Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 27, 2026
Application No. 18/293,706

PLATING APPARATUS AND PLATING METHOD

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Jan 30, 2024
Priority
Apr 27, 2023 — nonprovisional of PCTJP2023016570
Examiner
WONG, EDNA
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Ebara Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
58%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
4m
Est. Remaining
39%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 58% of resolved cases
58%
Career Allowance Rate
620 granted / 1061 resolved
-1.6% vs TC avg
Minimal -20% lift
Without
With
+-19.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
45 currently pending
Career history
1109
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.2%
-39.8% vs TC avg
§103
43.5%
+3.5% vs TC avg
§102
14.1%
-25.9% vs TC avg
§112
38.0%
-2.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1061 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Drawings The drawings were received on January 30, 2024. These drawings are acceptable. Specification Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract is not within the range of 50 to 150 words in length . A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b). Claim Objections Claims 3 and 5-7 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 3 Line 2, please insert the word -- further -- before the word “includes”. This is an instance where the article should be added to ensure the further limitation of the claim terminology. See claim 1, line 15. Claim 5 Line 2, please insert the word -- further -- before the word “includes”. This is an instance where the article should be added to ensure the further limitation of the claim terminology. See claim 2, line 4. Claim 6 Line 2, please insert the word -- further -- before the word “includes”. This is an instance where the article should be added to ensure proper further limitation of the claim terminology. See claim 5, line 2. Claim 7 Line 5, please amend the words “a plating” to the words -- an electroplating --. The apparatus as presently claimed comprises an anode and a cathode, and thus, would need a current or voltage to carry out the process. “Plating” does not automatically mean that an electrochemical reaction is occurring. It only creates the conditions under which one could occur. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 Claims 1-7 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 1 Line 16, “the third direction of the second outer peripheral wall” lacks antecedent basis. Antecedent basis must be laid for each recited element in a claim, typically, by introducing each element with the indefinite article (“a” or “an”). See Slimfold Mfg. Co. v. Kincaid Properties, Inc., 626 F. Supp 493, 495 (N.D. Ga. 1985), aff'd, 810 F.2d 1113 (Fed. Cir. 1987) (citing P. Rosenberg, 2 Patent Law Fundamentals § 14.06 (2d. Ed. 1984)). Subsequent mention of an element is to be modified by the definite article “the”, “said” or “the said,” thereby making the latter mention(s) of the element unequivocally referable to its earlier recitation. See claim 1, lines 11-12. Lines 16-17, “the third direction” is indefinite. Claim 1, lines 11-12, recite “the third direction is a direction perpendicular to a reciprocation direction of the paddle”. Claim 1, line 16, recites “the third direction of the first outer peripheral wall”. Claim 2 Line 5, “the third direction of the second outer peripheral wall” lacks antecedent basis. Antecedent basis must be laid for each recited element in a claim, typically, by introducing each element with the indefinite article (“a” or “an”). See Slimfold Mfg. Co. v. Kincaid Properties, Inc., 626 F. Supp 493, 495 (N.D. Ga. 1985), aff'd, 810 F.2d 1113 (Fed. Cir. 1987) (citing P. Rosenberg, 2 Patent Law Fundamentals § 14.06 (2d. Ed. 1984)). Subsequent mention of an element is to be modified by the definite article “the”, “said” or “the said,” thereby making the latter mention(s) of the element unequivocally referable to its earlier recitation. See also claim 3, line 3. Line 6, “the third direction” is indefinite. Claim 1, lines 11-12, recite “the third direction is a direction perpendicular to a reciprocation direction of the paddle”. Claim 1, line 16, recites “the third direction of the first outer peripheral wall”. Claim 3 Lines 2-3, “both end portions of the first center wall” lack antecedent basis. Antecedent basis must be laid for each recited element in a claim, typically, by introducing each element with the indefinite article (“a” or “an”). See Slimfold Mfg. Co. v. Kincaid Properties, Inc., 626 F. Supp 493, 495 (N.D. Ga. 1985), aff'd, 810 F.2d 1113 (Fed. Cir. 1987) (citing P. Rosenberg, 2 Patent Law Fundamentals § 14.06 (2d. Ed. 1984)). Subsequent mention of an element is to be modified by the definite article “the”, “said” or “the said,” thereby making the latter mention(s) of the element unequivocally referable to its earlier recitation. Line 4, “end portions of the honeycomb-structure portion” lack antecedent basis. Antecedent basis must be laid for each recited element in a claim, typically, by introducing each element with the indefinite article (“a” or “an”). See Slimfold Mfg. Co. v. Kincaid Properties, Inc., 626 F. Supp 493, 495 (N.D. Ga. 1985), aff'd, 810 F.2d 1113 (Fed. Cir. 1987) (citing P. Rosenberg, 2 Patent Law Fundamentals § 14.06 (2d. Ed. 1984)). Subsequent mention of an element is to be modified by the definite article “the”, “said” or “the said,” thereby making the latter mention(s) of the element unequivocally referable to its earlier recitation. Claim 5 Line 4, “end portion sides” are indefinite. Claim 6 Line 3, “end portions of the second center wall” lack antecedent basis. Antecedent basis must be laid for each recited element in a claim, typically, by introducing each element with the indefinite article (“a” or “an”). See Slimfold Mfg. Co. v. Kincaid Properties, Inc., 626 F. Supp 493, 495 (N.D. Ga. 1985), aff'd, 810 F.2d 1113 (Fed. Cir. 1987) (citing P. Rosenberg, 2 Patent Law Fundamentals § 14.06 (2d. Ed. 1984)). Subsequent mention of an element is to be modified by the definite article “the”, “said” or “the said,” thereby making the latter mention(s) of the element unequivocally referable to its earlier recitation. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by WO 2023/105561 (‘561). Apparatus Regarding claim 1, WO ‘561 teaches a plating apparatus (= a plating apparatus) [ρ [0001]] comprising: • a plating tank configured to store a plating solution (= plating solution Ps is stored inside the plating tank 10) [ρ [0044]], an anode being disposed in the plating tank (= an anode 11 is placed inside the plating tank 10) [ρ [0046]]; • a substrate holder configured to hold a substrate as a cathode so as to be opposed to the anode (= the substrate holder 30 holds the substrate Wf, which serves as the cathode, such that the plated surface Wfa of the substrate Wf faces the anode 11) [ρ [0052]]; and • a paddle disposed between the anode and the substrate (= a paddle 70) [Fig. 3], the paddle being configured to reciprocate parallel to the anode in a first direction and a second direction opposite to the first direction to stir the plating solution (= the paddle 70 is configured such that the movement region MA of the paddle 70 during stirring of the plating solution Ps (i.e., the range in which the paddle 70 reciprocates)) [ρ [0060]; and Fig. 3], the paddle including a honeycomb-structure portion (= the paddle 70C according to this modified example differs from the paddle 70 illustrated in Figure 5 in that it is equipped with a plurality of stirring members 73 having a honeycomb structure) [ρ [0119]] provided with a plurality of polygonal through-holes (= each stirring member 73 has a polygonal through-hole 73a that extends in the vertical direction) [ρ [0120]], wherein ۰ the honeycomb-structure portion has a shape in which a paddle width at a center portion in a third direction is wider than a paddle width at an end portion in the third direction, and the third direction is a direction perpendicular to a reciprocation direction of the paddle (= in this modified example, the first protruding portion 74b protrudes in an arc shape (in other words, in a bow shape) on the side in the first direction. Furthermore, the second protruding portion 74c in this modified example protrudes in an arc shape (in other words, in a bow shape) on the second direction side) [ρ [0122]; and Fig. 11], ۰ the honeycomb-structure portion includes a first outer peripheral wall (= a covering frame 75) [ρ [0119]] oriented in the first direction (= the first protruding portion 74b) [ρ [0122]], and ۰ the first outer peripheral wall includes a first center wall disposed at a center portion in the third direction of the first outer peripheral wall, and the first center wall extends in the third direction (= PNG media_image1.png 607 913 media_image1.png Greyscale ) [Fig. 11]. Regarding claim 2, WO ‘561 teaches wherein the honeycomb-structure portion includes a second outer peripheral wall oriented in the second direction, and the second outer peripheral wall includes a second center wall disposed at a center portion in the third direction of the second outer peripheral wall, and the second center wall extends in the third direction (= PNG media_image2.png 587 913 media_image2.png Greyscale ) [Fig. 11]. Regarding claim 3, WO ‘561 teaches wherein the first outer peripheral wall includes a pair of first inclined walls extending from both end portions of the first center wall as starting points in the second direction and directions approaching end portions of the honeycomb-structure portion (= PNG media_image3.png 364 557 media_image3.png Greyscale ) [Fig. 11]. Regarding claim 4, WO ‘561 teaches wherein at least one of the pair of first inclined walls is provided with at least one step (= PNG media_image4.png 599 932 media_image4.png Greyscale ) [Fig. 11]. Regarding claim 5, WO ‘561 teaches wherein the second outer peripheral wall includes a pair of second inclined walls extending from a center portion side in the third direction of the second outer peripheral wall toward the first direction while approaching end portion sides (= PNG media_image5.png 377 612 media_image5.png Greyscale ) [Fig. 11]. Regarding claim 6, WO ‘561 teaches wherein the second outer peripheral wall includes a pair of connection walls configured to connect both end portions of the second center wall to the pair of second inclined walls respectively (= PNG media_image6.png 434 637 media_image6.png Greyscale ) [Fig. 11]. Method Regarding claim 7, WO ‘561 teaches a plating method (= a plating method) [ρ [0001]] using the plating apparatus according to claim 1 (see Regarding claim 1 above), comprising: • immersing the substrate in the plating solution (= the substrate is immersed in the plating solution) [ρ [0009]]; • reciprocating the paddle in the first direction and the second direction (= the movement region MA of the paddle 70 during stirring of the plating solution Ps (i.e., the range in which the paddle 70 reciprocates) [ρ [0060]] to stir the plating solution (= stirring of the plating solution by the paddle)) [ρ [0009]]; and • performing a plating process on the substrate. (= performing a plating treatment on the substrate by passing electricity between the substrate and the anode while the stirring of the plating solution by the paddle is restarted) [ρ [0007]]. Citations The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. CN 211756780 is cited to teach the surface of the surface of the stirring paddle is provided with honeycomb-shaped holes (ρ [0013]). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDNA WONG whose telephone number is (571) 272-1349. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:00 AM- 3:30 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, Luan Van can be reached at (571) 272-8521. 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. /EDNA WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 30, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 05, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12768063
ELECTROLYTIC SOLUTION, MAGNESIUM PRODUCTION METHOD, MAGNESIUM, AND MAGNESIUM FOIL
3y 11m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12747508
ELECTROCHEMICAL TRANSFORMATIONS
2y 8m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12723317
CO2 CONVERSION METHOD
1y 5m to grant Granted Sep 01, 2026
Patent 12709811
ELECTROCHEMICAL CONVERSION OF CARBON DIOXIDE TO FORM AN ORGANIC ACID
1y 7m to grant Granted Aug 18, 2026
Patent 12680177
METHOD OF PRODUCING GLUCARIC ACID AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SYNTHETIC RESIN RAW MATERIAL BY ELECTROCHEMICAL TREATMENT
2y 2m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
58%
Grant Probability
39%
With Interview (-19.7%)
3y 1m (~4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1061 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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