Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/435,218

SILICON CARBIDE SINGLE CRYSTAL AND MANUFACTURING METHOD OF SILICON CARBIDE SINGLE CRYSTAL

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 07, 2024
Examiner
KUNEMUND, ROBERT M
Art Unit
1714
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Mirise Technologies Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
1065 granted / 1301 resolved
+16.9% vs TC avg
Moderate +14% lift
Without
With
+14.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
1338
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.5%
-39.5% vs TC avg
§103
60.4%
+20.4% vs TC avg
§102
11.6%
-28.4% vs TC avg
§112
9.3%
-30.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1301 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION 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 . 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jp 6678437. The Jp 6678437 reference teaches a method and product of doped silicon carbide single crystal, note entire translation. A seed crystal is placed on a pedestal in a deposition chamber, note, figure 5. Then source gas for silicon carbide is supplied in the chamber with a carrier gas and a dopant gas. The dopant gas can be nitrogen, note para 0014. The nitrogen gas is pulsed during the deposition so as to affect the specific resistance on the growing silicon carbide, note para 0014 and 0013. The sole difference between the instant claim and the prior art is the specific dopant profile, increasing and decreasing. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to before the filing date of the instant invention modify the Jp 6678437 reference to grow and have a silicon carbide single crystal with an increasing and decreasing specific resistance in order to have the properties needed for further device use as the reference clearly sets forth that nitrogen amounts due materially affect the specific resistance and that the amount of nitrogen in the chamber can be varied as needed. Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jp 6678437. The Jp 6678437 reference is relied on for the same reasons as stated, supra, and differs from the instant claim in the percent change of specific resistance. . However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to before the filing date of the instant invention modify the Jp 6678437 reference to have a percentage change range of the specific resistance in order to have a set uniform dopant profile. Claim(s) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jp 6678437. The Jp 6678437 reference is relied on for the same reasons as stated, supra, and differs from the instant claim in the repetition distance. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to before the filing date of the instant invention modify the Jp 6678437 reference to have a set distance for the repetition of the resistance change in order to create multiple platforms for further use. Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jp 6678437. The Jp 6678437 reference is relied on for the same reasons as stated, supra, and differs from the instant claim in the specific resistance change done in the facet region. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to before the filing date of the instant invention modify the Jp 6678437 reference to use the facet region to change the specific resistance in order to have a specific area for a change in dopant amounts. Claim(s) 6 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jp 6678437. The Jp 6678437 reference is relied on for the same reasons as stated, supra, and differs from the instant claim in the placement of the seed crystal in the hallow of the pedestal. However, in the absence of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to before the filing date of the instant invention to determine through routine experimentation the optimum, operable placement place of the seed and pedestal type in the Jp 6678437 reference in order to securely place the seed so as have no vibrations and growth only on one exposed surface growing a uniform crystal. Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jp 6678437. The Jp 6678437 reference is relied on for the same reasons as stated, supra, and differs from the instant claim in the changes of the conditions during growth. However, in the absence of unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to before the filing date of the instant invention to determine through routine experimentation the optimum, operable condition changes, temperature, pressure and flows in the Jp 6678437 reference in order to better affect changes to the dopant profile and the specific resistance. Examiner’s Remarks The remaining references are merely cited as showing the state of the art in silicon carbide growth with a dopant. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT M KUNEMUND whose telephone number is (571)272-1464. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am to 4:30 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, Kaj Olsen can be reached at 571-272-1344. 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. RMK /ROBERT M KUNEMUND/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1714
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 07, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 06, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 07, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601087
HEAT-RESISTANT MEMBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12601083
PROCESS FOR SYTHESIZING SPINEL-COATED SINGLE-CRYSTAL CATHODE ACTIVE MATERIALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595588
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING NITRIDE SEMICONDUCTOR SUBSTRATE, NITRIDE SEMICONDUCTOR SUBSTRATE, AND LAMINATE STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590384
THERMAL STABLE, ONE-DIMENSIONAL HEXAGONAL-PHASE VANADIUM SULFIDE NANOWIRES AND METHODS FOR PREPARING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583756
RECOVERING A CAUSTIC SOLUTION VIA CALCIUM CARBONATE CRYSTAL AGGREGATES
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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
82%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+14.2%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1301 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