Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 17/970,437

SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND SEMICONDUCTOR COMPONENT INCLUDING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Oct 20, 2022
Examiner
NELSON, JACOB THEODORE
Art Unit
2815
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Epistar Corporation
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
99 granted / 116 resolved
+17.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
158
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
54.6%
+14.6% vs TC avg
§102
27.8%
-12.2% vs TC avg
§112
15.3%
-24.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 116 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/18/2025 has been entered. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Taiwan on 10/26/2021. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the 110139670 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 11/26/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Response to Amendment Applicant’s amendment to claims 12 and 21 remove the terms first, second, third, and fourth geometric circle. The objection to the drawings is withdrawn as the claimed limitations not shown in the drawings are removed. Applicant’s amendments to claim 21 overcomes the prior 112 rejection of the final rejection dated 08/19/2025, as the limitations that made the claim indefinite are cancelled. The 112 rejection of claim 21 is withdrawn. Applicant’s amendment to claim 12 overcomes the prior 112 rejection dated 08/19/2025, as the claim now includes further detail that clarifies the areas used in the first density and second density. The prior 112 rejection of claim 12 is withdrawn. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claim 1 - 3, 5 - 8, 10 - 11, and 21 - 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 states “A semiconductor device, having a first diagonal line… and the third contact portion is disposed along one of the first diagonal line and the second diagonal line…”. It appears that the claim has one first diagonal line, but claims there are multiple first diagonal lines, as it states, “along one of the first diagonal lines”. It is unclear if the first diagonal line comprises multiple diagonal lines, as the claim does not make clear that the first diagonal line is multiple different lines. Another possible interpretation of claim 1 is that the third contact portion is along either the first diagonal line or the second diagonal line. This interpretation is consistent with the use of “along one of”, as it matches the wording and allows for a singular first diagonal line and a singular second diagonal line. However, the claim states “one of the first diagonal line and the second diagonal line” which can be interpreted to mean that there are multiple first diagonal line present and a singular second diagonal line and the third contact portion is disposed along one of the first diagonal lines and the second diagonal line. Claim 1 should be corrected to make clear how many diagonal lines are present and how the third contact portion is disposed in relation to the diagonal line. The main uncertainty of the claim comes from the use of “one of the”, as its location near the term “first diagonal line” implies multiple diagonal lines or it can imply that either the first diagonal line or the second diagonal line are being discussed in relation to the third contact portion. For the purpose of compact prosecution, examiner is interpreting claim 1 as stating “…having a first diagonal line, a second diagonal line… and the contact portion is disposed along either the first diagonal line or the second diagonal line; and wherein the semiconductor device…” as this interpretation appears to match the specification and the drawings. There appears to be one first diagonal line and one second diagonal line, and the third contact portion is at least disposed along the first diagonal line or the second diagonal line. Claims 2 – 3, 5 – 8, 10 – 11, and 21 – 22 depend on claim 1 and inherit all of its deficiencies. Claims 2 – 3, 5 – 8, 10 – 11, and 21 – 22 are rejected as being indefinite. Claims 7 – 8, and 22 similarly use the term “one of the first diagonal line and the second diagonal line”, and are indefinite as the same multiple interpretations in claim 1 are present in claims 7 – 8 and 22. It is unclear how many first diagonal lines are present, or if there is a singular first diagonal line and a singular second diagonal line being referenced in the claims. For the purpose of compact prosecution, the claims are being interpreted similar to claim 1, as in there is a singular first diagonal line and a singular second diagonal line. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 12 – 16, 18 – 20, and 23 are allowable primarily because the references of record, alone or in combination, do not anticipate or render obvious the limitations noted therein. For example, independent claim 12’s “…wherein the first density is based on an area of the first region and an area of the first part and the second density is based on an area of the second region and an area of the second part; and wherein the epitaxial structure has a side length of L, the first region is a ring- shaped structure with a distance of 0.15L to 0.3L from the geometric center”. Claims 13 – 16, 18 – 20, and 23 are allowed primarily as being dependent on an allowable base claim. Any comments considered necessary by applicant MUST be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance” Claims 1 - 3, 5 - 8, 10 - 11, and 21 - 22 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8 - 9 of applicant's remarks, filed 11/18/2025, with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of 08/19/2025 has been withdrawn. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20190273184 A1 teaches a semiconductor device with circular or ring like contact portions with a geometric center. It does not appear to teach multiple contact portions at different distances and does not appear to teach regions with a first and second density. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB T NELSON whose telephone number is (571)272-1031. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9:00 AM to 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, Joshua Benitez can be reached at 571-270-1435. 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. /J.T.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2815 /MONICA D HARRISON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 20, 2022
Application Filed
Apr 15, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Jul 21, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 12, 2025
Final Rejection — §112
Oct 29, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Oct 29, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Nov 18, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 22, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604592
DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD OF FABRICATING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588336
DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575095
FLASH MEMORY AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12575159
HIGH VOLTAGE SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12538843
PIXEL UNIT AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+10.3%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 116 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month