Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/000,561

METHOD AND DEVICE FOR APPLYING A COATING, AND COATED BODY

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Dec 02, 2022
Examiner
OTT, PATRICK S
Art Unit
1794
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Cemecon AG
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allow Rate
140 granted / 209 resolved
+2.0% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+21.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
42 currently pending
Career history
251
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.6%
-37.4% vs TC avg
§103
44.4%
+4.4% vs TC avg
§102
11.9%
-28.1% vs TC avg
§112
35.8%
-4.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 209 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 9/16/2025 has been entered. 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. (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. Claim(s) 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Greene (EP 2784799 A1). Regarding claim 15, Greene (EP 2784799 A1) teaches applying a layer to a substrate 22 (body) arranged on a rotatable substrate table 18 (carrier) by disposing the substrate in a vacuum chamber 10, supplying a sputtering (process) gas to the chamber from gas inlets (14, 16) (process gas supply), and generating a plasma within the vacuum chamber by applying electrical power to magnetron cathodes (24, 26) (at least one cathode) and sputtering material from targets on each cathode, wherein the power supply (38, 40) supplies voltage to the cathodes in pulses during a sputtering process (coating duration), and wherein a bias voltage comprising bias pulses is supplied to the substrate/body by a bias power supply 34 to attract positively charged ions (charge carriers of the plasma) and accelerate the ion cloud onto the substrate such that the ions are attached to the substrate/body surface during coating through bombardment (para 0047-0056, 0072; Fig. 1). Greene also teaches the bias pulses are synchronized with the cathode pulses during deposition, wherein the bias pulses are only synchronized with the cathode pulses during a metal-ion rich period (bias pulses during at least part of the coating duration, the bias pulses being synchronized with cathode pulses such that they have a defined phase relation to the cathode pulses), and wherein the synchronization of the bias voltage supply and the cathode power supply is performed by a control unit (controller) (para 0059-0066, claim 11; Fig. 3). Greene fails to explicitly teach the time course of the bias voltage varies during the coating duration by a change of a duration and/or phase relation of the bias pulses over a plurality of cathode pulses. However, the limitation merely states the intended use of the apparatus. A claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. See MPEP 2114(II). Greene teaches all of the claimed structural limitations, which is necessarily capable of varying the bias voltage phase relation over a plurality of cathode pulses by using the control unit to set a different phase relation/synchronization/delay time of the bias pulses after a period of time. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 6-9, filed 9/16/2025, with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of 7/16/2025 has been withdrawn. Applicant’s arguments, see 6-7, filed 9/16/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 15 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of a new interpretation of Greene (EP 2784799 A1). In particular, while Greene does not teach the method of varying the bias voltage over the plurality of cathode pulses as recited in claim 1, claim 15 only recites an intended use of the apparatus and the apparatus of Greene is capable of performing the claimed functional limitations in claim 15. This interpretation may be overcome by amending the claim to recite that the controller is “configured to” control the bias voltage power supply such that the time course of the bias voltage varies during the coating duration. Reasons for Allowance Claims 1, 3, 5-14, and 17 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Regarding claim 1, the closest prior art to the claimed invention is Greene (EP 2784799 A1). Greene teaches a method for applying a layer to a body comprising disposing the body in a vacuum chamber, supplying a process gas into the vacuum chamber, generating a plasma in the vacuum chamber by operating at least one cathode by applying a cathode voltage with cathode pulses and sputtering a target, applying a bias voltage to the body so that charge carriers of the plasma are accelerated towards the body and attached to its surface during a coating duration, wherein a time course of the bias voltage comprises bias pulses during at least a part of the coating duration, wherein the bias pulses are synchronized with the cathode pulses such that they have a defined phase relation to the cathode pulses. However, Greene fails to explicitly teach the time course of the bias voltage varies during the coating duration by a change of a duration and/or phase relation of the bias pulses over a plurality of the cathode pulses. Additionally, there Is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to modify the aforementioned combination to meet the claimed limitation. Therefore claim 1 is allowed. Claims 3 and 5-14 depend on claim 1 and thus are allowed for the same reasons. Claim 17 contains similar limitations as claim 1 and thus is allowed for similar reasons. 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.” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK S OTT whose telephone number is (571)272-2415. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm. 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, James Lin can be reached at (571) 272-8902. 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. /PATRICK S OTT/Examiner, Art Unit 1794
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 02, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 22, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
May 22, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 12, 2025
Final Rejection — §102
Aug 25, 2025
Interview Requested
Sep 02, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 02, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Sep 16, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Sep 22, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595549
OPTICAL FILTER INCLUDING A HIGH REFRACTIVE INDEX MATERIAL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597587
PROCESS CHAMBERS HAVING MULTIPLE COOLING PLATES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12584207
METHOD OF DEPOSITING AN ALUMINUM NITRIDE (AIN) THIN FILM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12588448
METHOD FOR PREPARING A CROSS SECTION WITH A FOCUSED ION BEAM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581926
METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR PROCESSING A SUBSTRATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 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
67%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+21.7%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 209 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