Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/479,211

MATERIAL FOR METAL LINE, METAL LINE IN SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND METHOD FOR FORMING METAL LINE IN SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Oct 02, 2023
Examiner
ZHENG, LOIS L
Art Unit
1733
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Huizhou Top Metal Material Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
68%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 9m
To Grant
81%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 68% — above average
68%
Career Allow Rate
500 granted / 739 resolved
+2.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 9m
Avg Prosecution
41 currently pending
Career history
780
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
55.2%
+15.2% vs TC avg
§102
20.9%
-19.1% vs TC avg
§112
13.4%
-26.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 739 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of invention Group I, claims 1-8 in the reply filed on 12/29/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 9-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention Groups II-III, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/29/2025. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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. Claim(s) 1-3 and 6-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ueda et al. US 5,541,007(Ueda). Ueda teaches an Al alloy that applies to the claimed material as follows: Al alloy material Instant application Ueda (broad) (abstract) Ueda (Sample 4 Table 1) Aluminum (Al) 99-99.8 wt% Balance Balance Copper (Cu) 0.1-0.5 wt% 0.01-3.0 wt% 0.50 wt% Scandium (Sc) 0.1-0.5 wt% 0.01-1.0 wt% 0.20 wt% Regarding claims 1 and 3, the Al amount in Sample 4 of Ueda(Table 1) is calculated to be 99.3 wt%. Therefore, the Al alloy in Sample 4 as taught by Ueda anticipates the claimed material having the claimed alloy composition. Additionally, the language “for a metal line in a semiconductor device” merely states the intended use for the claimed material, and does not provide any further limitations that distinguish the claimed material from the Al alloy in Sample 4 of Ueda. Regarding claim 2, the amount of copper in Sample 4 of Ueda is greater than the amount of scandium as claimed. Regarding claim 6, the instant claim recites a change rate calculated based on the material grain size before and after a heat treatment. However, this limitation merely quantifies the percentage grain size change, it does not contain further limitations that materially differentiates the claimed Al alloy material from the Al alloy material of Ueda. Regarding claim 7, the instant claim recites how grain size of the claimed material is measured, which does not provide further limitation that materially distinguishes the claimed Al alloy material from the Al alloy material of Ueda. Regarding claim 8, the instant claim recites the grain size before the heat treatment, which is not directed to the final Al alloy product, therefore, does not materially distinguishes the claimed Al alloy material from the Al alloy material of Ueda. 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. Claim(s) 4-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueda. The teachings of Ueda are discussed in section 5 above. Regarding claim 4, the ratio of Cu to Sc calculated based on the broader scope of the Al alloy composition is 1:1 (ratio of [lower limits of 0.01wt% Cu to 0.01 wt% of Sc] to 3:1[higher limits of 3.0wt% Cu to 1.0 wt% of Sc]), which is equivalent to 33-100 parts by weight of Sc per 100 parts by weight of Cu in the Al alloy of Ueda. The implicit amount of Sc per 100 parts by weight of Cu in the Al alloy composition of Ueda would have encompasses the claimed 50-70 parts by weight of Sc per 100 parts by weight of Cu. Therefore, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05(I). The selection of claimed amount of Sc per 100 parts by weight of Cu in the Al alloy composition from the amount of Sc per 100 parts by weight of Cu in the Al alloy composition of Ueda would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art since the amount of Sc per 100 parts by weight of Cu in the Al alloy composition of Ueda teach the same utility, absent persuasive evidence that the claimed particular 50-70 parts by weight of Sc per 100 parts by weight of Cu in the Al alloy composition is significant. Regarding claim 5, the broader scope of Ueda includes an Al alloy composition that encompasses the claimed Al99.5Cu0.3Sc0.2. Therefore, a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05(I). The selection of claimed Al alloy composition from the Al alloy composition of Ueda would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art since the Al alloy composition of Ueda teach the same utility, absent persuasive evidence that the claimed particular Al alloy composition is significant. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LOIS L ZHENG whose telephone number is (571)272-1248. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:15-4:45. 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, Keith Hendricks can be reached at 571-272-1401. 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. LOIS ZHENG Primary Examiner Art Unit 1733 /LOIS L ZHENG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1733
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 02, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 19, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 30, 2026
Interview Requested
Apr 09, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 10, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12584185
COLD-ROLLED STEEL SHEET HAVING EXCELLENT THERMAL-RESISTANCE AND MOLDABILITY, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12545978
ALUMINUM ALLOY AND COMPONENT PART PREPARED THEREFROM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12539534
ALUMINUM COATED BLANK AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12522939
SEALED ANODIZATION LAYER
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 13, 2026
Patent 12503742
CASE-HARDENED STEEL PART FOR USE IN AERONAUTICS
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
68%
Grant Probability
81%
With Interview (+13.4%)
3y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 739 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