Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/802,170

APPARATUS FOR PROCESSING A WAFER

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 25, 2022
Examiner
WILSON, LEE D
Art Unit
3723
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Lam Research AG
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
98%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
1458 granted / 1824 resolved
+9.9% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
1858
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
25.7%
-14.3% vs TC avg
§102
48.9%
+8.9% vs TC avg
§112
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1824 resolved cases

Office Action

§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 with traverse of Group I claims 1-18 in the reply filed on 8/5/25 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that these inventions share the same search. This is not found persuasive because Species will always have a similar search but the inventions are distinct from each other and individually patentable. The applicant did not say these inventions are not distinct and rise and fall together. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. 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. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yokouchi 2011/0262115 A1 in view of Ohmiya et al 2006/0203222 A1. Youkouchi discloses the claimed invention having a rotatable chuck 74 for receiving and rotating [[a]]the wafer; a heating device 4 & 5 arranged to heat a wafer received by the rotatable chuck; a plate 7 that (Note: that has to be transparent but is NOT) is transparent to radiation emitted by the heating device; and a plate holder 70 that holds an outer periphery of the plate, so as to mount the plate in the plate holder[[;]], wherein the plate holder is mountable in the apparatus to position the plate between the heating device and a wafer when the wafer is received by the rotatable chuck. Youkouchi does not discloses a plate which is transparent. Ohmiya et al discloses a device which has a wafer holder transparent plate 7 (see par.0088) which allows light to pass through and heat the wafer and it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have modified the Youkouchi device to have a transparent plate which allows both heaters to heat the workpiece yielding the predictable result of heating the wafer. KSR Regrading claim 2 see plate 7 of Yokouchi 2011/0262115 A1. Regarding claims 3 and 5 see element 73 fastening plate 7 of Yokouchi 2011/0262115 A1. Regarding claim 4 the plate holder surrounds the parts in the fact circular space encompasses the space of the heaters of Yokouchi 2011/0262115 A1. Regarding claim 6 see housing of Yokouchi 2011/0262115 A1 Regarding claim 7 see elements 75 of Yokouchi 2011/0262115 A1. Regarding claim 8 see elements 76 of Yokouchi 2011/0262115 A1. Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the modified Yokouchi 2011/0262115 A1 as applied to claims 1-8 above, and further in view of Shiro et al 2005/0148183 A1. The modified Yokouchi device discloses claimed invention except for antireflective coating which is used coated plate. The prior art discloses Shiro et al 2005/0148183 A1 an antireflective coating which is used on coating a window in which the coating is not of invention but the use of coating is what is being used and known in the art therefore art light-transmissive window member of the present invention so that measuring light from the back of the platen is not directly reflected in view of satisfactory measurement as taught by Shiro et al discloses in paragraph 0096 and it would have been obvious to use a known antireflective with the modified modified Yokouchi device by providing an known antireflective with the window for controlling reflection to yield the predictable result of any window and reflection. KSR Allowable Subject Matter Claims 9-17 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. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The 892 form discloses prior art being made of record. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEE D WILSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4499. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH 6;30-4;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, BRIAN KELLER can be reached at 571-272-8548. 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. LEE D. WILSON Examiner Art Unit 3723 Ldw /LEE D WILSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723 August 20, 2025
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 25, 2022
Application Filed
Aug 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599789
RESCUE ACCESS WEDGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595849
SEAL RING INSTALLATION MODULE AND SEAL RING INSTALLATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589976
LIFTING SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583068
Clamping Arrangement
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12564923
MOUNTING TOOL FOR POSITIONING A SHAFT SEALING RING ON A SHAFT AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING A SHAFT SEAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
80%
Grant Probability
98%
With Interview (+18.6%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1824 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