Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/529,854

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR DURATION-BASED SAMPLE PATH ADJUSTMENT

Non-Final OA §101§102
Filed
Dec 05, 2023
Examiner
NIMOX, RAYMOND LONDALE
Art Unit
2857
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Kla Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
70%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 0m
To Grant
82%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 70% — above average
70%
Career Allow Rate
323 granted / 461 resolved
+2.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 0m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
512
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
36.5%
-3.5% vs TC avg
§103
28.1%
-11.9% vs TC avg
§102
21.4%
-18.6% vs TC avg
§112
11.0%
-29.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 461 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §102
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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claim(s) 1-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more (See 2019 Update: Eligibility Guidance). Independent Claim(s) 1, 12, 22 recites receive an initial sample map of a sample, wherein the initial sample map includes an initial path including a set of site points, wherein the initial path includes a first duration and a first distance; generate one or more adjusted sample maps including one or more adjusted paths of the set of site points of the initial sample map, wherein each adjusted path is generated by adjusting an order of arrival of the set of site points based on a cost function; generate a final sample map of the sample based on the one or more adjusted paths, wherein the final sample map includes a final path generated based on the one or more adjusted order of arrivals of the set of site points; and wherein the final path has a second duration and a second distance, wherein at least one of the first duration or the first distance of the initial path are greater than at least one of the second duration or the second distance of the final path [Mathematical Concepts – mathematical relationships; mathematical formulas or equations or mathematical calculation] and/or [Mental Processes - concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion)]. In combination with Independent Claim(s) 1, 12, Claim(s) 2-11, 13-21 recite(s) wherein the set of site points include a set of inspection points on the sample. wherein the set of site points include a set of metrology measurement points on the sample. wherein the set of site points include a set of lithography points on the sample. wherein the order of arrival of the set of site points of the initial path is adjusted by generating a zigzag initial path based on a motion characteristic of the optical sub-system. wherein the order of arrival of the set of site points of the initial path is adjusted by adjusting a location in time of a site point. wherein the order of arrival of the set of site points of the initial path is adjusted by adjusting two or more locations in time of two or more site points, wherein the two or more site points are arranged consecutively in the initial path of the initial sample map. wherein the initial path includes a crossing area formed by two or more site points. wherein the order of arrival of the set of site points of the initial path is adjusted by: removing the crossing area from the initial path by adjusting a location in time of the two or more site points forming the crossing area. generate an initial rough path by adjusting one of an x-axis or a y-axis of the initial sample map. wherein the cost function is based duration [Mathematical Concepts – mathematical relationships; mathematical formulas or equations or mathematical calculation] and/or [Mental Processes - concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion)]. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application: Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP § 2106.05(f)) (i.e. a controller including one or more processors configured to execute program instructions causing the one or more processors to: direct an optical sub-system to perform one or more operations on the sample based on the final sample map, wherein the optical sub-system performs the one or more operations by following the final path of the set of site points on the sample; an optical sub-system; and a controller communicatively coupled to the optical sub-system, the controller including one or more processors configured to execute program instructions causing the one or more processors to:); Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (see MPEP § 2106.05(g)) (i.e. generic data acquisition/output); or Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP § 2106.05(h)) (i.e. direct an optical sub-system to perform one or more operations on the sample based on the final sample map, wherein the optical sub-system performs the one or more operations by following the final path of the set of site points on the sample; an optical sub-system; and a controller communicatively coupled to the optical sub-system, the controller including one or more processors configured to execute program instructions causing the one or more processors to: wherein the optical sub-system comprises an inspection sub-system; wherein the optical sub-system comprises a metrology sub-system; wherein the optical sub-system comprises a lithography sub-system). The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because looking at the additional elements as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. The additional elements simply append well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, e.g., a claim to an abstract idea requiring no more than a generic computer to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known to the industry, as discussed in Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. at 2359-60, 110 USPQ2d at 1984 (see MPEP § 2106.05(d)) (i.e. See Alice Corp. and cited references for evidence of additional elements (i.e., generic computer structure; an optical sub-system comprising an inspection sub-system, a metrology sub-system, or a lithography sub-system). 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. Claim(s) 1-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by TAKAGI ET AL. (US 20160019682 A1) (hereinafter “TAKAGI”). With respect to Claim(s) 1, 22, TAKAGI teaches an inspection method/device to reduce the amount of time it takes to collect images of defects and the BRI of: a controller including one or more processors (See, e.g., Fig(s). 1, 2) configured to execute program instructions causing the one or more processors to: receive an initial sample map of a sample, wherein the initial sample map includes an initial path including a set of site points, wherein the initial path includes a first duration and a first distance (See, e.g., Fig(s). 4, 6-9, 11-17); generate one or more adjusted sample maps including one or more adjusted paths of the set of site points of the initial sample map, wherein each adjusted path is generated by adjusting an order of arrival of the set of site points based on a cost function (See, e.g., Fig(s). 4, 6-9, 11-17); generate a final sample map of the sample based on the one or more adjusted paths, wherein the final sample map includes a final path generated based on the one or more adjusted order of arrivals of the set of site points (See, e.g., Fig(s). 4, 6-9, 11-17); and direct an optical sub-system to perform one or more operations on the sample based on the final sample map, wherein the optical sub-system performs the one or more operations by following the final path of the set of site points on the sample, wherein the final path has a second duration and a second distance, wherein at least one of the first duration or the first distance of the initial path are greater than at least one of the second duration or the second distance of the final path (See, e.g., Fig(s). 4, 6-9, 11-17). With respect to Claim(s) 12, TAKAGI teaches an inspection method/device to reduce the amount of time it takes to collect images of defects and the BRI of: an optical sub-system (See, e.g., Fig(s). 1, 2); and a controller communicatively coupled to the optical sub-system, the controller including one or more processors (See, e.g., Fig(s). 1, 2) configured to execute program instructions causing the one or more processors to: receive an initial sample map of a sample, wherein the initial sample map includes an initial path including a set of site points, wherein the initial path of the initial sample map has a first duration and a first distance (See, e.g., Fig(s). 4, 6-9, 11-17); generate one or more adjusted sample maps including one or more adjusted paths of the set of site points of the initial sample map, wherein each adjusted path is generated by adjusting an order of arrival of the set of site points based on a cost function; generate a final sample map of the sample based on the one or more adjusted paths, wherein the final sample map includes a final path generated based on the one or more adjusted order of arrivals of the set of site points (See, e.g., Fig(s). 4, 6-9, 11-17); and direct the optical sub-system to perform one or more operations on the sample based on the final sample map, wherein the optical sub-system performs the one or more operations by following the final path of the set of site points on the sample, wherein the final path has a second duration and a second distance, wherein at least one of the first duration or the first distance of the initial path are greater than at least one of the second duration or the second distance of the final path (See, e.g., Fig(s). 4, 6-9, 11-17). With respect to Claim(s) 2, 13, TAKAGI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s). TAKAGI further teaches the BRI of: wherein the optical sub-system comprises an inspection sub-system (See, e.g., Fig(s). 1, 2), wherein the set of site points include a set of inspection points on the sample (See, e.g., Fig(s). 4, 6-9, 11-17). With respect to Claim(s) 3, 14, TAKAGI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s). TAKAGI further teaches the BRI of: wherein the optical sub-system comprises a metrology sub-system (See, e.g., Fig(s). 1, 2), wherein the set of site points include a set of metrology measurement points on the sample (See, e.g., Fig(s). 4, 6-9, 11-17). With respect to Claim(s) 4, 15, TAKAGI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s). TAKAGI further teaches the BRI of: wherein the optical sub-system comprises a lithography sub-system (See, e.g., Fig(s). 1, 2), wherein the set of site points include a set of lithography points on the sample (See, e.g., Fig(s). 4, 6-9, 11-17). With respect to Claim(s) 5, TAKAGI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s). TAKAGI further teaches the BRI of: wherein the order of arrival of the set of site points of the initial path is adjusted by generating a zigzag initial path based on a motion characteristic of the optical sub-system (See, e.g., Fig(s). 4, 6-9, 11-17). With respect to Claim(s) 6, 16, TAKAGI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s). TAKAGI further teaches the BRI of: wherein the order of arrival of the set of site points of the initial path is adjusted by adjusting a location in time of a site point (See, e.g., Fig(s). 4, 6-9, 11-17). With respect to Claim(s) 7, 17, TAKAGI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s). TAKAGI further teaches the BRI of: wherein the order of arrival of the set of site points of the initial path is adjusted by adjusting two or more locations in time of two or more site points, (See, e.g., Fig(s). 4, 6-9, 11-17) wherein the two or more site points are arranged consecutively in the initial path of the initial sample map (See, e.g., Fig(s). 4, 6-9, 11-17). With respect to Claim(s) 8, 18, TAKAGI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s). TAKAGI further teaches the BRI of: wherein the initial path includes a crossing area formed by two or more site points (See, e.g., Fig(s). 4, 6-9, 11-17). With respect to Claim(s) 9, 19, TAKAGI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s). TAKAGI further teaches the BRI of: wherein the order of arrival of the set of site points of the initial path is adjusted by: removing the crossing area from the initial path by adjusting a location in time of the two or more site points forming the crossing area (See, e.g., Fig(s). 4, 6-9, 11-17). With respect to Claim(s) 10, 20, TAKAGI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s). TAKAGI further teaches the BRI of: wherein the program instructions are further configured to cause the one or more processors to: generate an initial rough path by adjusting one of an x-axis or a y-axis of the initial sample map (See, e.g., Fig(s). 3). With respect to Claim(s) 11, 21, TAKAGI teaches the BRI of the parent claim(s). TAKAGI further teaches the BRI of: wherein the cost function is based duration (See, e.g., Fig(s). 7, 13). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. MANASSEN ET AL. (US 20210335638 A1) teaches a measurement path optimization module configured to derive optimized wafer measurement paths for metrology measurements of the wafers that correspond to respective derived and updated dynamic sampling plan (See, e.g., ¶ 0023). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAYMOND NIMOX whose telephone number is (469)295-9226. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 10am-8pm CT. 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, ANDREW SCHECHTER can be reached at (571) 272-2302. 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. RAYMOND NIMOX Primary Examiner Art Unit 2857 /RAYMOND L NIMOX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 05, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601251
RIG OPERATIONS INFORMATION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596768
WAFER PATTERN IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12571852
BATTERY LIFE PREDICTION APPARATUS AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12560919
Method of Determining at least one tolerance band limit value for a technical variable under test and corresponding calculation device
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12560657
Battery State of Health Estimation Method, Battery Management Apparatus, and Battery Management System
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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
70%
Grant Probability
82%
With Interview (+11.4%)
3y 0m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 461 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