527032
BACKSIDE CONTACT WITH SHALLOW PLACEHOLDER AND EASY BACKSIDE SEMICONDUCTOR REMOVAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12519046
WAFER LEVEL PACKAGING HAVING REDISTRIBUTION LAYER FORMED UTILIZING LASER DIRECT STRUCTURING
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12512427
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE INCLUDING LOWER PADS HAVING DIFFERENT WIDTHS AND SEMICONDUCTOR PACKAGE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2025
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
72%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+32.9%)
3y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 29 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