Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/573,116

LIQUID METAL CONNECTION DEVICE AND METHOD

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Dec 21, 2023
Examiner
OWENS, DOUGLAS W
Art Unit
2897
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Intel Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
265 granted / 328 resolved
+12.8% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+2.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
29 currently pending
Career history
357
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
35.9%
-4.1% vs TC avg
§102
36.8%
-3.2% vs TC avg
§112
18.0%
-22.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 328 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 . Specification The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract of the disclosure does not commence on a separate sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.52(b)(4) and 1.72(b). A new abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. 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)(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 27, 29, 33, 35, and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0187850 to Lin et al. The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. Regarding claim 27, Lin et al. teach an electronic interconnect socket, (Figs. 4A – 4C, for example) comprising: an array of pins (404) on a first surface; an array of liquid metal filled reservoirs (410) on a second surface; and a resilient material spacer (434) located between pins in the array of pins, wherein a surface of the resilient material spacer is at or above ends of the pins in an uncompressed state, and exposes the ends of the pins in a compressed state (Fig. 4C). Regarding claim 29, Lin et al. teach an electronic interconnect socket, wherein the resilient material is continuous and encases tips of the array of pins (Fig. 4C). Regarding claim 33, Lin et al. teach an electronic interconnect socket, further including a resilient cap (430) over the array of liquid metal filled reservoirs. Regarding claim 35, Lin et al. teach an electronic interconnect socket, wherein at least some of the pins in the array of pins include formed flat metal pins. Lin et al., ¶ [0019]. Regarding claim 38, Lin et al. teach an electronic device (Figs. 3A – 3C, for example), comprising: an array of pins (304) embedded within a socket body, the array of pins exposed on a first major surface of the socket body; an array of liquid metal filled reservoirs (310) on a second major surface of the socket body, the array of pins passing through the socket body and coupled to the array of liquid metal filled reservoirs; and an adhesive film (340) over the array of liquid metal filled reservoirs on the second surface. 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 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. Regarding claim 28, Lin et al. teach an electronic interconnect socket, wherein the resilient material includes a porous foaming agent (¶ [0027]). Lin et al. do not explicitly teach that the foaming agent is a polymer. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to use a polymer foaming agent since it is a known material that would have been well suited for the intended use. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 44 – 46 are allowed. Claims 30-032, 34, 36, 37, and 39 – 43 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record does not teach or reasonably suggest an electronic device as recited in claim 44, including “one or more fasteners coupling the semiconductor die package to the circuit board, wherein the one or more biasing devices store a releasing force to drive the semiconductor die package out of engagement with the liquid metal socket upon release of the one or more fasteners.” Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0000117 to Baskaran et al. teach an electronic interconnect socket including an array of pins and an array of liquid metal filled reservoirs. Baskaran et al. do not teach a resilient material spacer, an adhesive film over the array of liquid metal filled reservoirs, or biasing devices with a stored releasing force. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS W OWENS whose telephone number is (571)272-1662. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30-1:30. 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, Chad Dicke can be reached at 571-270-7996. 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. DOUGLAS W. OWENS, Esq. Primary Patent Examiner Art Unit 2897 /DOUGLAS W OWENS/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 21, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12593716
SUBSTRATE ASSEMBLY AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588538
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE HAVING WIRED UNDER BUMP STRUCTURE AND METHOD THEREFOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581937
INTEGRATED DEVICE COMPRISING METALLIZATION INTERCONNECTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12564085
MICROELECTRONIC ASSEMBLY WITH UNDERFILL FLOW CONTROL
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12563882
ELECTRONIC DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 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
81%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+2.8%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 328 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