Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/160,939

ETCHING METHOD AND ETCHING APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jan 27, 2023
Examiner
LAOBAK, ANDREW KEELAN
Art Unit
1713
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Screen Holdings Co., LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
24 granted / 31 resolved
+12.4% vs TC avg
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+28.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
72
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
60.8%
+20.8% vs TC avg
§102
16.8%
-23.2% vs TC avg
§112
19.7%
-20.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 31 resolved cases

Office Action

§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. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election of Group I, claims 1-3, in the reply filed on 11/25/2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 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. Claim s 1-3 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 1 recites the limitation " a reduced pressure state ". This limitation could be interpreted to mean that “creating” the “reduced pressure state” requires reducing a pressure within the processing chamber. However, with this interpretation it is not clear what pressure would be required in order for it to be considered “a reduced pressure state”. Alternatively, “creating a reduced pressure state” may be interpreted as providing any pressure within a processing chamber where that pressure can then be compared to some other higher pressure such that it is considered “a reduced pressure state”. Claim 1 is indefinite because it is not clear exactly what is required by this limitation. Claim 1 recites the limitation “etching the coating film is performed when the OH stretching vibration of a predetermined threshold value or higher is detected in the substrate”. It is unclear what is required by this limitation because it is unclear what would be required for a OH stretching vibration value to be considered a predetermined threshold value. For example, zero could be considered a value and all etching could presumably occur when zero or higher values are detected. Additionally, it is not clear if this limitation is intended to refer to the entirety of the limitation that is presented together as “ supplying an etching gas containing hydrogen fluoride into the processing chamber and etching the coating film formed on the substrate ” or if the limitation only relates to “etching the coating film formed on the substrate”. Claim 1 is indefinite because it is not clear exactly what is required by this limitation. Claims 2 and 3 are indefinite due to being dependent upon claim 1. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-3 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art does not disclose or render obvious all the limitations of claim 1, with particular attention to the limitation “ in supplying the vapor, detecting OH stretching vibration in the substrate by infrared spectroscopy ”. The closest prior art of record is considered to be Inaba et al. (JP-2018056465-A, IDS document) and Kuwabara et al. (US-5321264-A). Inaba teaches a method of etching that includes reducing the pressure withing a processing chamber, supplying water vapor to a substrate, and etching the substrate by supplying hydrogen fluoride gas. However, Inaba does not teach detecting OH stretching vibration by infrared spectroscopy and teaches supplying the water vapor for a set amount of time prior to supplying the hydrogen fluoride gas and etching the substrate. Kuwabara teaches a method of using infrared spectroscopy that can measure the amount of water present on a substrate using OH stretching vibration. However, the method of Kuwabara requires moving a prism element into contact with the surface of the substrate to be measured, and therefore this method would not be suitable for measuring the amount of water on the substrate while supplying the water. Claims 2 and 3 would be allowable due to being dependent upon claim 1. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT ANDREW KEELAN LAOBAK whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (703)756-5447 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday - Friday 8:00am - 5:30pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Joshua Allen can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-270-3176 . 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. /A.K.L./ Examiner, Art Unit 1713 /DUY VU N DEO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1713
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 27, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Mar 19, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 19, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 19, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12581882
SUBSTRATE PROCESSING METHOD, METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE, SUBSTRATE PROCESSING APPARATUS, AND RECORDING MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573601
PLASMA PROCESSING APPARATUS AND PLASMA PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12557575
METHODS FOR REDUCING LEAKAGE CURRENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12542257
MINIMIZING REFLECTED POWER IN A TUNABLE EDGE SHEATH SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12543542
Patterning Method Using Secondary Resist Surface Functionalization for Mask Formation
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
77%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+28.2%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 31 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month