Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/032,582

RAY DETECTOR, MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Apr 19, 2023
Examiner
KIM, JAY C
Art Unit
2815
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
BOE TECHNOLOGY GROUP CO., LTD.
OA Round
2 (Final)
48%
Grant Probability
Moderate
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
70%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 48% of resolved cases
48%
Career Allow Rate
412 granted / 849 resolved
-19.5% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+21.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
67 currently pending
Career history
916
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
39.1%
-0.9% vs TC avg
§102
19.5%
-20.5% vs TC avg
§112
39.6%
-0.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 849 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION This Office Action is in response to Amendment filed December 19, 2025. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Drawings The drawings were received on December 19, 2025. These drawings are accepted. 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 9, 11-18 and 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 claims 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 inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Regarding claim 9, Applicants did not originally disclose that “the absorption layer of the photodiode further comprises an undoped region located between the first doped region and the second doped region” as recited on lines 17-18, because (a) Applicants provided the following drawing on page 15 of the REMARKS filed December 19, 2025, PNG media_image1.png 296 592 media_image1.png Greyscale (b) however, the alleged undoped region should have been originated from the shared layer 36 shown in Fig. 9 of current application, which Applicants originally disclosed to be formed of a-Si or amorphous Si in paragraph [0179] of current application, but Applicants did not originally disclose what the shared layer 36 is not doped with, (c) as disclosed by Isomura et al. (“Effects of impurities on the properties of amorphous silicon,” Applied Surface Science 113/114 (1997) pp. 754-758), an amorphous silicon is commonly doped with impurities such as nitrogen and oxygen that affects conductivity, see Fig. 1 of Isomura et al., and (d) therefore, not only Applicants did not originally disclose the limitation cited above, the limitation cited above may also fail to comply with the Enablement requirement since impurities or dopants such as nitrogen and oxygen have been commonly incorporated into an amorphous silicon material layer, and therefore, “an undoped layer” may not be obtainable in reality. Claims 11-18 and 20 depend on claim 9, and therefore, claims 11-18 and 20 also fail to comply with the written description requirement. 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. Claims 9, 11-18 and 20 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. Regarding claim 9, it is not clear what the limitation “an undoped region” recited on line 17 refers to, because (a) as discussed above under 35 USC 112(a) rejection, the limitation “the absorption layer of the photodiode further comprises an undoped region located between the first doped region and the second doped region” recited on lines 17-18 fails to comply with the written description requirement, (b) for Applicants to claim “an undoped region”, Applicants first need to claim what kinds of dopants or impurities are not incorporated or contained in the “undoped region”, and what the unincorporated or uncontained dopants or impurities would have done if they had been incorporated or contained in the “undoped region”, (c) as discussed above, Isomura et al. (“Effects of impurities on the properties of amorphous silicon,” Applied Surface Science 113/114 (1997) pp. 754-758) disclose that an amorphous silicon is commonly doped with impurities such as nitrogen and oxygen, which affect conductivity of the amorphous silicon, and (d) therefore, it is not clear whether the “undoped region” does not comprise any dopants or impurities including nitrogen or oxygen, or the “undoped region” does not comprise certain kinds of dopants or impurities. Claims 11-18 and 20 depend on claim 9, and therefore, claims 11-18 and 20 are also indefinite. Response to Arguments Applicants’ arguments with respect to claim 9 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Conclusion Applicants' amendment necessitated the new grounds of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicants are reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY C KIM whose telephone number is (571) 270-1620. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM - 6:00 PM 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, 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. /JAY C KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815 /J. K./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815 February 27, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 19, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Dec 19, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 27, 2026
Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604680
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING GROUP III NITRIDE SEMICONDUCTOR SUBSTRATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593612
STRUCTURE OF SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND METHOD FOR FABRICATING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593509
TRANSISTOR AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588315
III-NITRIDE SEMICONUCTOR DEVICES HAVING A BORON NITRIDE ALLOY CONTACT LAYER AND METHOD OF PRODUCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12557324
SEMICONDUCTOR POWER DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
48%
Grant Probability
70%
With Interview (+21.9%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 849 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