Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/234,549

METHOD OF FORMING MATERIAL WITHIN A RECESS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 16, 2023
Examiner
TADAYYON ESLAMI, TABASSOM
Art Unit
1718
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Asm Ip Holding B V
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
50%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 7m
To Grant
77%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 50% of resolved cases
50%
Career Allow Rate
384 granted / 776 resolved
-15.5% vs TC avg
Strong +27% interview lift
Without
With
+27.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 7m
Avg Prosecution
65 currently pending
Career history
841
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
60.2%
+20.2% vs TC avg
§102
15.7%
-24.3% vs TC avg
§112
20.7%
-19.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 776 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/25/26 has been entered. 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 1-9, 11-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shinya Yoshimoto et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2022/0119944, here after Yoshimoto. Claims 1 and 5 are rejected. Yoshimoto teaches a method of forming material within a recess on a surface of a substrate, the method comprising: providing a substrate within a reaction chamber [0005]; forming a flowable material at a first temperature (less than 300C) within the reaction chamber, the flowable material forming deposited material within the recess, wherein a ratio of a thickness of the deposited material on a bottom of the recess to a thickness of deposited material on a top surface of the recess is greater than or equal to 1.5[0070, fig. 8, 0010]; after forming the deposited material, treating the deposited material using activated species within the reaction chamber to form treated material (plasma curing treatment) [ 0081, fig. 8]; and after forming the treated material, heating (thermal annealing) the substrate including the treated material at a second temperature (400-1000C) [0088] to remove a portion of the treated material (film shrinks and densified and looks like removing material), wherein removing the portion of the treated material reduces a thickness of the treated material within the recess (the film shrinks and thickness reduces) [fig. 8, 0093 last two sentences]. Yoshimoto teaches the thermal annealing time(heating) of less than 10 sec via RTA (rapid thermal annealing) [0093], and not between about 30 seconds. However, an ordinary skill in at can replace regular annealing for RTA with expectation of success which in fact increasing the annealing time. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of Yoshimoto and have regular annealing rather than RTA, because substitution of equivalents requires no express motivation. In re Fount, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982); In re Siebentritt 152, USPQ (CCPA 1967). It is also to the skill of an ordinary person to adjust annealing time with annealing temperature to meet claim annealing time. Claim 2 is rejected. Yoshimoto teaches forming the deposited material within the recess comprises forming the deposited material to a thickness of the within the recess between about 5 nm and about 30 nm [0016 last sentence]. Claim 3 is rejected. Yoshimoto teaches the step of heating the substrate comprises providing a gas comprises one or more of argon, nitrogen (N2), helium, and/or ammonia [0083 lines 17-19, 0082 limes 13-15]. Claim 4 is rejected. Yoshimoto teaches the step of treating the deposited material comprises providing a treatment gas consisting of hydrogen (H₂) to the reaction chamber [0072, 0073]. Claim 6 is rejected. Yoshimoto teaches plasma treatment between and after deposition pulses [0071, 0072] therefore a temperature (T3) during the step of treating is equal to T1 and less than T2. Claim 7 is rejected. Yoshimoto teaches T1 is between about 50 °C and about 90°C [0082]. Claim 8 is rejected. Yoshimoto teaches the step of heating the substrate comprises providing a gas consisting of ammonia and optionally, one or more of argon, nitrogen (N₂), and helium. [0083]. Claim 9 is rejected. Yoshimoto teaches the step of forming the flowable material comprises a cyclical deposition process, and wherein a cycle of the cyclical deposition process (ALD or CVD) for depositing silicon and nitrogen containing film [0005] which in fact comprises: providing a precursor comprising silicon and nitrogen to the reaction chamber for a precursor pulse; providing a reactant comprises one or more of argon, nitrogen (N₂), or hydrogen (H₂) to the reaction chamber; and providing a plasma power for a deposition plasma power pulse period, and wherein the cycle of the cyclical deposition process is repeated a plurality of times [0013-0015]. Claims 11 and 13 are rejected. Yoshimoto teaches the precursor comprising hexamethylcyclotrisilazane [0067]. Claim 12 is rejected. Yoshimoto teaches the reactant comprising hydrogen or nitrogen [0014]. Claim 14 is rejected. Yoshimoto teaches pressure within the reaction chamber during the step of heating is between about 300 Pa and about 2800 Pa [claim 8]. Claim 15 is rejected. Yoshimoto teaches the step of treating the deposited material comprises providing a treatment gas comprising hydrogen (H₂) to the reaction chamber [0072-0073]. Claim 16 is rejected. Yoshimoto teaches performing the steps of forming a flowable material and treating the deposited material a plurality of times [abstract first sentence]. Claim 17 is rejected. Yoshimoto teaches the step of heating the substrate consists essentially of providing the gas and heating the substrate [0083]. Claim 18 is rejected. Yoshimoto teaches performing a first loop a plurality of times, and performing a second loop a plurality of times, wherein the first loop comprises the steps of forming a flowable material and treating the deposited material, and wherein the second loop comprises the first loop and the step of heating the substrate [0010, 0015, 0072, 0081]. Claim 19 is rejected. Yoshimoto teaches the step of heating the substrate comprises providing a gas consisting essentially of one or more of argon, nitrogen (N2), helium, and/or ammonia [0083]. Claim 20 is rejected. Yoshimoto teaches the limitation of claim 1, and therefore a structure formed (gap filled) by it. Claim 21 is rejected. Yoshimoto teaches a system comprising: a reactor comprising a reaction chamber (ALD or CVD); and a controller [0048] configured to perform a method according to claim 1. Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shinya Yoshimoto et al (U. S. Patent Application: 2022/0119944, here after Yoshimoto, further in view of Kang Hu et al (Korean Patent: 20150037662, here after Hu). Claim 22 is rejected for the same reason claim 1 is rejected above. Yoshimoto teaches densifying(shrinkage) the deposited film [0093], but does not teach the substrate comprising features with different aspect ratio. Hu teaches with substrate having features with varies of aspect ratio's, deposited film thickness in a gap with higher aspect ratio is larger than deposited film thickness in lower aspect ratio gap [fig. 3]. of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention was made to have a method of depositing as Yoshimoto teach, where the thickness of the treated material within recess with higher aspect ratio is less than lower aspect ratio feature, because shrinkage would be more in higher thickness film. Response to Arguments Applicant's arguments filed 02/25/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant argues Yuan does not teach new limitation of amended claim; however, Yoshimoto teaches it (see claim rejection above). The applicant further argues regarding a ratio of a thickness of the deposited material on a bottom of the recess to a thickness of deposited material on a top surface of the recess is greater than or equal to 1.5, however Yoshimoto teaches this limitation as well [0070, fig. 8, 0010]. Same above statement is valid for the rest of the applicant argument regarding claim 22. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TABASSOM TADAYYON ESLAMI whose telephone number is (571)270-1885. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6. 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, Gordon Baldwin can be reached at 5712725166. 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. /TABASSOM TADAYYON ESLAMI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1718
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 16, 2023
Application Filed
Sep 24, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Dec 16, 2024
Response Filed
Feb 25, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 15, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
May 07, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
May 09, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jun 23, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 02, 2025
Response Filed
Nov 22, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 21, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 25, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599968
METHOD OF PRODUCING AN ADDITIVE MANUFACTURED OBJECT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12600634
2D AMORPHOUS CARBON FILM ASSEMBLED FROM GRAPHENE QUANTUM DOTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601049
AG- AND/OR CU- CONTAINING HARD COATINGS WITH ANTIBACTERIAL, ANTIVIRAL AND ANTIFUNGAL PROPERTIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12590372
LASER INDUCED FORWARD TRANSFER OF 2D MATERIALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585183
METHOD OF FORMING AN ELECTRONIC DEVICE ON A FLEXIBLE SUBSTRATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
50%
Grant Probability
77%
With Interview (+27.1%)
3y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 776 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