Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/319,437

MANUFACTURING METHODS OF SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURES

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
May 17, 2023
Examiner
KIM, JAY C
Art Unit
2815
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Enkris Semiconductor Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
48%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 8m
To Grant
70%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 48% of resolved cases
48%
Career Allow Rate
412 granted / 849 resolved
-19.5% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+21.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 8m
Avg Prosecution
67 currently pending
Career history
916
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
39.1%
-0.9% vs TC avg
§102
19.5%
-20.5% vs TC avg
§112
39.6%
-0.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 849 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION This Office Action is in response to Application filed May 17, 2023. 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 Applicants’ election without traverse of Species F drawn to the embodiment shown in Figs. 16-22 of current application, claims 1, 3 and 9-11, in the reply filed on December 15, 2025 is acknowledged. 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, 3 and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Murakawa et al. (WO 2020/262560) (Murakawa et al. (US 2022/0415714) is used as a translation in current Office Action) in view of Kunisato et al. (US 2002/0127856) Regarding claim 1, Murakawa et al. disclose a manufacturing method of a semiconductor structure (Fig. 9), comprising: providing a structure (Fig. 5) to be peeled off, wherein the structure to be peeled off comprises a first structure (structure including and disposed below mask layer 18 in Fig. 5) and a second structure (structure disposed above mask layer 18 in Fig. 5), the first structure comprises: a base (11) ([0045]); a first mask layer (18) ([0055]) located on the base, wherein a first opening (18b) ([0060]) that exposes the base is provided in the first mask layer, see Fig. 1, the first opening comprises an open end (top portion of opening portion 18b in Fig. 1); and a first epitaxial layer (bottom portion of 13 inside opening portion 18b) ([0059]) epitaxially grown from the base (11) to fill up the first opening (18b), because Applicants’ first epitaxial layer 12 is also formed inside the first opening 110/111 in Fig. 16 of current application; and the second structure comprises: a second epitaxial layer (top portion of 13 (and subsequently deposited layer(s) including n-type GaN layer)) ([0064]) located on the first epitaxial layer and the first mask layer; and applying force ([0071]) on the structure to be peeled off to fracture the second epitaxial layer and the first epitaxial layer (bottom portion of 13 inside opening portion 18b) (Fig. 7), to peel off the first structure and make the second structure form a semiconductor structure, because (a) Murakawa et al. disclose that “Since each element portion 12 is peeled off from the underlying substrate 11, each connection portion 23 is broken (emphasis added)”, and that “Such a connection portion 23 may remain at the underlying substrate 11 side or the element portion 12 side or both of them, depending on the situation of breakage”, (b) Applicants do not specifically claim where the claimed fracture is generated, (c) for example, when strictly interpreted, Figs. 21 and 22 of current application show that the fracture is generated only inside the first epitaxial layer 12 rather than inside both the first epitaxial layer 12 and the second epitaxial layer 21 shown in Fig. 17 of current application, and (d) therefore, the limitation “to fracture the second epitaxial layer and the first epitaxial layer” should be broadly interpreted since otherwise claim 1 would be indefinite. Murakawa et al. differ from the claimed invention by not showing that an area of an orthographic projection of the open end on the base is less than an area of an orthographic projection of the first opening on the base. Kunisato et al. disclose a manufacturing method of a semiconductor structure, where an area of an orthographic projection of an open end (top portion of opening of first mask layer 2) of a first mask layer (2 in Fig. 1) ([0064]) on a base (1) is less than an area of an orthographic projection of a first opening (bottom portion of opening of first mask layer 2) of the first mask layer (area between overhangs 2a) on the base. Since both Murakawa et al. and Kunisato et al. teach a manufacturing method of a semiconductor structure employing a mask layer, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that an area of an orthographic projection of the open end on the base disclosed by Murakawa et al. can be less than an area of an orthographic projection of the first opening on the base of Murakawa et al. as disclosed by Kunisato et al., because (a) as disclosed in paragraph [0024] of Kunisato et al., i.e. “the nitride-based semiconductor layer, having low dislocation density, consisting of the material different from that of the underlayer can be grown on the underlayer with a small thickness to form hetero structure”, and “the mask layers are preferably at least partially inverse-trapezoidal”, (b) the inverse-trapezoidal mask layer disclosed by Kunisato et al. would improve the quality of the semiconductor layers grown on the first mask layer disclosed by Murakawa et al., which in turn would improve performance of the semiconductor device formed by using the higher quality semiconductor layers. Regarding claim 3, Murakawa et al. further disclose that before applying the force on the structure to be peeled off (Figs. 5 and 6), the manufactured method further comprises removing the first mask layer (18 in Figs. 1 and 5) in the first structure. Murakawa et al. in view of Kunisato et al. differ from the claimed invention by not showing that the first mask layer is removed by wet etching. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the first mask layer 18 disclosed by Murakawa et al. can be removed by wet etching, because (a) dry etching and wet etching, which are basically only two types of etchings, have been commonly and interchangeably employed in semiconductor research and industry, and (b) the first mask layer 18 disclosed by Murakawa et al. disposed underneath a device structure disclosed by Murakawa et al. has been commonly etched by wet etching since wet etching can remove dielectric or semiconductor materials that dry etching may not be able to remove since etchant for wet etching can flow in an area that is not easily accessible and not directly in line of sight by dry etching. Regarding claims 9-11, Murakawa et al. further disclose that the second structure comprises a transfer substrate (support substrate 14 in Fig. 6 after support substrate 14 is bonded to underlying structure) ([0069]); before applying force on the structure to be peeled, the manufacturing method further comprises: adhering or bonding a surface of the second epitaxial layer (top portion of 13 (and subsequently deposited layer(s)) away from the first epitaxial layer (bottom portion of 12) to the transfer substrate (step between Fig. 6 and Fig. 7); and when force is applied to the second structure, the force is applied to the transfer substrate, which is an inherent process to obtain the semiconductor device structure shown in Fig. 7 of Murakawa et al. (claim 9), a plurality of first openings (18b in Fig. 1) ([0057]) are provided, and a second epitaxial layer (top portion of 13 (and subsequently deposited layer(s)) in Figs. 2 and 3) corresponding to each of the plurality of the first openings is coalesced into a plane (top surface of 13 (and subsequently deposited layer(s)) in Figs. 2 and 3) (claim 10), and a plurality of first openings (18b in Fig. 1) are provided, and the second epitaxial layer (top portion of 13 (and subsequently deposited layer(s)) in Figs. 2 and 3) corresponding to each of the plurality of the first openings is an LED structure or a vertically conductive semiconductor structure (Fig. 4) ([0052] and [0067]) (claim 11). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kamikawa et al. (US 12,417,913) Murakawa (US 2022/0416015) Kim et al. (US 11,495,170) Gandrothula et al. (US 2021/0242086) Kamikawa et al. (US 12,087,577) Kamikawa et al. (US 11,508,620) Kamikawa et al. (US 12,146,237) Yoshida (US 11,908,688) Hoshi et al. (US 12,293,945) Heo et al. (US 9,263,255) Lin et al. (US 8,507,357) Chiao et al. (US 11,145,507) Lee et al. (US 8,313,967) Nakahata et al. (US 7,732,236) Kim et al. (US 2023/0142462) Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY C KIM whose telephone number is (571) 270-1620. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM - 6:00 PM EST. 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, Joshua Benitez can be reached at (571) 270-1435. 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. /JAY C KIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815 /J. K./Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815 February 11, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 17, 2023
Application Filed
Jul 21, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jul 21, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Dec 15, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 11, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604680
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING GROUP III NITRIDE SEMICONDUCTOR SUBSTRATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12593612
STRUCTURE OF SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND METHOD FOR FABRICATING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12593509
TRANSISTOR AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588315
III-NITRIDE SEMICONUCTOR DEVICES HAVING A BORON NITRIDE ALLOY CONTACT LAYER AND METHOD OF PRODUCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12557324
SEMICONDUCTOR POWER DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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
48%
Grant Probability
70%
With Interview (+21.9%)
3y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 849 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