Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/329,325

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR GENERATING AND ANALYZING ROUGHNESS MEASUREMENTS

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
Jun 05, 2023
Examiner
CHANG, HANWAY
Art Unit
2878
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Fractilia LLC
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
538 granted / 626 resolved
+17.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
65 currently pending
Career history
691
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.5%
-38.5% vs TC avg
§103
38.4%
-1.6% vs TC avg
§102
34.8%
-5.2% vs TC avg
§112
6.0%
-34.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 626 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
PreDETAILED ACTION Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement filed 4/7/2025 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 because US PGPub 20041477121 is not the correct listed document. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits. Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a). Response to Arguments The terminal disclaimer filed on 1/2/2025 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of US Pat. 11,670,480, 10,664,955, 10,656,532 have been reviewed and is accepted. However, upon further consideration, the claims stand rejected under 35 USC 101, produced below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea (e.g. mathematical concepts) without significantly more. The claims recite, for example claim 1, a method for applying a model, adjusting a parameter of the model, obtaining a best fit of the model. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the generically recited method steps do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a processor (see MPEP 2105.05(f)) or a mental process (see MPEP 2104.02(a)(2)(III). Regarding claim 1, the claim recites a method for detecting edge positions in a pattern structure comprising detecting the edge positions of features within the pattern structure of an image without filtering the image (Fig. 12 of Platzgummer (US PGPub 2017/0357153) shows a device detecting edge positions of a feature pattern as conventional activity, see paragraph [0066]), wherein the detecting is performed by: applying a model to a single linescan (does not add significantly more - this step is a mathematical concept (i.e. data manipulation done on a processor)), adjusting, based on the single linescan, one or more parameters of the model (does not add significantly more – this step is a mathematical concept (i.e. adjusting a model is data manipulation)), obtaining, using the one or more adjusted parameters, a best fit of the model to the single linescan (does not add significantly more – this step is a mental process (i.e. best fit of the model can be done by pen and paper)). Claims 2-8 are further limiting the abstract idea without significantly more as dependent upon claim 1. Regarding claim 9, the claim recites a processor that is commensurate in scope with claim 1 and is rejected under 35 USC 101 for the same reasons above. Claims 10-15 are further limiting the abstract idea without significantly more as dependent upon claim 9. Regarding claim 16, the claim recites a processor that is commensurate in scope with claim 9 and is rejected under 35 USC 101 for the same reasons above. Claims 17-20 are further limiting the abstract idea without significantly more as dependent upon claim 16. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HANWAY CHANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5766. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 AM - 4:00 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, Georgia Epps can be reached at (571) 272-2328. 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. Hanway Chang /HC/ Examiner, Art Unit 2878 /GEORGIA Y EPPS/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2878
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 05, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 08, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §101
Jun 12, 2024
Response Filed
Jun 28, 2024
Final Rejection — §101
Dec 17, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 10, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 12, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 25, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597582
Charged Particle Beam Apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12557588
METHODS OF CROSS-SECTION IMAGING OF AN INSPECTION VOLUME IN A WAFER
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12520413
SAPPHIRE LAMP FOR LASER SUSTAINED PLASMA BROADBAND LIGHT SOURCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12476073
SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPE IMAGE-BASED PITCH WALK INSPECTION METHOD AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE COMPRISING THE INSPECTION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Patent 12463003
HIGH TEMPERATURE ION SOURCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 04, 2025
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
86%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+7.6%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 626 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