Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/350,281

LAYER FORMING METHOD

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jun 17, 2021
Examiner
HSIEH, HSIN YI
Art Unit
2899
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Asm Ip Holding B V
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
51%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 10m
To Grant
57%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 51% of resolved cases
51%
Career Allow Rate
321 granted / 631 resolved
-17.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
57 currently pending
Career history
688
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
39.3%
-0.7% vs TC avg
§102
23.1%
-16.9% vs TC avg
§112
35.3%
-4.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 631 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/29/2025 has been entered. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/04/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 1 recites the limitation “the gaps comprising a gap having a surface comprising a first material and a second material different than the first material” (emphasis added) in the 2nd to 4th lines of the claim, which lacks the full support of the original disclosure (the original disclosure of the parent application 15,691,241). The paragraph [0037] of the specification of the parent application 15,691,241 states: “The surface of the gaps may comprise different sorts of deposited material 19, 21. The surface may for example comprise Al2O3 or TiN.” This paragraph fully supports “the surface of the gaps” comprising a first material and a second material different than the first material, but does not fully support “a gap having a surface comprising a first material and a second material different than the first material”. “A gate” refers to either a vertical gate or a horizontal gate shown in Fig. 2 according to the paragraph [0034-0035] of the specification of the parent application 15,691,241. There is no indication in the original disclosure that a vertical gate or a horizontal gate comprises a first material and a second material different than the first material. Fig. 2 shows the first material and the second material (19 and 20), but does not clearly show the boundaries of the first material and the second material (19 and 20), and fails to show “a gap having a surface comprising a first material and a second material different than the first material.” Thus, this limitation lacks the full support of the original disclosure. Claim 12 recites the limitation “the gaps comprising a gap having a surface comprising a first material and a second material different than the first material” (emphasis added) in the 2nd to 4th lines of the claim, which lacks the full support of the original disclosure (the original disclosure of the parent application 15,691,241). The paragraph [0037] of the specification of the parent application 15,691,241 states: “The surface of the gaps may comprise different sorts of deposited material 19, 21. The surface may for example comprise Al2O3 or TiN.” This paragraph fully supports “the surface of the gaps” comprising a first material and a second material different than the first material, but does not fully support “a gap having a surface comprising a first material and a second material different than the first material”. “A gate” refers to either a vertical gate or a horizontal gate shown in Fig. 2 according to the paragraph [0034-0035] of the specification of the parent application 15,691,241. There is no indication in the original disclosure that a vertical gate or a horizontal gate comprises a first material and a second material different than the first material. Fig. 2 shows the first material and the second material (19 and 20), but does not clearly show the boundaries of the first material and the second material (19 and 20), and fails to show “a gap having a surface comprising a first material and a second material different than the first material.” Thus, this limitation lacks the full support of the original disclosure. Claims 2-11 and 13-20 are rejected because they depend on the rejected claims 1 and 12. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 12/29/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues in the reply that the paragraphs [0035], [0039], [0015], [0016], [0038], [0044] and Fig. 2 of the original disclosure, sufficiently supports claim 1. The Examiner disagrees with Applicant's argument, because the paragraphs [0035], [0039], [0015], [0016] [0038], [0044] and Fig. 2 of the original disclosure only sufficiently supports "the surface of the gaps, comprising a first material and a second material different than the first material", but does not support "a gap having a surface comprising a first material and a second material different than the first material" as recited in claim 1. The limitation of "a gap having a surface comprising a first material and a second material different than the first material" has a scope much narrower than the scope of "the surface of the gaps comprising a first material and a second material different than the first material." None of the paragraphs and Fig. 2 mentioned above sufficiently supports "a gap having a surface comprising a first material and a second material different than the first material". Thus, the rejections still stand. The same rebuttal on claim 1 applies to claim 12. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Elers et al. (US 20030082296 A1) teach an atomic level deposition method for metal nitride. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HSIN YI HSIEH whose telephone number is (571)270-3043. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 - 5:00 pm. 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, Zandra V Smith can be reached on 571-272-2429. 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. /HSIN YI HSIEH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2899 2/21/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 17, 2021
Application Filed
Sep 26, 2023
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jan 02, 2024
Response Filed
Apr 06, 2024
Final Rejection — §112
Jun 10, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 15, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 21, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Jun 25, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 29, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Dec 26, 2024
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Dec 26, 2024
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 30, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 30, 2024
Response Filed
Jul 01, 2025
Response Filed
Oct 24, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Dec 29, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 27, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 04, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Mar 03, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 03, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598786
FIELD EFFECT TRANSISTOR STRUCTURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12575243
DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12550486
OPTOELECTRONIC DEVICE WITH AXIAL THREE-DIMENSIONAL LIGHT-EMITTING DIODES
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12538616
LIGHT EMITTING DIODE WITH OPTIMISED ELECTRIC INJECTION FROM A SIDE ELECTRODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12538617
3D LIGHT-EMITTING DIODE AND ASSOCIATED MANUFACTURING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
51%
Grant Probability
57%
With Interview (+6.2%)
3y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 631 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