Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/503,739

SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Nov 07, 2023
Examiner
OJEH, NDUKA E
Art Unit
2892
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
89%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
87%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 89% — above average
89%
Career Allow Rate
686 granted / 769 resolved
+21.2% vs TC avg
Minimal -2% lift
Without
With
+-2.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
794
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
50.5%
+10.5% vs TC avg
§102
28.9%
-11.1% vs TC avg
§112
12.7%
-27.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 769 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 11/7/2023 and 12/14/2023 were filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Specification The abstract is consistent with the requirements set forth in the MPEP 608.01(b). The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE COMPRISING CELL GATE CONDUCTIVE LAYER WITH TOP SURFACE AT DIFFERENT LEVELS 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 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Choi et al. US PGPub. 2021/0118886. Regarding claim 10, Choi teaches a semiconductor device (fig. 11-13) [0021]-[0023], comprising: a substrate (100, fig. 13) [0029] including a first cell active pattern (AP1, fig. 13 and examiner’s fig. 1) [0031] and a dummy active pattern (IP1, fig. 13) [0036]; a cell gate dielectric layer (150, fig. 13) [0090] on the first cell active pattern (AP1) and the dummy active pattern (IP1); a cell gate conductive layer (140, fig. 13) [0090] on the cell gate dielectric layer (150); and a bit-line structure (BL, fig. 13) [0104] electrically connected (via 220 and 105a, fig. 12, [0113]) to the first cell active pattern (AP1), wherein the cell gate conductive layer (140) includes, a dummy overlap section (DOS, examiner’s fig. 1) overlapping the dummy active pattern (IP1), and a cell overlap section (COS, examiner’s fig. 1) overlapping the first cell active pattern (AP1), and wherein a maximum thickness (DT2’, examiner’s fig. 1) of the dummy overlap section (DOS) is greater than a maximum thickness (DTR1’, examiner’s fig. 1) of the cell overlap section (AP1) (Choi et al., fig. 13 and examiner’s fig. 1). PNG media_image1.png 938 1113 media_image1.png Greyscale Examiner’s Fig. 1 Regarding claim 11, Choi teaches the semiconductor device of claim 10, wherein the substrate (100) further includes a second cell active pattern (AP2, examiner’s fig. 1) adjacent to the dummy active pattern (IP1), and the dummy overlap section (DOS) overlaps the second cell active pattern (AP2) (Choi et al., fig. 13 and examiner’s fig. 1). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 12-18 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: the prior arts of record taken alone or in combination neither anticipates nor renders obvious a semiconductor device wherein “the dummy overlap section includes: a first part overlapping the dummy active pattern; and a second part overlapping the second cell active pattern, wherein a lowermost portion of the first part of the dummy overlap section is at a level higher than a level of a lowermost portion of the second part of the dummy overlap section” as recited in claim 12 in combination with the rest of the limitations of claims 10-11; and a semiconductor device wherein “a top surface of the cell overlap section is at a level lower than a level of a top surface of the dummy overlap section, and the semiconductor device further comprises a cell gate capping layer in contact with the top surface of the cell overlap section and the top surface of the dummy overlap section” as recited in claim 18 in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 10. Claims 13-17 are also objected to as allowable for further limiting and depending upon allowable claim 12. Claims 1-9 and 19-20 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior arts of record taken alone or in combination neither anticipates nor renders obvious a semiconductor device wherein “the first cell gate conductive layer includes, a dummy overlap section overlapping the dummy active pattern and the second cell active pattern, and a cell overlap section overlapping the first cell active pattern, and wherein a top surface of the dummy overlap section is at a level higher than a level of a top surface of the cell overlap section” as recited in claim 1; and a semiconductor device comprising “a second cell gate conductive layer on the first cell gate conductive layer” in combination with the limitation wherein “the first cell gate conductive layer includes, a first top surface in contact with the second cell gate conductive layer, and a second top surface in contact with the cell gate capping layer, and wherein the first top surface is at a level lower than a level of the second top surface” as recited in claim 19. Claims 2-9 and 20 are also allowed for further limiting and depending upon allowed claims 1 and 19. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Jung et al. S PGPub. 2018/0226411 teaches a semiconductor device comprising first and second active patterns and a core region with dummy elements. Ryu et al. US PGPub. 2014/0131786 also teaches a semiconductor device comprising first and second active patterns and dummy patterns. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NDUKA E OJEH whose telephone number is (571)270-0291. The examiner can normally be reached M-F; 9am - 5pm.. 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, DREW N RICHARDS can be reached at (571) 272-1736. 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. /NDUKA E OJEH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2892
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 07, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Mar 25, 2026
Interview Requested
Mar 26, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 26, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604615
DISPLAY APPARATUS HAVING PROTRUDING CONDUCTIVE LAYER AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604594
LIGHT-EMITTING STRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598898
ELECTROLUMINESCENT DISPLAY DEVICE HAVING A STRUCTURE FOR IMPROVING LIGHT EXTRACTION EFFICIENCY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588389
TRANSPARENT DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12581799
LIGHT CONTROL MEMBER AND DISPLAY DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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
89%
Grant Probability
87%
With Interview (-2.3%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 769 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