Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/152,865

METHOD OF MANUFACTURING WAFER

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Jan 11, 2023
Examiner
REIDA, MOLLY KAY
Art Unit
2899
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Disco Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
348 granted / 417 resolved
+15.5% vs TC avg
Minimal +2% lift
Without
With
+2.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
31 currently pending
Career history
448
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
46.3%
+6.3% vs TC avg
§102
34.4%
-5.6% vs TC avg
§112
16.0%
-24.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 417 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A, subspecies A2 relating to claims 1, 2, 4, 7, and 8 in the reply filed on 12/10/2025 is acknowledged. Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/11/2023 and 10/16/2025 have been considered by the examiner. 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. Claim(s) 1, 2, and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hatada et al. (US Pub. 2015/0001718A1). Regarding independent claim 1, Hatada teaches a method of manufacturing a wafer (Figs. 1+; para. 0048+), comprising: a wafer preparing step of preparing a wafer (2) including a plurality of semiconductor devices (3) joined to a substrate by respective adhesive layers (“solder or the like”) (Fig. 1; para. 0048); a determining step of determining whether each of the semiconductor devices joined to the substrate is defective or non-defective (para. 0050); a laser beam applying step of applying a laser beam to heat one of the adhesive layers by which one of the semiconductor devices that has been determined as defective is bonded to the substrate, thereby melting the adhesive layer in an area of the wafer that is irradiated with the laser beam (Fig, 2A; para. 0052, 0061-0062); and a treating step of treating the semiconductor device released from a bonded state due to the adhesive layer being melted in the laser beam applying step (Fig. 2B; para. 0053). Re claim 2, Hatada teaches wherein the laser beam is applied to the adhesive layer through the semiconductor device (Fig, 2A; para. 0052, 0061-0062). Re claim 4, Hatada teaches wherein the treating step is a removing step of removing the semiconductor device from the substrate (Fig. 2B; para. 0053). 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. Claim(s) 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatada et al. (US Pub. 2015/0001718A1; see also JP 2015012005A) in view of Liao (US Pub. 2020/0367395A1; on IDS). Re claim 7, Hatada teaches wherein the removing step includes a step of attracting the lifted semiconductor device under suction to remove the semiconductor device from the substrate (Fig. 2B; para. 0051, 0053 – where “absorbed” is considered to read on “under suction” – the English translation of the Japanese version (JP 2015012005A) uses “suction” instead of “absorption”). Hatada is silent with respect to a step of ejecting a gas toward the semiconductor device released from the bonded state to lift the semiconductor device off the substrate. Liao teaches a removing step wherein the removing step includes a step (Fig. 6) of ejecting a gas (S) toward the semiconductor device (20) released from the bonded state to lift the semiconductor device off the substrate (para. 0030), and a step (Fig. 7) of attracting the lifted semiconductor device under suction to remove the semiconductor device from the substrate (para. 0033). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing that the removing step of Hatada could be replaced with the removing step of Liao to arrive at the claimed invention for the purpose of improving the convenience of removing the chip as well as further reducing or preventing solder remaining (Liao (para. 0031). Re claim 8, Hatada teaches a non-defective semiconductor device bonding step, after the removing step, of bonding a semiconductor device having same functions as those of the semiconductor device determined as defective to an area from which the semiconductor device determined as defective has been removed (para. 0066). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOLLY KAY REIDA whose telephone number is (571)272-4237. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00PM. 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, Brent Fairbanks can be reached at (408)918-7532. 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. /MOLLY K REIDA/Examiner, Art Unit 2899 /Brent A. Fairbanks/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2899
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 11, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 06, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Apr 02, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 02, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 02, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 16, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604647
DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598736
SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593438
SEMICONDUCTOR MEMORY DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593543
DISPLAY MODULE MANUFACTURING METHOD AND DISPLAY SCREEN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593558
DISPLAY DEVICE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 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
84%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+2.4%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 417 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