Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/125,137

METAL MASK

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Mar 23, 2023
Examiner
CHEN, KEATH T
Art Unit
1716
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Darwin Precisions Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
30%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 10m
To Grant
55%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 30% of cases
30%
Career Allow Rate
345 granted / 1139 resolved
-34.7% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
70 currently pending
Career history
1209
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
56.3%
+16.3% vs TC avg
§102
16.5%
-23.5% vs TC avg
§112
25.1%
-14.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1139 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
Detailed Correspondence 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 . 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. 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. Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cai et al. (US 20220307120 , hereafter ‘120). ‘120 teaches some limitations of: Claim 1: FINE METAL MASK PLATE (title, includes the claimed “A metal mask, comprising”): As shown in FIGS. 1 and 2, the fine metal mask plate includes a mask strip body 100 being of a strip-like shape and including two opposite long edges and two opposite short edges, and at least three skirts 200 arranged on each short edge and spaced apart from each other along an extension direction of the short edge ([0030], includes the claimed “a mask body having two opposite first side edges and two opposite second side edges, the two side edges extending along a first direction, the two second side edges extending along a second direction, each of the two first side edges having a first length”), The opening evaporation area is provided with a plurality of sub-areas, and a plurality of openings 100a arranged in an array form are provided in each sub-area ([0050], 3rd sentence, includes the claimed “the mask body comprising an open slot region”), The opening evaporation area is located in the middle area of the mask strip body, the welding areas are located at two opposite ends of the opening evaporation area and close to the end-part positions ([0050], 2nd sentence), A plurality of welding spots 300 are arranged in the welding area ([0039], includes the claimed “two first fixing regions”), at least two end-part skirts 201 located at the two end-part positions of the short edge among the three skirts 200 may be clamped by the tensioning device, so as to apply a tensioning force to the two end-part skirts 201 ([0031], 3rd sentence, includes the claimed “and two first clamping regions arranged between the two first side edges along the second direction, wherein the two first fixing regions are positioned on two opposite sides of the open slot region, respectively, and each of the two first clamping regions is positioned between each of the two first fixing regions and each of the two first side edges” and as shown in Fig. 1); The two adjacent skirts 200 are spaced apart from each other, and an gap formed by the spacing between the two adjacent skirts 200 ([0046], includes the claimed “and at least one first gap formed in each of the two first side edges, each of the at least one first gap having a first opening length in the first direction”), a width D1 of each skirt 200 in the extension direction of the short edge ranges from 10 mm to 80 mm ([0035]), a spacing d1 between two adjacent skirts 200 in the extension direction of the short edge ranges from 20 mm to 80 mm ([0037]), a width D of the mask strip body 100 in an extension direction of the short edge ranges from 100 mm to 400 mm ([0032], mostly likely read into the claimed “wherein a ratio of the first opening length to the first length is between 0.2 and 0.8” except choosing very large D1 and very small d1 or vice versa, therefore, it is overlapping in range, see MPEP 2144.05). Claim 2: As shown in FIGS. 1 and 2, the fine metal mask plate includes a mask strip body 100 being of a strip-like shape and including two opposite long edges and two opposite short edges, and at least three skirts 200 arranged on each short edge and spaced apart from each other along an extension direction of the short edge ([0030], includes the claimed “wherein a number of the at least one first gap in each of the two first side edges is plural, the plurality of the first opening lengths of the plurality of first gaps positioned in each of the two first side edges are added up to obtain a first length sum, and a ratio of the first length sum to the first length is between 0.2 and 0.8”). Claim 3: a spacing d1 between two adjacent skirts 200 in the extension direction of the short edge ranges from 20 mm to 80 mm ([0037], includes the claimed “wherein the first opening length is greater than 15 mm”). Claim 4: Figs. 1 shows the claimed “wherein the mask body is rectangular, and the first direction is perpendicular to the second direction”. Claim 5: The opening evaporation area is provided with a plurality of sub-areas, and a plurality of openings 100a arranged in an array form are provided in each sub-area ([0050], 3rd sentence, includes the claimed “wherein a plurality of open slots are formed in the open slot region and arranged along the second direction”). Claim 6: As shown in FIGS. 2 and 3, a tensioning device for fixing the above-mentioned fine metal mask plate onto the mask plate frame 20 is further provided in the embodiment of the present disclosure. The tensioning device includes: two clamps 30 configured to clamp the two short edges of the mask strip body 100 respectively, and a tension control mechanism configured to control each clamp 30 to apply a tensioning force to the mask strip body 100 ([0054], includes the claimed “wherein the two first clamping regions are suitable for interfering with a clamping mechanism”, note being suitable does not require a clamping mechanism), A plurality of welding spots 300 are arranged in the welding area ([0039], includes the claimed “and the two first fixing regions are suitable for being welded onto a frame”, note being suitable does not require welding being made). Claim 7: Fig. 1 shows the gap is U-shaped (includes the claimed “wherein the at least one first gap comprises U-shaped gap, V-shaped gap, rectangular gap, or a combination thereof”). Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘120, as being applied to claim 1 rejection above, in view of NAKAMURA et al. (US 20190378984, hereafter ‘984). ‘120 does not teach the limitations of: Claim 8: wherein the mask body further comprises two second fixing regions and two second clamping regions, wherein the open slot region, the two second fixing regions, and the two second clamping regions are arranged between the two second side edges along the first direction, the two second fixing regions are positioned on the two opposite sides of the open slot region, respectively, and each of the two second clamping regions is positioned between each of the two second fixing regions and each of the two second side edges. Claim 9: further comprising a plurality of second gaps formed in the two second side edges, each of the two second side edges having a second length, each of the plurality of the second gaps having a second opening length in the second direction, wherein the plurality of the second opening lengths of the plurality of the second gaps positioned in each of the two second side edges are added up to obtain a second length sum, and a ratio of the second length sum to the second length is between 0.2 and 0.8. ‘984 is analogous art in the field of EPOSITION MASK DEVICE (title), holds the vapor deposition mask in a stretched state ([0008]), each joint portion 60 is configured as a weld portion by spot welding ([0077], 2nd last sentence). ‘984 teaches that the vapor deposition mask 20 has a plurality of notches 42 ([0081], Fig. 1 or 3 shows notches on all sides of the mask), The first width W1 of the notch 42 can be, for example, 1 mm or more and 10 mm or less. The second width W2 of the joint piece 44 can be, for example, 1 mm or more and 3 mm or less (Fig. 23, [0087], 2nd last sentence, also reads into “a ratio of the second length sum to the second length is between 0.2 and 0.8”), for the purpose of suppressing the occurrence of wrinkles and deformation in the vapor deposition mask ([0014]). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have adopted notches at all sides of the mask, as taught by ‘984, to the mask strip body 100 of ‘120, for the purpose of suppressing the occurrence of wrinkles and deformation in the vapor deposition mask ([0014]). Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ‘120 and ‘984, as being applied to claim 8 rejection above, further in view of Krijne et al. (CN 20120178190, hereafter ‘190). The combination of ‘120 and ‘984 does not teach the limitations of: Claim 10: wherein a single open slot is formed in the open slot region, and the two first fixing regions and the two second fixing regions are connected and arranged around the single open slot. ‘190 is analogous art in the field of a shadow mask (20) comprising a number of deposition openings (Di) (abstract), metal shadow mask is pre-tensioned prior to being welded onto a mask-retaining metal frame ([0007], 3rd sentence). ‘190 teaches that it is assumed that the shadow mask and support mask comprise a plurality of openings, but evidently the arrangement and method according to the invention could equally well be applied to a shadow mask and support mask each having only a single opening ([0017], last sentence). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have reduced the a plurality of openings 100a of ‘120 to a single opening, as taught by ‘190, for its suitability with predictable results. The selection of something based on its known suitability for its intended use has been held to support a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP 2144.07. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20210351351 is cited for mask with a groove 16 (Fig.1) or two (Fig. 9) and D1+D2=(0.3 to 0.4)*D3 (Fig. 2,[0036]). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEATH T CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1870. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-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, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached at 571-272-1435. 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. /KEATH T CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 23, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601058
Substrate Processing Apparatus, Method of Manufacturing Semiconductor Device and Non-transitory Computer-readable Recording Medium
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12538741
RAW MATERIAL FEEDING DEVICE, SUBSTRATE PROCESSING SYSTEM, AND RESIDUAL ESTIMATION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Patent 12532692
SEMICONDUCTOR PROCESSING DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12522911
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR VAPORIZATION AND VAPOR DISTRIBUTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12505988
PLASMA CHAMBER WITH GAS CROSS-FLOW, MICROWAVE RESONATORS AND A ROTATABLE PEDESTAL FOR MULTIPHASE CYCLIC DEPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2025
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
30%
Grant Probability
55%
With Interview (+24.5%)
3y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1139 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