Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/642,889

COMPOSITE SPRING STRUCTURE TO REINFORCE MECHANICAL ROBUSTNESS OF A MEMS DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Apr 23, 2024
Examiner
HOSSAIN, MOAZZAM
Art Unit
2898
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
694 granted / 792 resolved
+19.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+10.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
52 currently pending
Career history
844
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.7%
-37.3% vs TC avg
§103
45.5%
+5.5% vs TC avg
§102
31.3%
-8.7% vs TC avg
§112
16.6%
-23.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 792 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 group I, claims 1-17 in ”Response to Election / Restriction Filed - 12/01/2025”, is acknowledged along with cancellation of claims 18-20. Applicant request to includes new claims 21-23 have been granted. In view of the above, this office action considers claims 1-17 and 21-23 pending for prosecution, and are examined on their merits. 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. Notes: when present, semicolon separated fields within the parenthesis (; ;) represent, for example, (100; Fig 1; [0015]) or (Col 1, Ln 61) = (element 100; Figure No. 1; Paragraph No. [0015]) or Column No 1, Line Nos. 61. For brevity, the texts “Element”, “Figure No.” and “Paragraph No.” or “Column No, Line Nos" shall be excluded shall be excluded, though; additional clarification notes may be added within each field. The number of fields may be fewer or more than three indicated above. These conventions are used throughout this document. Claims 1-5, 7-8 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Chou; Chung-Yen et al., (US 20160318758 A1); hereinafter Chou. Regarding claim 1, Chou teaches a semiconductor structure (semiconductor structure 100, Fig 1-2A; [0015,0019]) comprising (see the entire document; Figs 1-2A-2B; specifically as cited below): PNG media_image1.png 386 1006 media_image1.png Greyscale Chou Figure 2A and Figure 2B a first substrate (206 in 202; Fig 2A; [0019]); a second substrate (234 in 232 MEMS device substrate; [0021]) overlying the first substrate (202), wherein the first and second substrates at least partially define a cavity (222; [0020); a microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) component (238: moveable mass) in the cavity (222); and a spring structure (236; Figs 2A-2B [0023-0024]) disposed between a region of the second substrate (234) and the MEMS component (238), wherein the spring structure (236) comprises (depicted in view 200B; Fig 2B) a first layer (260; Fig 2B; [0024]) and a second layer (264), wherein the first layer (260) continuously extends along a first vertical surface of the second layer (264). Regarding claim 2, Chou as applied to the semiconductor structure of claim 1, further teaches, wherein the first (260; silicon as detailed in Fig 9, where 104 is semiconductor silicon [0045]) and second layers (264; dielectric; [0024]) comprise different materials (silicon/dielectric). Regarding claim 3, Chou as applied to the semiconductor structure of claim 1, further teaches, wherein the first layer (260) continuously extends along a second vertical surface of the second layer (depicted in view of 200B; Fig 2B; see the combined layer of second and third instances from left, where 260 is interfacing at least two instances of 264), wherein the first vertical surface is opposite the second vertical surface (Fig 2B). Regarding claim 4, Chou as applied to the semiconductor structure of claim 1, further teaches, wherein (view of 200B; Fig 2) an upper surface of the first layer (260) is aligned ((depicted in view of 200B; Fig 2B) with an upper surface of the second layer (264). Regarding claim 5, Chou as applied to the semiconductor structure of claim 1, further teaches, wherein (view of 200B; Fig 2) a height of the first layer (260) is equal to a height of the second layer (264). Regarding claim 7, Chou as applied to the semiconductor structure of claim 1, further teaches, wherein when viewed in top view (projected from view of 200B; Fig 2) the first layer (260) comprises a first L-shaped segment (at least opposite to the bulge of 264) laterally adjacent to and directly contacting a second L-shaped segment of the second layer (264). Regarding claim 8, Chou as applied to the semiconductor structure of claim 1, further teaches, wherein (view of 200B; Fig 2) when viewed from above the first layer (264) or the second layer (264) comprises opposing sidewalls defining one or more openings (240) that extend through a height of the spring structure (236). 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 of this title, 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 6 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Chou; Chung-Yen et al., (US 20160318758 A1); hereinafter Chou; in view of TANAKA; Satoru (US 20150021719 A1) hereinafter Tanaka. Regarding claim 6, Chou as applied to the semiconductor structure of claim 1, but does not expressly disclose, wherein when viewed in top view (projected from view of 200B; Fig 2) the first (260) and second layers (264) respectively comprise a first lateral segment extending from the region of the second substrate in a first direction and a second lateral segment extending from the first lateral segment in a second direction, wherein the first direction is substantially orthogonal to the second direction. However, in the analogous art another prior art Tanaka teaches a substrate 10, a movable body 20, a fixed section 3 including a first fixed section 30 and a second fixed section 32, Coupling sections (spring) 40/44 ( Fig 1-2; [0057-0058]), wherein (Fig 1; [0061-0064]) when viewed in top view (view fig 1 Fig 1) the first (40/44) and second layers (41/42) respectively comprise a first lateral segment extending from the region of the second substrate (3) in a first direction (direction (bottom to top or top to bottom; Y-axis direction) and a second lateral segment extending from the first lateral segment in a second direction (left to right; X-axis direction), wherein the first direction (bottom to top or top to bottom; Y-axis direction) is substantially orthogonal to the second direction (left to right; X-axis direction). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure the layout of spring layers of Tanaka into Chou’s structure, and thereafter the combination of (Chou and Tanaka) comprises spring layout as claimed , since this configuration, at least, have the advantages of the movable mass can move in a predetermined direction without coming into contact with the substrate (Tanaka [0057]) Regarding claim 21, Chou teaches a semiconductor structure (semiconductor structure 100, Fig 1-2A; [0015,0019]) comprising (see the entire document; Figs 1-2A-2B; specifically as cited below): a first substrate (234 in 232 MEMS device substrate; [0021]) overlying a base structure (202 including 206; Fig 2A; [0019]) ; a movable component (238: moveable mass) over the base structure (202); and a suspension structure (236; Figs 2A-2B [0023-0024]) arranged between the movable component (238) and a sidewall of the first substrate (234), wherein the suspension structure (236) comprises (depicted in view 200B; Fig 2B) a first suspension layer (260; Fig 2B; [0024]) and a second suspension layer (264), wherein in a top view (projection from Figs 2A-2B); and wherein the second suspension layer (109b) contacts opposing sidewalls of the first segment and opposing sidewalls of the second segment. But Chou does not expressly disclose “the first suspension layer (260) comprises a first segment extending from the sidewall of the first substrate (234) in a first direction and a second segment extending from the first segment in a second direction substantially orthogonal to the first direction. However, in the analogous art another prior art Tanaka teaches a substrate 10, a movable body 20, a fixed section 3 including a first fixed section 30 and a second fixed section 32, Coupling sections (spring) 40/44 ( Fig 1-2; [0057-0058]), wherein (Fig 1; [0061-0064]) when viewed in top view (view fig 1 Fig 1) “the first suspension layer (40/44) comprises a first segment extending from the sidewall of the first substrate (3) in a first direction ((left to right; X-axis direction) and a second segment extending from the first segment in a second direction (left to right; X-axis direction) substantially orthogonal to the first direction (bottom to top or top to bottom; Y-axis direction). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure the layout of spring layers of Tanaka into Chou’s structure, and thereafter the combination of (Chou and Tanaka) comprises spring layout as claimed , since this configuration, at least, have the advantages of the movable mass can move in a predetermined direction without coming into contact with the substrate (Tanaka [0057]). Regarding claim 22, The combination of (Chou and Tanaka) semiconductor structure of claim 21, further teaches, wherein a bottom surface of the first suspension layer (236/260 in view of Tanaka 40/44) is aligned (because both are made from 234 without bottom surface etching) with a bottom surface of the movable component ( 238 in view of Tanaka 20). Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a) (1) as being anticipated by Chou; Chung-Yen et al., (US 20160318758 A1); hereinafter Chou; in view of TANAKA; Satoru (US 20150021719 A1) hereinafter Tanaka; and in further view of KOURY, JR.; DANIEL N et al. (US 20140024162 A1) hereinafter Koury; Regarding claim 23, The combination of (Chou and Tanaka) semiconductor structure of claim 21, further teaches, wherein the first suspension layer (260) comprises silicon (260; silicon as detailed in Fig 9, where 104 is semiconductor silicon [0045]) and while Chou dislcoses the second suspension layer (264) comprises a (264; dielectric; [0024]) but does not specifically teaches that dielectric is a (metal or a) polymer. However, in the analogous art, Koury teaches an improved MEMS transducer apparatus that includes, inter alia, spring structure coupled with the center anchor structure(s) to a portion of the cavity surface region ([abstract]), wherein (claim 3) discloses the spring structure(s) comprises a silicon material, a polymer, a dielectric, or metal material. Accordingly, the prior art references teach that it is known that polymer dielectric material is functional equivalents. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted dielectric material of second suspension layer (264) with polymer material by Koury and thereafter the combination of (Chou, Tanaka and Koury) comprises the second suspension layer (264) comprises a (264) as polymer, because all materials were known equivalent for providing dielectric properties within the semiconductor art. The substitution would have resulted in the predictable result of providing insulation to the MEMS suspension layer. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 9 is differentiated over the current status of the closest prior arts cited in section I-III above or in PTO-892. Claims 10-17 are differentiated over prior art as those inherits the subject matter from claim 9. Examiner Note with regard to Prior Art of Record Claim 9 is distinguished over the closest prior arts, given in PTO-892, either singularly or in combination, fail to anticipate or render obvious the, in combination with all other limitations in the claim “wherein a crystal orientation of the suspension structure changes at least two times along a lateral distance between the sidewall of the first substrate and a sidewall of the movable component.” as claimed and defined by applicant”. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOAZZAM HOSSAIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7960. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 8:30AM - 6:00 PM. EST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Error! Unknown document property name. whose telephone number is Error! Unknown document property name.. The examiner can normally be reached on Error! Unknown document property name.. 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 J. Maldonado can be reached on 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 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 to register user only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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. 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. /MOAZZAM HOSSAIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2898 December 19, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 23, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12600619
EARLY-IMPACT OUT-OF-PLANE MOTION LIMITER FOR MEMS DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600620
LOW-IMPACT OUT-OF-PLANE MOTION LIMITER MEMS DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604503
PROFILE CONTROL OF ISOLATION STRUCTURES IN SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596948
METHOD FOR MAKING A QUANTUM DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589989
PROCESS FOR MANUFACTURING A MICRO-ELECTRO-MECHANICAL DEVICE FROM A SINGLE SEMICONDUCTOR WAFER AND RELATED MEMS DEVICE
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
88%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+10.7%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 792 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