Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/077,812

TWO STEP IMPLANT TO CONTROL TIP-TO-TIP DISTANCE BETWEEN TRENCHES

Final Rejection §103§112
Filed
Dec 08, 2022
Examiner
BERRY, PAUL ANTHONY
Art Unit
2898
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Applied Materials, Inc.
OA Round
2 (Final)
93%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 93% — above average
93%
Career Allow Rate
26 granted / 28 resolved
+24.9% vs TC avg
Minimal -2% lift
Without
With
+-2.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
79
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
51.5%
+11.5% vs TC avg
§102
26.6%
-13.4% vs TC avg
§112
21.9%
-18.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 28 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §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 . Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 09/04/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding applicant’s argument that Huang ‘679 fails to disclose the implantation of the two species may use the same twist angle, Huang ‘679 in Para [0050] discloses performing a second ion implantation recipe with the same tilt angle and twist angle as the first ion implantation as it states “…the two recipes may differ in their ion species, total ion dose, tilt angles, and/or twist angles.”, Note, Para [0050] lists possible changes and uses the modifier “and/or” which the Merriam-Webster dictionary defines as “used as a function word to indicate that two words or expressions are to be taken together or individually”, therefore “and/or” allows the change of the ion species so the twist angle of the two ion implantations remains the same. Applicant’s argues that Huang ‘679 fails to disclose wherein an implant energy and a dose of the first species and an implant energy and a dose of the second species are selected so that the tip-to-tip distance is reduced by at least 10 nm and the critical dimension of the patterned photoresist lines is affected by less than 1 nm. As described below in the argument of Claims 1 and 10, Huang ‘679 discloses a method of using lithography to create a pattern, then using a process to control variables of ion species, total ion doses, ion implant energies, and the tilt angles and twist angles of the ion implantation to further form the photoresist pattern. As described below a person having ordinary skill in the art would through routine optimization use the result oriented variables, disclosed by Huang ‘679, of ion species, total ion doses, ion implant energies, tilt angles and twist angles of the ion implantation, to achieve the well-known advantage “…to reduce a dimension of the resist pattern (corresponding to a line end to line end space in a metal layer) without (or insignificantly) enlarging another dimension of the resist pattern (corresponding to line width in a metal layer)” disclosed in Para [0019] of Huang ‘679. And would thereby would obtain an optimal tip-to-tip reduction by at least 10nm while impacting the critical dimension of the patterned photoresist lines by less than 1nm. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 4 and 10, that Huang ‘679 does not disclose silicon as the first ion species. However, Huang ‘679 discloses species for the first ion species and that list includes silicon. Therefore Huang ‘679 is open for silicon being the first ion species. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Regarding claims 9 and 17, the amendments made in the Request for Reconsideration – After Non-Final dated 09/04/2025 overcome the 35 USC § 112 rejections of the office action mailed on 06/20/2025. Therefore, the 35 USC § 112 rejections of claims 9 and 17 in the office action mailed on 06/20/2025 are withdrawn. Regarding claim 19, Applicant’s Request for Reconsideration – After Non-Final dated 09/04/2025 has canceled the claim therefore, the 35 USC § 112 rejection claim 19 in the office action mailed on 06/20/2025 is withdrawn. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claims 1, 3-10, 12-17 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Huang et al. (US 2021/0389679 A1, hereinafter Huang ‘679), in view of the following arguments. With respect to Claim 1 Huang ‘679 discloses a method (Fig 1A-8C of Huang ‘679) of reducing a tip-to-tip distance (D2, Fig 3, Para [0030]) between adjacent patterned photoresist lines (210a/210b, Fig 3, Para [0030]) disposed on a workpiece (209, Fig 4, Para [0021]), wherein the patterned photoresist lines (210a/210b) have sidewalls (walls of 210a/210b as shown in Fig 3), a thickness (D1, Fig 3, Para [0030]) known as a critical dimension (CD), and a distance (D2, Fig 3, Para [0030]) between adjacent patterned photoresist lines (210a) known as the tip-to-tip distance (end-to-end, Para [0030]), and wherein the workpiece (209) is disposed on a platen (304, Fig 11A, Para [0031]) capable of twist (disclosed in Fig 4 and Fig 5 and Para [0033]) about a rotational axis (X-Z as shown in Fig 5 and disclosed in Para [0033]) and tilt (disclosed in Fig 5 and Para [0033]) about a tilt axis (Z axis as shown in Fig 5 and disclosed in Para [0033]), the method comprising: orienting the workpiece (209) on the platen (304) by selecting a twist angle (β, Fig 9A, Para [0045]) of the platen (304) so as to align a trajectory (angle of ions disclosed in Para [0038]) of an incoming ion beam (212, Fig 6B and Fig 6D, Para [0038 and 0040]) to a primary photoresist direction (X=0 axis as shown in Fig 6B and Fig 6B) and by selecting a high tilt angle (α, disclosed in Fig 5 and Para [0038]), wherein the primary photoresist direction (X=0 axis) is parallel to the sidewalls (walls of 210a/210b)(Fig 6B and 6D disclose 212 parallel to sidewalls); directing a first ion beam (Para [0039] discloses that ion beam of 2 doses, hereinafter IB1) having a first species (Para [0039] discloses possible first species, hereinafter Species1) toward the workpiece (209) after the orienting (disclosed in Para [0039]); and In a related embodiment (Fig 10 of Huang ‘679), Huang ‘679 discloses directing a second ion beam (Para [0050] of Huang ‘679 discloses a second ion beam dose, hereinafter IB2) having a second species (Para [0050] discloses performing a second ion implantation recipe using a different ion species as it states “…the two recipes may differ in their ion species, total ion dose, tilt angles, and/or twist angles.”, Note, Para [0050] lists possible changes and uses the modifier “and/or” which the Merriam-Webster dictionary defines as “used as a function word to indicate that two words or expressions are to be taken together or individually”, therefore “and/or” allows the change of the ion species. The second species hereinafter Species2), different from the first species (Species1, Para [0050] discloses performing a second ion implantation recipe using a different ion species), toward the workpiece (209) after directing the first ion beam (IB1) while the workpiece (209) remains oriented (Para [0050] discloses performing a second ion implantation recipe with the same tilt angle and twist angle as it states “…the two recipes may differ in their ion species, total ion dose, tilt angles, and/or twist angles.”, Note, Para [0050] lists possible changes and uses the modifier “and/or” which the Merriam-Webster dictionary defines as “used as a function word to indicate that two words or expressions are to be taken together or individually”, therefore “and/or” allows the change of the ion species). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate Huang ‘679’s further teaching of directing a second ion beam having a second species, different from the first species, toward the workpiece after directing the first ion beam while the workpiece remains oriented into Huang ‘679’s method. Huang ‘679 discloses a method of using lithography to create a pattern, then using a process to control variables of ion species, total ion doses, ion implant energies and tilt and twist angles of the ion implantation to further form the photoresist pattern. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art through routine optimization to use the result oriented variables of ion species, total ion doses, ion implant energies, tilt angles and twist angles of the ion implantation, to achieve the well-known advantage “…to reduce a dimension of the resist pattern (corresponding to a line end to line end space in a metal layer) without (or insignificantly) enlarging another dimension of the resist pattern (corresponding to line width in a metal layer)” disclosed in Para [0019] of Huang ‘679. As incorporated, the further method (disclosed in Huang ‘679 Para (0050)) of using a second species, different from the first species for the second ion dose, toward the workpiece after directing the first ion beam while the workpiece remains oriented would be used in Huang ‘679’s method as stated above. Huang ‘679 discloses a method of using lithography to create a pattern, then using a process to control variables of ion species, total ion doses, ion implant energies, and the tilt angles and twist angles of the ion implantation to further form the photoresist pattern. But Huang ‘679 fails to explicitly disclose wherein an implant energy and a dose of the first species and an implant energy and a dose of the second species are selected so that the tip-to-tip distance is reduced by at least 10 nm and the critical dimension of the patterned photoresist lines is affected by less than 1 nm. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to a person having of ordinary skill in the art through routine optimization to use the result oriented variables, disclosed by Huang ‘679, of ion species, total ion doses, ion implant energies, tilt angles and twist angles of the ion implantation, to achieve the well-known advantage “…to reduce a dimension of the resist pattern (corresponding to a line end to line end space in a metal layer) without (or insignificantly) enlarging another dimension of the resist pattern (corresponding to line width in a metal layer)” disclosed in Para [0019] of Huang ‘679. And would thereby would obtain an optimal tip-to-tip reduction by at least 10nm while impacting the critical dimension of the patterned photoresist lines by less than 1nm. With respect to Claim 3 Huang ‘679 discloses all limitations of the method of claim 1, and Huang ‘679 discloses a method of using lithography to create a pattern, then using a process to control variables of ion species, total ion doses, ion implant energies, and the tilt angles and twist angles of the ion implantation to further form the photoresist pattern. But Huang ‘679 fails to explicitly disclose wherein the tip-to-tip distance is reduced by at least 15 nm and the critical dimension of the patterned photoresist lines is affected by less than 1 nm. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to a person having of ordinary skill in the art through routine optimization to use the result oriented variables, disclosed by Huang ‘679, of ion species, total ion doses, ion implant energies, tilt angles and twist angles of the ion implantation, to achieve the well-known advantage “…to reduce a dimension of the resist pattern (corresponding to a line end to line end space in a metal layer) without (or insignificantly) enlarging another dimension of the resist pattern (corresponding to line width in a metal layer)” disclosed in Para [0019] of Huang ‘679. And would thereby would obtain an optimal tip-to-tip reduction by at least 15nm while impacting the critical dimension of the patterned photoresist lines by less than 1nm. With respect to Claim 4 Huang ‘679 discloses all limitations of the method of claim 1, and Huang ‘679 further discloses wherein the first species (Species1) comprises silicon (Para [0039] discloses silicon as first species). With respect to Claim 5 Huang ‘679 discloses all limitations of the method of claim 1, and Huang ‘679 further discloses wherein the second species (Species2) comprises an inert species, oxygen or nitrogen (Para [0039] discloses nitrogen or oxygen as second species). With respect to Claim 6 Huang ‘679 discloses all limitations of the method of claim 5, and Huang ‘679 further discloses wherein the second species (Species2) is argon (Para [0039] discloses argon as second species). With respect to Claim 7 Huang ‘679 discloses all limitations of the method of claim 1, and Huang ‘679 further discloses, wherein the high tilt angle (α) is at least 45° (Para [0034] discloses a tilt angle of “at least 40 degrees, such as at least 60 degrees, or in a range from 60 degrees to 80 degrees”). With respect to Claim 8 Huang ‘679 discloses all limitations of the method of claim 7, and Huang ‘679 further discloses, wherein the high tilt angle (α) is between 60° and 80°. (Para [0034] discloses a tilt angle of “at least 40 degrees, such as at least 60 degrees, or in a range from 60 degrees to 80 degrees”). With respect to Claim 9 Huang ‘679 discloses all limitations of the method of claim 1, and Huang ‘679 further discloses wherein orienting the workpiece comprises selecting the twist angle (β) such that an angle between the primary photoresist direction (X=0) and the trajectory (angle of ions disclosed in Para [0038]) of the incoming ion beam (212) less than 5° (Para [0045] discloses that β is the angle between the X-Z plane (X=0) and also discloses that β can be between 0 and 90 degrees). With respect to Claim 10 Huang ‘679 discloses a method (Fig 1A-8C of Huang ‘679) of reducing a tip-to-tip distance (D2, Fig 3, Para [0030]) between adjacent patterned photoresist lines (210a/210b, Fig 3, Para [0030]) disposed on a workpiece (209, Fig 4, Para [0021]), wherein the patterned photoresist lines (210a/210b) have sidewalls (walls of 210a/210b as shown in Fig 3), a thickness (D1, Fig 3, Para [0030]) known as a critical dimension (CD), and a distance (D2, Fig 3, Para [0030]) between adjacent patterned photoresist lines (210a/210b) known as the tip-to-tip distance (Para [0030] discloses D2 as end-to-end dimension) and wherein the workpiece (209) is disposed on a platen (304, Fig 11A, Para [0031]) capable of twist (disclosed in Fig 4 and Fig 5 and Para [0033]) about a rotational axis (X-Z as shown in Fig 5 and disclosed in Para [0033]) and tilt (disclosed in Fig 5 and Para [0033]) about a tilt axis (Z axis as shown in Fig 5 and disclosed in Para [0033]), the method comprising: orienting the workpiece (209) on the platen (304) by selecting a twist angle (β, Fig 9A, Para [0045]) of the platen (304) so as to align a primary photoresist direction (X=0 axis as shown in Fig 6B and Fig 6B) to a trajectory (angle of ions disclosed in Para [0038]) of an incoming ion beam (212, Fig 6B and Fig 6D, Para [0038 and 0040]) and by selecting a high tilt angle (α, disclosed in Fig 5 and Para [0038]), wherein the primary photoresist direction (X=0) is parallel to the sidewalls (walls of 210a/210b)(Fig 6B and 6D disclose 212 parallel to sidewalls); directing a first ion beam (Para [0039] discloses that ion beam of 2 doses, hereinafter IB1) comprising silicon ions (Para [0039] discloses silicon as first species) toward the workpiece (209) after the orienting (disclosed in Para [0039] and Fig 1B step 121); rotating the workpiece 180° (Fig 1B, step 124 discloses repeating step 120, which is rotating substrate, after ion implantation and Para [0043] and Fig 8A-8B discloses rotating the workpiece 180°) after directing the first ion beam (IB1); directing the first ion beam (IB1) toward the workpiece (209) a second time after rotating (Fig 1B, step 124 discloses repeating step 120, which is rotating substrate, after ion implantation and Para [0043] and Fig 8A-8B discloses rotating the workpiece 180°); directing a second ion beam (Para [0039] discloses that ion beam of 2 doses, hereinafter IB2) toward the workpiece (209); rotating the workpiece 180° after directing the second ion beam (Fig 1B, step 124 discloses repeating step 120, which is rotating substrate, after ion implantation and Para [0043] and Fig 8A-8B discloses rotating the workpiece 180°); and directing the second ion beam (IB2) toward the workpiece (209) a second time after rotating a second time (Para [0042] and Fig 1B step 123 disclose a second does after rotating a second time (Para [0042] and Fig 1B disclose that steps of rotating and ion implantation can be repeated). The present embodiment of Huang ‘679 fails to explicitly disclose having a second species different from the silicon ions. However, in a related embodiment (Fig 10 of Huang ‘679), Huang ‘679 discloses having a second species (Para [0050] discloses performing a second ion implantation recipe using a different ion species as it states “…the two recipes may differ in their ion species, total ion dose, tilt angles, and/or twist angles.”, Note, Para [0050] lists allowable changes and uses the modifier “and/or” which the Merriam-Webster dictionary defines as “used as a function word to indicate that two words or expressions are to be taken together or individually”, therefore “and/or” allows the change of the ion species. The second species hereinafter Species2) different from the silicon ions, (Species1, Para [0050] discloses performing a second ion implantation recipe using a different ion species than the first implantation). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate Huang ‘679’s further teaching of having a second species different from the silicon ions into Huang ‘679’s method. Huang ‘679 discloses a method of using lithography to create a pattern, then using a process to control variables of ion species, total ion doses, ion implant energies and tilt and twist angles of the ion implantation to further form the photoresist pattern. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art through routine optimization to use the result oriented variables of ion species, total ion doses, ion implant energies, tilt angles and twist angles of the ion implantation, to achieve the well-known advantage “…to reduce a dimension of the resist pattern (corresponding to a line end to line end space in a metal layer) without (or insignificantly) enlarging another dimension of the resist pattern (corresponding to line width in a metal layer)” disclosed in Para [0019] of Huang ‘679. As incorporated, the further method (disclosed in Huang ‘679 Para (0050)) of using a second species, different from the first species for the second ion dose, toward the workpiece after directing the first ion beam while the workpiece remains oriented would be used in Huang ‘679’s method as stated above. Huang ‘679 discloses a method of using lithography to create a pattern, then using a process to control variables of ion species, total ion doses, ion implant energies, and the tilt angles and twist angles of the ion implantation to further form the photoresist pattern. But Huang ‘679 fails to explicitly disclose wherein an implant energy and a dose of the silicon ions and an implant energy and a dose of the second species are selected so that the tip-to-tip distance is reduced by at least 10 nm and the critical dimension of the patterned photoresist lines is affected by less than 1 nm. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to a person having of ordinary skill in the art through routine optimization to use the result oriented variables, disclosed by Huang ‘679, of ion species, total ion doses, ion implant energies, tilt angles and twist angles of the ion implantation, to achieve the well-known advantage “…to reduce a dimension of the resist pattern (corresponding to a line end to line end space in a metal layer) without (or insignificantly) enlarging another dimension of the resist pattern (corresponding to line width in a metal layer)” disclosed in Para [0019] of Huang ‘679. And would thereby would obtain a selected optimization wherein an implant energy and a dose of the silicon ions and an implant energy and a dose of the second species are selected so that the tip-to-tip distance is reduced by at least 10 nm and the critical dimension of the patterned photoresist lines is affected by less than 1 nm. With respect to Claim 12 Huang ‘679 discloses all limitations of the method of claim 10, and Huang ‘679 discloses a method of using lithography to create a pattern, then using a process to control variables of ion species, total ion doses, ion implant energies, and the tilt angles and twist angles of the ion implantation to further form the photoresist pattern. But Huang ‘679 fails to explicitly disclose wherein the tip-to-tip distance is reduced by at least 15 nm and the critical dimension of the patterned photoresist lines is affected by less than 1 nm. Nevertheless, it would have been obvious to a person having of ordinary skill in the art through routine optimization to use the result oriented variables, disclosed by Huang ‘679, of ion species, total ion doses, ion implant energies, tilt angles and twist angles of the ion implantation, to achieve the well-known advantage “…to reduce a dimension of the resist pattern (corresponding to a line end to line end space in a metal layer) without (or insignificantly) enlarging another dimension of the resist pattern (corresponding to line width in a metal layer)” disclosed in Para [0019] of Huang ‘679. And would thereby would obtain a selected optimization wherein an implant energy and a dose of the silicon ions and an implant energy and a dose of the second species are selected so that the tip-to-tip distance is reduced by at least 15 nm and the critical dimension of the patterned photoresist lines is affected by less than 1 nm. With respect to Claim 13 Huang ‘679 discloses all limitations of the method of claim 10, and Huang ‘679 further discloses, wherein the second species (Species2) comprises an inert species, oxygen or nitrogen (Para [0039] discloses nitrogen or oxygen as possible second species). With respect to Claim 14 Huang ‘679 discloses all limitations of the method of claim 13, and Huang ‘679 further discloses, wherein second species (Species2) is argon (Para [0039] discloses argon as possible second species). With respect to Claim 15 Huang ‘679 discloses all limitations of the method of claim 10, and Huang ‘679 further discloses, wherein the high tilt angle (α) is at least 45° (Para [0034] discloses a tilt angle of “at least 40 degrees, such as at least 60 degrees, or in a range from 60 degrees to 80 degrees”). With respect to Claim 16 Huang ‘679 discloses all limitations of the method of claim 15, and Huang ‘679 further discloses, wherein the high tilt angle (α) is between 60° and 80° (Para [0034] discloses a tilt angle of “at least 40 degrees, such as at least 60 degrees, or in a range from 60 degrees to 80 degrees”). With respect to Claim 17 Huang ‘679 discloses all limitations of the method of claim 10, and Huang ‘679 further discloses, wherein orienting the workpiece (209) comprises selecting the twist angle (β) such that an angle between the primary photoresist direction (X=0) and the trajectory of the incoming ion beam (212) less than 5° (Para [0045] discloses that β is the angle between the X-Z plane (X=0) and also discloses that β can be between 0 and 90 degrees). With respect to Claim 21 Huang ‘679 discloses all limitations of the method of claim 4, and Huang ‘679 further discloses wherein the first ion beam (IB1) having the first species (Species1) is directed toward the workpiece (209) prior to the second ion beam (IB2) having the second species (Species2)(Para [0050] of Huang ‘679 discloses performing a first ion implantation followed by a second ion implantation recipe using a different ion species). With respect to Claim 22 Huang ‘679 discloses all limitations of the method of claim 10, and Huang ‘679 discloses further wherein the first ion beam (IB1) comprising silicon ions (Species1) is directed toward the workpiece (209) prior to the second ion beam (IB2) having the second species (Species2)(Para [0050] discloses performing a first ion implantation followed by a second ion implantation recipe using a different ion species). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ma et al. (US-20170178911-A1) teaches a two-step ion implantation process to harden the patterned features and eliminate or reduce chemical and mechanical gradient affecting the resist profile and etching properties. Hung et al. (US 2018/0090370 A1) teaches a two-step ion implantation process to decrease end-to-end spacing of features. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is 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 PAUL A. BERRY whose telephone number is (703)756-5637. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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, Julio Maldonado can be reached at 571-272-1864. 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. /PAUL A BERRY/Examiner, Art Unit 2898 /JULIO J MALDONADO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2898
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 08, 2022
Application Filed
Jun 11, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Aug 19, 2025
Interview Requested
Aug 26, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Aug 26, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 04, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 17, 2025
Final Rejection — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604537
HIGH MOBILITY TRANSISTOR ELEMENT RESULTING FROM IGTO OXIDE SEMICONDUCTOR CRYSTALLIZATION, AND PRODUCTION METHOD FOR SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604724
VERTICAL SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598780
GATE-ALL-AROUND TRANSISTORS WITH HYBRID ORIENTATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12568856
METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THREE-DIMENSIONAL SYSTEM-ON-CHIP AND THREE-DIMENSIONAL SYSTEM-ON-CHIP
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12568636
MPS DIODE DEVICE AND PREPARATION METHOD THEREFOR
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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
93%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (-2.1%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 28 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