Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/471,260

INTEGRATED CIRCUIT DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Sep 20, 2023
Examiner
HALL, VICTORIA KATHLEEN
Art Unit
2897
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 6m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
678 granted / 811 resolved
+15.6% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
846
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
38.7%
-1.3% vs TC avg
§102
19.9%
-20.1% vs TC avg
§112
31.8%
-8.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 811 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Drawings The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 102B in Figures 6A, 7A, 8A, 9, 10, 11A, 12A, and 13A. PNG media_image1.png 1172 1732 media_image1.png Greyscale Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. The drawings are objected to because of the following informalities: Delete the extraneous 172 in Figure 2B. PNG media_image2.png 567 461 media_image2.png Greyscale Add reference numbers 130S1, 130S2 to Figure 2D. See applicants’ specification, page 7, paragraph 34. PNG media_image3.png 513 564 media_image3.png Greyscale Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Page 7, paragraph 32, line 3: Change “F1on” to “F1 on”. Page 11, paragraph 48, line 3: Change “130is” to “130 is”. Page 13, paragraph 56, last line of the page: Change “include” to “includes” for subject-verb agreement. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Objections Claims 1-11 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, line 6: Change “pair of gate lines n” to “pair of gate lines”. Compare with claim 1, line 3. Claim 1, line 9: After “each” add “insulating spacer structure”. Claim 1, line 17: After “each” add “insulating spacer structure”. Claims 2-11 are objected to for depending from objected-to base claim 1. Claim 2, line 1: After “each” add “insulating spacer structure”. Claim 8, line 1: After “each” add “insulating spacer structure”. Claim 20, line 25: After “each” add “insulating spacer structure”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 5 and 20 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. Regarding claim 5, which depends from claim 1: Claim 5 requires “wherein the second spacer portions respectively included in the pair of insulating spacer structures are integrally connected to each other.” (emphasis added). The use of this term does not make sense in this context. The term “respectively” is used in comparing two lists of an equal number of items by matching the first item of the first list with the first item of the second list, and so on. Here, there is no apparent list. Because the use of this term does not make sense in the context of this claim, claim 5 is rejected as indefinite. Regarding claim 20: This claim requires: wherein the plurality of insulating spacer structures include a plurality of first spacer portions, a plurality of second spacer portions, and a plurality of spacer corner portions, wherein the plurality of first spacer portions cover sidewalls of each of the pair of gate lines, the plurality of second spacer portions are integrally connected to the plurality of first spacer portions and cover a portion of the source/drain region, and the plurality of spacer corner portions are interposed between the plurality of first spacer portions and the plurality of second spacer portions and fill corner spaces defined by the pair of gate lines and the source/drain region…. (emphasis added). The language, “wherein the plurality of first spacer portions cover sidewalls of each of the pair of gate lines” is confusing because the language can be interpreted as all the defined first spacer portions cover each gate line when, from the disclosure, there is a one-to-one correspondence between first spacer portions and the gate lines. Because the language is confusing, claim 20 is rejected as indefinite. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (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. Claims 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 15, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lin, U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2021/0066473, Figures 1-2I. PNG media_image4.png 475 654 media_image4.png Greyscale PNG media_image5.png 1263 1112 media_image5.png Greyscale PNG media_image6.png 1262 740 media_image6.png Greyscale PNG media_image7.png 986 968 media_image7.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1: Lin Figures 1-2I disclose an integrated circuit device, comprising: a fin-type active region (102F) that extends along a first lateral direction on a substrate (102); a pair of gate lines (dummy gates (110)/replacement gate structures (140)) that extend along a second lateral direction on the fin-type active region (102F), wherein the second lateral direction intersects the first lateral direction; a source/drain region (source/drain regions (112); source/drain structures (130)) disposed on the fin-type active region (102F) and interposed between the pair of gate lines […] (110/140); and a pair of insulating spacer structures (121, 121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) that cover the pair of gate lines (110/140) the source/drain region (112, 130), wherein each of the pair of insulating spacer structures (121, 121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) comprises: a first spacer portion (121) that covers a sidewall of one gate line (110/140) of the pair of gate lines (110/140), wherein the first spacer portion (121) extends along the second lateral direction; a second spacer portion (121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) integrally connected to the first spacer portion (121), wherein the second spacer portion (121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) protrudes in the first lateral direction and covers a partial region of a sidewall of the source/drain region (112/130); and a spacer corner portion (portion between first spacer portion (121) and second spacer portion (121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) that fills corner spaces defined by the one gate line (110/140) and the source/drain region (112/140) between the first spacer portion (121) and the second spacer portion (121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)), wherein each of the pair of insulating spacer structures (121, 121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) has a single film structure that includes a silicon oxycarbide (SiOC) film doped with about 0 at % to about 5 at % of nitrogen atoms. Lin specification ¶¶ 19-68. This rejection relies on a silicon oxycarbide (SiOC) film with 0% nitrogen atoms. Id. ¶ 38. Regarding claim 3, which depends from claim 1: Lin discloses the source/drain region (112/130) includes a first portion that has a greatest width in the second lateral direction, and the first portion comprises facet-free sidewall portions on both sides in the second lateral direction, wherein each facet-free sidewall portion extends in a vertical direction, and the first portion of the source/drain region (112/130) does not overlap the insulating spacer structure (125) in the vertical direction. See, e.g. Lin Figure 2E-2. Regarding claim 5, which depends from claim 1: Lin discloses the second spacer portions (121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) respectively included in the pair of insulating spacer structures (121, 121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) are integrally connected to each other. See Lin specification ¶ 40. Regarding claim 7, which depends from claim 1: Lin discloses each of the sidewalls of the source/drain region (112, 130) in the second lateral direction includes a first crystal facet that includes a surface inclined in a direction toward the substrate (102), a second crystal facet that includes a surface inclined in a direction away from the substrate, and a facet-free sidewall portion that extends in a vertical direction, and the first crystal facet and the second crystal facet are spaced apart from each other in the vertical direction with the facet-free sidewall portion interposed therebetween. See, e.g., Lin Figure 2E-2. Regarding claim 8, which depends from claim 1: Lin discloses each of the pair of insulating spacer structures (121, 121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) includes a SiOC film that does not include nitrogen atoms. See Lin specification ¶ 38 (SiOC). Regarding claim 10, which depends from claim 1: Lin discloses a device isolation film (104) that covers both sidewalls of the fin-type active region (102F), wherein a lowermost surface of the source/drain region (130) is coplanar with an uppermost surface of the device isolation film (104). See, e.g., Lin Figure 2E-2. Regarding claim 12: Lin Figures 1-2I disclose an integrated circuit device, comprising: a fin-type active region (102F) that extends along a first lateral direction on a substrate (102); at least one nanosheet (114S) that is spaced apart from a fin top surface of the fin-type active region (102F) in a vertical direction, wherein the at least one nanosheet (114S) faces the fin top surface of the fin-type active region (102F); a gate line (dummy gates (110)/replacement gate structures (140)) that surrounds the at least one nanosheet (114S) on the fin-type active region (102F), wherein the gate line (110/140) extends along a second lateral direction, wherein the second lateral direction intersects the first lateral direction; a source/drain region (source/drain regions (112); source/drain structures (130)) disposed on the fin-type active region (102F) adjacent to the gate line (110/140), wherein the source/drain region (112/130) is in contact with the at least one nanosheet (114S); an insulating spacer structure (121, 121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) that covers a sidewall of the gate line (110, 140) and a portion of the source/drain region (112, 130); and a device isolation film (104) that covers both sidewalls of the fin-type active region (102F), wherein the insulating spacer structure (121, 121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) comprises: a first spacer portion (121) that covers the sidewall of the gate line (110, 140) and extends along the second lateral direction; a second spacer (121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) portion integrally connected to the first spacer portion (121), wherein the second spacer portion (121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) protrudes in the first lateral direction and covers a partial region of a sidewall of the source/drain region (112, 130); and a spacer corner portion (portion between first spacer portion (121) and second spacer portion (121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) that fills a corner space defined by the gate line (110, 140) and the source/drain region (112, 130) between the first spacer portion (121) and the second spacer portion (121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)), wherein the insulating spacer structure (121, 121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) has a single film structure that includes a silicon oxycarbide (SiOC) film doped with about 0 at % to about 5 at % of nitrogen atoms. Lin specification ¶¶ 19-68. This rejection relies on a silicon oxycarbide (SiOC) film with 0% nitrogen atoms. Id. ¶ 38. Regarding claim 15, which depends from claim 12: Lin discloses the source/drain region (112, 130) includes a first portion that has a greatest width in the second lateral direction, and the first portion includes facet-free sidewall portions on both sides in the second lateral direction, wherein each facet-free sidewall portion extends in the vertical direction, and the first portion of the source/drain region (112, 130) does not overlap the second spacer portion (121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) of the insulating spacer structure (121, 121 portion of fin sidewall spacer (125)) in the vertical direction. See, e.g., Lin Figure 2E-2. Regarding claim 18, which depends from claim 12: Lin discloses each of the sidewalls of the source/drain region (112, 130) in the second lateral direction includes a first crystal facet, a facet-free sidewall portion, and a second crystal facet that are sequentially arranged in a direction away from the fin-type active region, the first crystal facet includes a surface inclined in a direction toward the substrate (102), the facet-free sidewall portion includes a surface that extends in a vertical direction, and the second crystal facet includes a surface inclined in a direction away from the substrate (102). See id. 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 6 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin, and further in view of Dube, U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2017/0178962, Figure 2B. PNG media_image8.png 252 371 media_image8.png Greyscale Regarding claim 6, which depends from claim 1: Lin Figure 2E-2 discloses each of the sidewalls of the source/drain region (112, 130) in the second lateral direction includes at least one crystal facet and a facet-free sidewall portion, but Lin does not disclose that a height of the facet-free sidewall portion in a vertical direction is greater than a height of the at least one crystal facet in a vertical direction. Dube Figure 2B, directed to similar subject matter, discloses each of the sidewalls of the source/drain region (214) in the second lateral direction includes at least one crystal facet and a facet-free sidewall portion, and a height of the facet-free sidewall portion in a vertical direction is greater than a height of the at least one crystal facet in a vertical direction. Dube specification ¶ 24. (For purposes of this rejection, the Office interprets “at least one crystal facet” in Dube as either the facet facing toward the substrate or the face facing away from the substrate.) One having ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date would be motivated to modify Lin to include the Dube source/drain region design because the modification would have involved the substitution of an equivalent known for the same purpose. Regarding claim 13, which depends from claim 12: Lin Figure 2E-2 discloses that the source/drain region (112, 130) includes a first portion that has a greatest width in the second lateral direction, wherein the first portion includes a facet-free sidewall portion that extends in the vertical direction, but Lin does not disclose that a length of the facet-free sidewall portion in the vertical direction is greater than ½ of the total length of the source/drain region in the vertical direction. Dube Figure 2B, directed to similar subject matter, discloses the source/drain region (214) includes a first portion that has a greatest width in the second lateral direction, wherein the first portion includes a facet-free sidewall portion that extends in the vertical direction, and a length of the facet-free sidewall portion in the vertical direction is approximately ½ of the total length of the source/drain region (214) in the vertical direction. Dube specification ¶ 24. One having ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date would be motivated to modify Lin to include the Dube source/drain region design because the modification would have involved the substitution of an equivalent known for the same purpose. As for the requirement that a length of the facet-free sidewall portion in the vertical direction is greater than ½ of the total length of the source/drain region in the vertical direction, a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985). See MPEP § 2144.05(I). Because “approximately half” and “greater than half” are close, claim 13 is an obvious variant over the combination. Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin, and further in view of Tan, U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2020/0105620, Figures 1, 8A-9B, and 11A-19B. PNG media_image9.png 455 512 media_image9.png Greyscale PNG media_image10.png 1094 658 media_image10.png Greyscale PNG media_image11.png 1438 1105 media_image11.png Greyscale PNG media_image12.png 1412 1103 media_image12.png Greyscale PNG media_image13.png 952 1106 media_image13.png Greyscale Regarding claim 9, which depends from claim 1: Lin is silent as to the composition of its insulating spacer structures. Tan, directed to similar subject matter, Tan specification ¶¶ 19-64, discloses its insulating spacer structures (78/80) include about 5-18 at% carbon, 40-46 at% silicon, and 45-50 at% oxygen, Tan specification ¶ 41, which overlaps the claim requirement of about 2 at % to about 40 at % of carbon atoms, about 30 at % to about 60 at % of silicon atoms, and about 40 at % to about 70 at % of oxygen atoms. Claim 9 requirement Tan reference ¶ 41 Silicon, at% 30-60 40-46 Oxygen, at % 40-70 45-50 Carbon, at% 2-40 5-18 One having ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date would be motivated to modify Lin to include the Tan SiOC material composition, because the modification would have involved a selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use. Regarding claim 19, which depends from claim 12: Lin is silent as to the composition of its insulating spacer structures. Tan, directed to similar subject matter, Tan specification ¶¶ 19-64, discloses its insulating spacer structures (78/80) include a SiOC film that does not include nitrogen atoms, wherein the SiOC film includes about 5-18 at% carbon, 40-46 at% silicon, and 45-50 at% oxygen, Tan specification ¶ 41, which overlaps the claim requirement of a SiOC film that does not include nitrogen atoms, wherein the SiOC film includes about 2 at % to about 40 at % of carbon atoms, about 30 at % to about 60 at % of silicon atoms, and about 40 at % to about 70 at % of oxygen atoms. Claim 19 requirement Tan reference ¶ 41 Silicon, at% 30-60 40-46 Oxygen, at % 40-70 45-50 Carbon, at% 2-40 5-18 One having ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date would be motivated to modify Lin to include the Tan SiOC material composition, because the modification would have involved a selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin, and further in view of Wang, U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2020/0126868, Figures 1 and 8A-9E. PNG media_image14.png 419 605 media_image14.png Greyscale PNG media_image15.png 418 946 media_image15.png Greyscale PNG media_image16.png 357 637 media_image16.png Greyscale PNG media_image17.png 456 985 media_image17.png Greyscale PNG media_image18.png 396 670 media_image18.png Greyscale Regarding claim 11, which depends from claim 1: Lin discloses a device isolation film (103, 104) that covers both sidewalls of the fin-type active region (102F); and an insulating liner (131) that covers the source/drain region (112, 130) and the device isolation film (103, 140), and the insulating liner (131) is in contact with the fin-type active region (102F), the source/drain region (112, 130), and an interface between the fin-type active region (102F) and the source/drain region (112, 130). Lin specification ¶¶ 21, 22, 26-28, 41, 46-50. Lin is silent as to whether the fin-type active region includes a recess that has a lowermost surface at a vertical level lower than a vertical level of a fin top surface of the fin-type active region, the source/drain region includes a crystal facet that includes a surface inclined toward the substrate from the lowermost surface of the recess, and the insulating liner is in contact with the fin-type active region, the source/drain region, and an interface between the fin-type active region and the source/drain region in a region adjacent to the lowermost surface of the recess. Wang, directed to similar subject matter, discloses a device isolation film (56) that covers both sidewalls of the fin-type active region (52); and an insulating liner (98) that covers the source/drain region (92) and the device isolation film (56), wherein the fin-type active region (52) includes a recess (not shown, but disclosed in Wang specification, paragraphs 23, 38) that has a lowermost surface at a vertical level lower than a vertical level of a fin top surface of the fin-type active region (52), the source/drain region (92) includes a crystal facet that includes a surface inclined toward the substrate (50) from the lowermost surface of the recess, and the insulating liner (98) is in contact with the second spacer (86, 88) adjacent the fin-type active region (52), the source/drain region (92), and an interface between the second spacer (86, 88) adjacent the fin-type active region (52) and the source/drain region (92) in a region adjacent to the lowermost surface of the recess. One having ordinary skill in the art at a time before the effective filing date would be motivated to modify Lin to include the Wang recess design because the modification would have involved the substitution of an equivalent known for the same purpose. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2, 4, 14, 16, 17, and 20 are 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: With regard to claim 2: The claim has been found allowable because the prior art of record does not disclose “wherein, in each of the pair of insulating spacer structures, the second spacer portion has a planar shape of which a width in the second lateral direction that gradually decreases with increasing distance in the first lateral direction from the one gate line”, in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim. With regard to claim 4: The claim has been found allowable because the prior art of record does not disclose “wherein each of a thickness of the spacer corner portion in the first lateral direction and a thickness of the spacer corner portion in the second lateral direction is greater than a thickness of the first spacer portion in the first lateral direction”, in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim. With regard to claim 14: The claim has been found allowable because the prior art of record does not disclose “wherein the second spacer portion has a planar shape of which a width in the second lateral direction gradually decreases with increasing distance from the first spacer portion”, in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim. With regard to claim 16: The claim has been found allowable because the prior art of record does not disclose “wherein each of a thickness of the spacer corner portion in the first lateral direction and a thickness of the spacer corner portion in the second lateral direction is greater than a thickness of the first spacer portion in the first lateral direction”, in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim. With regard to claim 17: The claim has been found allowable because the prior art of record does not disclose “the first portion of the source/drain region overlaps the second spacer portion of the insulating spacer structure in the vertical direction”, in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim. With regard to claim 20: The claim has been found allowable because the prior art of record does not disclose “wherein a thickness of each of the plurality of spacer corner portions in the first lateral direction and a thickness of each of the plurality of spacer corner portions in the second lateral direction are each greater than a thickness of each of the plurality of first spacer portions in the first lateral direction”, in combination with the remaining limitations of the claim. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTORIA KATHLEEN HALL whose telephone number is (571)270-7567. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8 a.m.-5 p.m. 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, Fernando Toledo can be reached at 571-272-1867. 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. /Victoria K. Hall/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2897
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 20, 2023
Application Filed
Dec 24, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112
Mar 03, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 03, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604682
METHODS FOR PATTERNING A SEMICONDUCTOR SUBSTRATE USING METALATE SALT IONIC LIQUID CRYSTALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12588559
DISPLAY PANEL, TILED DISPLAY DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME, AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12575400
POWER PLANES AND PASS-THROUGH VIAS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12557503
Display Substrate and Preparation Method Therefor, and Display Apparatus
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12557508
LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE, DISPLAY DEVICE, IMAGING DEVICE, ELECTRONIC DEVICE, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE
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
84%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+19.1%)
2y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 811 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