Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/499,699

SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 01, 2023
Examiner
PRIDEMORE, NATHAN ANDREW
Art Unit
2898
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Mitsubishi Electric Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
74%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 74% — above average
74%
Career Allow Rate
45 granted / 61 resolved
+5.8% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
96
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
49.5%
+9.5% vs TC avg
§102
22.6%
-17.4% vs TC avg
§112
24.3%
-15.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 61 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 Species 2 Modification 2 in the reply filed on 04 March 2026 is acknowledged. Applicant submits that claims 1, 3, 4, and 5 are readable thereon and claim 1 is generic. Examiner has considered the claim language and will treat claims 1-6 and 9-10 on the merits as being readable upon the elected Species 2 and Modification 2, wherein claims 7-8 are withdrawn from consideration. The restriction is maintained, and any subsequent amendments to the claims reading on the non-elected species will be withdrawn from future consideration in view of the election (ELC. of 04 March 2026). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bo Yu et al. (US 2024/0096782 A1; hereinafter Yu). Regarding Claim 1, Yu discloses a semiconductor device (Fig. 1 and Fig. 3) comprising: a plurality of lead frames (11/21; ¶0079); a plurality of semiconductor elements (3/4; ¶0088) mounted to the plurality of lead frames (11/21); a heat sink (13/23; thermally conductive; ¶0082) disposed below the plurality of lead frames (11/21); and an insulating sheet (12/22; ¶0078) interposed between the plurality of lead frames (11/21) and the heat sink (13/23) (as shown in Fig. 1), wherein the insulating sheet (12/22) and the heat sink (13/23) are each divided into two or more portions (insulating sheet is divided into portion 12 and portion 22; heat sink is divided into portion 13 and portion 23), and all the plurality of semiconductor elements (3/4) are arranged at positions overlapping the insulating sheet (12/22) and the heat sink (13/23) in plan view (as shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 3). Regarding Claim 2, Yu discloses the semiconductor device according to claim 1, wherein the two or more portions of the insulating sheet (12 and 22) have different thermal conductivities (Yu; ¶0078; “A thermal conductivity of the first insulation layer 12 is higher than a thermal conductivity of the second insulation layer 22”). Regarding Claim 5, Yu discloses the semiconductor device according to claim 1, wherein the two or more portions of the insulating sheet (12/22) have shapes (quadrilateral shape) corresponding to arrangement of the plurality of lead frames (using the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language of “corresponding to arrangement”; the quadrilateral shapes of the portions of the insulating sheet 12 and 22 corresponds to and overlaps with the arrangement of the lead frames 11 and 21; as shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 3). Regarding Claim 6, Yu discloses the semiconductor device according to claim 2, wherein the two or more portions of the insulating sheet (12/22) have shapes (quadrilateral shape) corresponding to arrangement of the plurality of lead frames (using the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language of “corresponding to arrangement”; the quadrilateral shapes of the portions of the insulating sheet 12 and 22 corresponds to and overlaps with the arrangement of the lead frames 11 and 21; as shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 3). Regarding Claim 9, Yu discloses the semiconductor device according to claim 1, wherein the two or more portions of the insulating sheet (12/22) are asymmetrically arranged in plan view (as shown in Fig. 3; 1 and 2 (which comprise 12 and 22, respectively) are arranged asymmetrically in plan view). Regarding Claim 10, Yu discloses the semiconductor device according to claim 2, wherein the two or more portions of the insulating sheet (12/22) are asymmetrically arranged in plan view (as shown in Fig. 3; 1 and 2 (which comprise 12 and 22, respectively) are arranged asymmetrically in plan view). 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 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu in view of Vikas Gupta et al. (US 20240112978 A1; hereinafter Gupta). Regarding Claim 3, Yu discloses the semiconductor device according to claim 1, wherein two or more semiconductor elements (4) are arranged on one portion of the insulating sheet (22) (and discloses in ¶0079 that the semiconductor element 4 may be alternatively connected to or not connected to a corresponding “line layer” which is the lead frame). However, Yu is silent regarding wherein two or more lead frames (21) are in intimate contact with the one portion of the insulating sheet (22). In the same field of endeavor, Gupta teaches a similar semiconductor device in Fig. 1; comprising a plurality of electronic components (30; equivalent to semiconductor elements; ¶0025) disposed on a plurality of lead frames (Fig. 1; 21, 21A, 21A; which electrically connect to 30; ¶0029), an insulating sheet with two portions (10’ and 10; ¶0025), and a heat sink with two portions (22 left and 22 right divided by G1; which dissipates heat from element 30 in a direction D1; as described in ¶0029); wherein the two portions are asymmetrically arranged (as shown in Fig. 1; wherein the left portion includes one element 30 and the right portion includes two elements 30 and is asymmetrically shaped accordingly), wherein two or more lead frames (21A, 21A; on the right side of G1) of the two or more electronic elements (30, 30; on the right side of G1) are in intimate contact with one portion of the insulating sheet (the one portion 10; on the right side of G1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the two or more lead frames supporting the two or more electronic elements in intimate contact with the one asymmetrically larger portion of the insulating sheet (of Gupta) in the device of Yu in order to electrically connect both similar electronic elements while providing appropriate heat dissipation paths (Gupta; ¶0029-¶0030) for the respective asymmetric portions (wherein both Yu and Gupta teach asymmetrical arrangements for the plurality of semiconductor elements in respective Fig. 1) while assigning the optimal thermal conductivity to respective circuits to manage device cost (Yu; ¶0079). Regarding Claim 4, Yu discloses the semiconductor device according to claim 2, wherein two or more semiconductor elements (4) are arranged on one portion of the insulating sheet (22) (and discloses in ¶0079 that the semiconductor element 4 may be alternatively connected to or not connected to a corresponding “line layer” which is the lead frame). However, Yu is silent regarding wherein two or more lead frames (21) are in intimate contact with the one portion of the insulating sheet (22). In the same field of endeavor, Gupta teaches a similar semiconductor device in Fig. 1; comprising a plurality of electronic components (30; equivalent to semiconductor elements; ¶0025) disposed on a plurality of lead frames (Fig. 1; 21, 21A, 21A; which electrically connect to 30; ¶0029), an insulating sheet with two portions (10’ and 10; ¶0025), and a heat sink with two portions (22 left and 22 right divided by G1; which dissipates heat from element 30 in a direction D1; as described in ¶0029); wherein the two portions are asymmetrically arranged (as shown in Fig. 1; wherein the left portion includes one element 30 and the right portion includes two elements 30 and is asymmetrically shaped accordingly), wherein two or more lead frames (21A, 21A; on the right side of G1) of the two or more electronic elements (30, 30; on the right side of G1) are in intimate contact with one portion of the insulating sheet (the one portion 10; on the right side of G1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have the two or more lead frames supporting the two or more electronic elements in intimate contact with the one asymmetrically larger portion of the insulating sheet (of Gupta) in the device of Yu in order to electrically connect both similar electronic elements while providing appropriate heat dissipation paths (Gupta; ¶0029-¶0030) for the respective asymmetric portions (wherein both Yu and Gupta teach asymmetrical arrangements for the plurality of semiconductor elements in respective Fig. 1) while assigning the optimal thermal conductivity to respective circuits to manage device cost (Yu; ¶0079). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN PRIDEMORE whose telephone number is (703)756-4640. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00am - 4:00pm 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, JULIO MALDONADO can be reached at (571) 272-1864. 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. NATHAN PRIDEMORE Examiner Art Unit 2898 /NATHAN PRIDEMORE/Examiner, Art Unit 2898 /JULIO J MALDONADO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 01, 2023
Application Filed
Apr 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12588433
POROUS III-NITRIDES AND METHODS OF USING AND MAKING THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588187
SEMICONDUCTOR MEMORY DEVICE AND METHOD FOR FABRICATING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581678
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE, METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME, AND ELECTRONIC APPARATUS INCLUDING THE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12581918
FABRICATING METHOD FOR TEST ELEMENT GROUP
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12575311
DISPLAY SUBSTRATE AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
74%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+19.7%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 61 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