Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/135,413

Organometallic Compound For Thin Film Deposition And Method For Forming Group 4 Metal-Containing Thin Film Using Same

Final Rejection §102§103§112
Filed
Apr 17, 2023
Examiner
HOU, FRANK S
Art Unit
1692
Tech Center
1600 — Biotechnology & Organic Chemistry
Assignee
Egtm Co. Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allow Rate
82 granted / 115 resolved
+11.3% vs TC avg
Strong +32% interview lift
Without
With
+31.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
49 currently pending
Career history
164
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.9%
-39.1% vs TC avg
§103
33.7%
-6.3% vs TC avg
§102
24.2%
-15.8% vs TC avg
§112
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 115 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §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 . DETAILED ACTION Claims 1 and 6-11 of S. J. Sun, et.al. US 18/135,413 (04/17/2023) are pending. Claims 6-11 are withdrawn as directed to unelected Group. Claim 1 is under examination on merits and are rejected. Election/Restrictions Pursuant to the restriction requirement, Applicant elected Group I (claims 1-5), without traverse, during the phone interview on 09/08/2025. Claims 6-11 drawn to non-elected Group (II) is withdrawn from consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b). Applicant confirmed the election and canceled claims 2-4 in the reply filed on 01/21/2026. The Restriction Requirement is made as Final. Pursuant to the election of species requirement, Applicant elected, without traverse, the compound of the Formula 2 in claim 3 as the species of the Formula 1 of claim 1 during the phone interview on 09/08/2025, for prosecution on the merits to which the claims shall be restricted if no generic claim is finally held to be allowable. Applicant confirmed the election and amended claim 1 in the reply filed on 01/21/2026. No claim of the elected invention read on the elected species. The elected species was searched and determined to be unpatentable as discussed in the 103 rejection below. The provisional species election requirement is in effect. PNG media_image1.png 314 241 media_image1.png Greyscale Withdrawal Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(d) Rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) as being in improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of claim 1 is withdrawn in view the claim has been canceled. Withdrawal Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 Rejection of claims 1 and 5 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)(a)(2) as being anticipated by S-H. Kim,, et al, US20220205099A1 (published on 01/30/2022)(“Kim”) is withdrawn in view of the instant claim 1 has been amended with new limitations of R1 is selected from a linear alkyl group having 3 to 6 carbon atoms and a branched alkyl group having 3 to 6 carbon atoms, R2 is a linear alkyl group having 2 to 3 carbon atoms which cannot be met by Kim. Rejection of claims 1, 2 and 5 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)(a)(2) as being anticipated by J. Yang, et al, US20190119418A1 (2019) (“Yang”) is withdrawn in view of the instant claim 1 has been amended with new limitations of R1 is selected from a linear alkyl group having 3 to 6 carbon atoms and a branched alkyl group having 3 to 6 carbon atoms, R2 is a linear alkyl group having 2 to 3 carbon atoms which cannot be met by Yang. Withdrawal Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 Rejection of claims 1-3, 5 and the elected species are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over C.S. Hong, et al, US 20210327708 A1 (2021)(“Hong”) is withdrawn in view of the instant claim 1 has been amended with new limitations of R1 is selected from a linear alkyl group having 3 to 6 carbon atoms and a branched alkyl group having 3 to 6 carbon atoms, R2 is a linear alkyl group having 2 to 3 carbon atoms Which cannot be met by the compound [(Me)(nPr)Cp]Zr(NMe2)3 taught by Hong. New 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. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over S-H. Kim,, et al, US20220205099A1 (published on 01/30/2022)(“Kim”). US20220205099A1 (published on 01/30/2022)(“Kim”) Kim teaches a precursor having the formula of M(R1R2Cp)a(L1)b that can be used for forming a Group IV transition metal containing film. Kim at page 1, [0008]-[0012]. Kim teaches example compounds of the formula of M(R1R2Cp)a(L1)b such as Zr(Me(Et)Cp)(NMe2)3 and Zr(Et(nPr)Cp)(NMe2)3. Kim at page 5, left col., [0107], line 31 for Zr(Me(Et)Cp)(NMe2)3 and line 38 for Zr(Et(nPr)Cp)(NMe2)3. Per Example 5, Kim teaches Zr(Me(Et)Cp)(NMe2)3 has a chemical structure as indicated below. Kim at page 11, Example 5, [0149]. PNG media_image2.png 560 758 media_image2.png Greyscale Per Example 7, Kim teaches a thin film made from the Zr(Me(Et)Cp)(NMe2)3 through ALD. Kim at page 11, Example 7. Difference between Kim and the instant Claim 1 The Kim Zr(Et(nPr)Cp)(NMe2)3 differs from claim 1 only in that Kim does not specify the substituted positions of the Et and the n-Pr. Obviousness Rationale of Claim 1 It would have been prima facie obvious for one skilled artisan to arrive at the instantly claimed invention based on the teachings from Kim with a reasonable expectation of success before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. One skilled artisan seeking to utilize the Kim compound Zr(Et(nPr)Cp)(NMe2)3 as a precursor to deposit zirconium film is motivated to elect the instant claim variables R1 and R3 in Kim Zr(Et(nPr)Cp)(NMe2)3 as ethyl and n-propyl respectively as indicated below, thus arrive at a compound meeting each and every limitation of the Formula 1 in claim 1, therefore, claim 1 is obvious. PNG media_image3.png 476 1060 media_image3.png Greyscale One skilled artisan is motivated to do so with a reasonable expectation of success because this proposed compound is a homologues of the Kim Zr(Me(Et)Cp)(NMe2)3 in Example 5, compounds which are homologs (compounds differing regularly by the successive addition of the same chemical group, e.g., by -CH2- groups) are generally of sufficiently close structural similarity that there is a presumed expectation that such compounds possess similar properties. MPEP 2144.09. II. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 FRANK S. HOU whose telephone number is (571)272-1802. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30 am-2:30 pm Eastern on Monday to Friday. 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, Scarlett Goon can be reached at (571)2705241. 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. /FRANK S. HOU/Examiner, Art Unit 1692 /ALEXANDER R PAGANO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1692
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 17, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 04, 2025
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Jan 21, 2026
Response Filed
Feb 11, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12583876
BRANCHED ORGANOSILICON COMPOUND, METHOD OF PREPARING SAME, AND RELATED COMPOSITIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12577194
METHOD FOR THE HYDROGENATION OF AROMATIC NITRO COMPOUNDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577265
ISOCYANATE GROUP-CONTAINING ORGANOSILICON COMPOUND AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING ISOCYANATE GROUP-CONTAINING ORGANOSILICON COMPOUND
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12570676
MULTIFUNCTIONALIZED SILICON NANOPARTICLES, PROCESS FOR THEIR PREPARATION AND USES THEREOF IN ELECTROCHEMILUMINESCENCE BASED DETECTION METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12570601
PROCESS FOR PREPARING (R)-4-AMINOINDANE AND CORRESPONDING AMIDES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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
71%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+31.8%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 115 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