Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/539,556

GATE STACK FOR FIELD EFFECT TRANSISTORS

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Dec 14, 2023
Examiner
HENRY, CALEB E
Art Unit
2818
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Zinite Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 5m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allow Rate
1052 granted / 1217 resolved
+18.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
1265
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
49.8%
+9.8% vs TC avg
§102
36.3%
-3.7% vs TC avg
§112
11.2%
-28.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1217 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
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 . Specification 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. 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. Claim 9 recites the limitation "the gradient region". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. 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)(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) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tsai (20230369439). PNG media_image1.png 576 782 media_image1.png Greyscale Regarding claim 1, Tsai teaches an field effect transistor comprising: a source (par. 92); a drain (par. 92); a semiconductor (par. 92) extending between the source and the drain; a gate (par. 92) located over the semiconductor; and a gate stack (par. 92) formed between the semiconductor material and the gate, the gate stack including a dielectric layer (fig. 8D: 12) abutting the semiconductor material, and a diffusion barrier layer (fig. 8D: 10) abutting the gate, the gate stack including a gradient region between the dielectric layer and the diffusion barrier (please see fig. 8D which shows the oxygen gradient region between 10 and 12) wherein the stoichiometry of the materials in the gradient region changes from the stoichiometry of the dielectric material to the stoichiometry of the diffusion barrier (please see fig. 8D which shows the oxygen gradient region between 10 and 12). Regarding claim 2, Tsai teaches an transistor of claim 1 wherein the change in stoichiometry in the gradient region is substantially monotonic (please see fig. 8D). Regarding claim 3, Tsai teaches an transistor of claim 1 wherein the diffusion barrier also serves as an adhesion layer for the gate (the material taught in par. 111 are known to have adhesive properties). Regarding claim 4, Tsai teaches an transistor of claim 1 wherein the materials in the gradient region have stoichiometric ratios in the form of XOiNj where X is the base material, Oi is the oxygen content and Nj is the nitrogen content (par. 111). Regarding claim 5, Tsai teaches an transistor of claim 4 wherein the base material X is hafnium (par. 111). Regarding claim 6, Tsai teaches an transistor of claim 4 wherein the base material X is zirconium (par. 111). Regarding claim 7, Tsai teaches an transistor of claim 1 wherein the semiconductor is tin oxide (par. 117). Regarding claim 8, Tsai teaches an transistor of claim 1 wherein the semiconductor is IGZO (par. 117). Claim(s) 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by O'Meara (20070077701). Regarding claim 9, O'Meara teaches an gate stack for use in a field effect transistor (par. 16) having a source (par. 116: 113), a drain (par. 116: 114) a semiconductor (par. 116: 112) connecting the source and the drain and having a gate (par. 116: 117) located over the semiconductor, comprising: a dielectric material (fig. 3C: 304b) abutting the semiconductor; a diffusion barrier (fig. 3C: 304a) abutting the gate; and a gradient material between the dielectric material and the diffusion barrier, the gradient region comprising a graded transition between the dielectric material and the diffusion barrier to reduce stressed between the dielectric material and the diffusion barrier (par. 24-41 teaches 304a is expected to act as a good diffusion barrier between the gate electrode material and the non-etched portion 304b). NOTE: Please see 112 rejection above. Regarding claim 10, O'Meara teaches an gate stack of claim 9 where the dielectric material has the form of XO, the diffusion barrier has the form XN and the gradient material has the form XO.sub.iN.sub.j, where i decreases and j increases in the gradient region, from the region adjacent the dielectric material to the region adjacent the diffusion barrier (par. 24-41 teaches this). Regarding claim 11, O'Meara teaches an gate stack of claim 10 wherein X is hafnium (par. 24-41 teaches this material). Regarding claim 12, O'Meara teaches an gate stack of claim 11 wherein the diffusion barrier also acts as an adhesion layer for the gate (as taught in par. 24-41, the materials taught are known to have adhesive properties). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CALEB E HENRY whose telephone number is (571)270-5370. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 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, Eva Montalvo can be reached at (571) 270-3829. 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. /CALEB E HENRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 14, 2023
Application Filed
Feb 16, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604596
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING A PEROVSKITE SOLAR CELL WITH AN IMPROVED HOLE TRANSPORT LAYER AND A PEROVSKITE SOLAR CELL WITH AN IMPROVED HOLE TRANSPORT LAYER MANUFACTURED BY THE SAME METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12604650
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING THE LIGHT-EMITTING ELEMENT AND LIGHT-EMITTING DEVICE USING PHOTOLITHOGRAPHY TECHNIQUE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12598801
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE OF PHYSICAL UNCLONABLE FUNCTION AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12588440
SUBSTRATE PROCESSING METHOD AND SUBSTRATE PROCESSING APPARATUS FOR ETCHING USING OXDIZATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584068
COMPOUND FOR ORGANIC ELECTRIC ELEMENT, ORGANIC ELECTRIC ELEMENT USING THE SAME, AND AN ELECTRONIC DEVICE THEREOF
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
86%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+6.2%)
2y 5m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1217 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