Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/358,966

SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND METHOD OF FABRICATING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 26, 2023
Examiner
MARUF, SHEIKH
Art Unit
2897
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
469 granted / 541 resolved
+18.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +10% lift
Without
With
+10.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
571
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
3.2%
-36.8% vs TC avg
§103
66.4%
+26.4% vs TC avg
§102
16.9%
-23.1% vs TC avg
§112
10.1%
-29.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 541 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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 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. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 4, 6 and 7 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. According claim 5 is allowed as dependent from claim 4. Claims 8 and 15 are allowed. According claims 9-14 and 16-20 are allowed as dependent from clam 8 and 15 respectively 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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bae et al. (US PGPub: 2023/0180481 A1), hereinafter Bae and in view of IM; Mir (PGpub: 2023/0413573 A1), hereinafter IM. Regarding claim 1, Bae teaches a device, comprising: a ferroelectric layer (150) ; a first channel layer (160 on the top) and a second channel layer (160 on the bottom) disposed on two opposing sides of the ferroelectric layer (150) and contacting the ferroelectric layer (FIG. 1); and gate electrodes (130) disposed on two opposing sides of the ferroelectric layer and over the first channel layer and the second channel layer. Bae does not explicitly teach two different channel layer, first and second channel layer may be same. However, the applicant has to made it clear that first and second channel layers are different and separated from each other. It is known in the industry top have tow different channel layer as taught by IM in FIG. 1 CH1 and CH2. Hence, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective fling date of the claimed invention to use Bae’s device to modify with known features as described in IM such that the device works efficiently. Regarding claim 2, Bae teaches the device according to claim 1, wherein a lateral dimension of the first channel layer is different from a lateral dimension of the second channel layer ((FIG. 1 has similar dimension). But, it known to people skilled in the industry to make dissimilar dimension in order for the device functionally to work.. Regarding claim 3, Bae teaches the device according to claim 1, wherein a lateral dimension of the first channel layer is equal to a lateral dimension of the second channel layer (FIG. 1). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHEIKH MARUF whose telephone number is (571)270-1903. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8am-6pm EDT. 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, Chad Dicke can be reached on 571-270-7996. 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. /SHEIKH MARUF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 26, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604479
TWO TRANSISTOR CAPACITORLESS MEMORY CELL WITH STACKED THIN-FILM TRANSISTORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604499
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICES WITH EMBEDDED FERROELECTRIC FIELD EFFECT TRANSISTORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604625
DISPLAY PANEL AND DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12575111
BACK-END-OF-LINE 2D MEMORY CELL
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12568639
INSULATED GATE POWER DEVICE WITH EPITAXIALLY GROWN SUBSTRATE LAYERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
87%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+10.3%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 541 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