Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/504,255

SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 08, 2023
Examiner
GUMEDZOE, PENIEL M
Art Unit
2899
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
DENSO CORPORATION
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
1080 granted / 1302 resolved
+14.9% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+3.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
1325
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
40.7%
+0.7% vs TC avg
§102
31.3%
-8.7% vs TC avg
§112
25.2%
-14.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1302 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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 11/08/23 & 12/04/23 & 10/08/24 was/were received by the Examiner before the issuance/mailing date of the first office action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) has/have been considered (except for anything in foreign language non-accompanied by an English translation) 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) 1-2 is/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 Yamada (US 2016/0027716) with intrinsic evidences from Tsurumi et al. (US 6,037,657), Hayasaka et al. (US 6,809,421) and Ohuchi et al. (US 6,197,617). a. Re claim 1, Yamada discloses a semiconductor device (structure on fig. 1 excluding the cooler 6; see fig. 1 and related text; see remaining of disclosure for more details) to be arranged adjacent to a cooler 6 in a predetermined direction (vertical direction), the semiconductor device comprising: a semiconductor element 1 having main electrodes on opposite faces opposite in the predetermined direction (the main electrodes on top and bottom surfaces are not explicitly shown and disclosed but inherently exist because device 1 is disclosed in at least [0027]-[0033] to be electrically connected to layer 5b and layer 2b, and this connection configuration requires top and bottom electrodes for the types of devices such as IGBT and the likes that device 1 is disclosed to be in [0026]; in the alternative, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided device 1 with top and bottom electrodes to electrically connect to layers 5b and 2b as intended, and this as a non-inventive step of providing such a device with essential working parts as conventionally known in the art; see MPEP 2144.I&II); a substrate 5 (or 5&2) having an insulating base member 5a containing resin (glass epoxy resin; see [0027]), a front-face metal body 5b ([0027]) disposed on a front face of the insulating base member and a back-face metal body 5a disposed on a back face of the insulating base member, the front-face metal body being electrically connected to at least one of the main electrodes of the semiconductor element (explicit as per the above explanations); and a sealing body 8 (epoxy resin; [0033]) containing resin and sealing at least a part of the substrate and the semiconductor element, wherein a glass transition point of the insulating base member is referred to as Tgi (Tgi would be 120°C for epoxy glass as per col. 7 ln. 48-50 of Ohuchi et al. ‘617), a linear expansion coefficient of the insulating base member is referred to as αi (αi would be 15 ppm/°C for epoxy as per fig. 35 of Hayasaka et al. ‘421, noting that epoxy stands for epoxy resin as commonly done in the art), a glass transition point of the sealing body is referred to as Tgs (Tgs would be 150°C for epoxy resin as per col. 7 ln. 51-67 of Ohuchi et al. ‘617), and a linear expansion coefficient of the sealing body is referred to as αs (αs would be 14 ppm/°C for epoxy as per fig. 7 of Tsurumi et al. ‘657), and wherein the insulating base member and the sealing body satisfy a relationship of Tgs≥Tgi and a relationship of αi≥αs (explicit as per the above). b. Re claim 2, the semiconductor element has, as the main electrodes, a first main (top) electrode and a second main (bottom) electrode disposed on the opposite faces in the predetermined direction, wherein the substrate (when it is 5&2) includes a first substrate 5 to which the first main electrode is connected and a second substrate 2 to which the second main electrode is connected, and wherein the first substrate and the second substrate are disposed to interpose the semiconductor element therebetween in the predetermined direction (explicit on fig. 1). 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(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamada (US 2016/0027716) in view of Blaszczak et al. (US 2005/0067721, cited on IDS), with intrinsic evidences from Tsurumi et al. (US 6,037,657) and Hayasaka et al. (US 6,809,421). a. Re claim 1, Yamada discloses a semiconductor device (structure on fig. 1 excluding the cooler 6; see fig. 1 and related text; see remaining of disclosure for more details) to be arranged adjacent to a cooler 6 in a predetermined direction (vertical direction), the semiconductor device comprising: a semiconductor element 1 having main electrodes on opposite faces opposite in the predetermined direction (the main electrodes on top and bottom surfaces are not explicitly shown and disclosed but inherently exist because device 1 is disclosed in at least [0027]-[0033] to be electrically connected to layer 5b and layer 2b, and this connection configuration requires top and bottom electrodes for the types of devices such as IGBT and the likes that device 1 is disclosed to be in [0026]; in the alternative, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided device 1 with top and bottom electrodes to electrically connect to layers 5b and 2b as intended, and this as a non-inventive step of providing such a device with essential working parts as conventionally known in the art; see MPEP 2144.I&II); a substrate 5 (or 5&2) having an insulating base member 5a containing resin (glass epoxy resin; see [0027]), a front-face metal body 5b ([0027]) disposed on a front face of the insulating base member and a back-face metal body 5a disposed on a back face of the insulating base member, the front-face metal body being electrically connected to at least one of the main electrodes of the semiconductor element (explicit as per the above explanations); and a sealing body 8 (epoxy resin; [0033]) containing resin and sealing at least a part of the substrate and the semiconductor element, wherein a glass transition point of the insulating base member is referred to as Tgi (Tgi of epoxy glass), a linear expansion coefficient of the insulating base member is referred to as αi (αi would be 15 ppm/°C for epoxy as per fig. 35 of Hayasaka et al. ‘421, noting that epoxy stands for epoxy resin as commonly done in the art), a glass transition point of the sealing body is referred to as Tgs (Tgs of epoxy resin), and a linear expansion coefficient of the sealing body is referred to as αs (αs would be 14 ppm/°C for epoxy as per fig. 7 of Tsurumi et al. ‘657), and wherein the insulating base member and the sealing body satisfy a relationship of αi≥αs (explicit as per the above). But Yamada does not explicitly disclose that the insulating base member and the sealing body satisfy a relationship of Tgs≥Tgi. However, Blaszczak et al. disclose that having the glass transition point a sealing material 6 higher than the glass transition temperature (or point) of an epoxy glass substrate 3 allows the sealing material to control the final shape of a package device including a flat surfaces upon cooling (see figs 1-9 and at least [0014], [0068], [0072], [0080] and [0091]). As such, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have provided the sealing resin 8 to have a higher glass transition temperature (or point) than the one of the insulating substrate 5a (including also for the second insulating substrate 2a as necessary by making it of an epoxy glass too) in order to allow the sealing resin 8 to control the final shape of a package device including a flat surfaces upon cooling from soldering the cooler 6 to layer 2c. The modification would have resulted in having the insulating base member and the sealing body satisfying a relationship of Tgs≥Tgi. b. Re claim 2, the semiconductor element has, as the main electrodes, a first main (top) electrode and a second main (bottom) electrode disposed on the opposite faces in the predetermined direction, wherein the substrate (when it is 5&2) includes a first substrate 5 to which the first main electrode is connected and a second substrate 2 to which the second main electrode is connected, and wherein the first substrate and the second substrate are disposed to interpose the semiconductor element therebetween in the predetermined direction (explicit on fig. 1). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ogawa (US 2022/0051961) and Sono et al. (US 5,920,117) disclose structures similar to the claimed invention. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PENIEL M GUMEDZOE whose telephone number is (571)270-3041. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00AM - 5:30PM. 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, Dale Page can be reached at 5712707877. 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. /PENIEL M GUMEDZOE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 08, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 10, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 10, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604736
SHIELD TO REDUCE SUBSTRATE ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERFERENCE AND WARPAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593394
HEAT TRANSFER FROM NON-GROUNDABLE ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593698
ELECTRONIC PACKAGE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593581
DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593673
SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURE AND METHOD MAKING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
83%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (+3.7%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1302 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