Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/649,897

3D MEMORY CELLS AND ARRAY ARCHITECTURES

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Apr 29, 2024
Priority
Oct 01, 2021 — provisional 63/251,583 +7 more
Examiner
NGUYEN, DUY T V
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Neo Semiconductor Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
79%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2m
Est. Remaining
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 79% — above average
79%
Career Allowance Rate
859 granted / 1088 resolved
+19.0% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+16.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
1160
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.0%
-38.0% vs TC avg
§103
55.1%
+15.1% vs TC avg
§102
23.0%
-17.0% vs TC avg
§112
13.3%
-26.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1088 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 . Response to Election/Restrictions 1. Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I, claims 1-7, in the reply filed on 9/8/2026 is acknowledged. Specification 2. 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. Appropriate correction is required. 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. 3. Claims 1-3, 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Endoh et al. (US 2013/0119452). Re claim 1, Endoh teaches, under BRI, Figs. 1-2, [0166, 0178-0179], a cell structure, comprising: -a first material forming a bit line (BL); -a second material forming a storage region (floating gate 5) that is coupled to (via adjacent elements/layers) a first portion of the bit line (BL); -a third material forming a channel (pillar 2) that is connected (via adjacent elements/layers) to the storage region (5) and to second and third portions of the bit line (BL); -a fourth material forming a source line (SL) that is connected to the channel (2); -a fifth material forming a front gate (USG 12) coupled (via adjacent elements/layers) to a first portion of the channel (2) and a first portion of the source line (SL); and -a sixth material forming a back gate (LSG 11) coupled to a second portion of the channel (2) and a second portion of the source line (SL). Note: connect/couple # directly/physically connect/couple. PNG media_image1.png 535 457 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 376 369 media_image2.png Greyscale Re claim 2, Endoh teaches, Figs. 1-2, [0166], a first dielectric layer (7, 8) connected between (horizontal & vertical directions) the front gate (12) and the first portion of the channel (2) and the first portion of the source line (SL). Re claim 3, Endoh teaches, Figs. 1-2, a second dielectric layer (7, 8) connected between the back gate (11) and the second portion of the channel (2) and the second portion of the source line (SL). Re claim 6, Endoh teaches, Figs. 1-2, insulator material (7, 8 around 5) connected between (in vertical direction) the storage region (5) and a first portion of the bit line (BL). Re claim 7, Endoh teaches, [0166], Figs. 1-2, a dielectric layer (6) connected between the storage region (5) and the channel (2). 4. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Katsumata et al. (US 2010/0118610). Re claim 1, Katsumata teaches, under BRI, Figs. 1-2, [0032, 0040-0042], a cell structure, comprising: -a first material forming a bit line (BL); -a second material forming a storage region (of charge storage layer 26) that is coupled to (via adjacent elements/layers) a first portion of the bit line (BL); -a third material forming a channel (31, 34) that is connected (via adjacent elements/layers) to the storage region (26) and to second and third portions of the bit line (BL); -a fourth material forming a source line (SL) that is connected to the channel (31, 34); -a fifth material forming a front gate (SG) coupled to a first portion of the channel (31, 34) and a first portion of the source line (SL); and -a sixth material forming a back gate (BG 12) coupled (via adjacent elements/layers) to a second portion of the channel (31, 34) and a second portion of the source line (SL). Note: connect/couple # directly/physically connect/couple. PNG media_image3.png 668 458 media_image3.png Greyscale PNG media_image4.png 754 546 media_image4.png Greyscale Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. 5. Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Endoh in view of Chang et al. (US 2015/0103603). The teachings of Endoh have been discussed above. Re claims 4 & 5, Endoh teaches wherein the third material (2) has an N+ doping type [0168]. Endoh does not explicitly teach the second material has opposing doping type and has a P-doping type. Chang teaches “floating gate is N-type or P-type doped polysilicon” [0006]. As taught by Chang, one of ordinary skill in the art would utilize & modify the above teaching to obtain the second material has opposing doping type and has a P-doping type as claimed, because it aids in increasing threshold voltage of control gate transistor & improving the reliability of the product. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to employ the teaching as taught by Chang in combination with Endoh due to above reason. Conclusion 6. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Kito et al. (US 2007/0252201, Figs. 1-4) discloses a semiconductor memory device including a plurality of memory strings, pillar shaped semiconductor between SL and BL. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUY T.V. NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7431. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7AM-4PM, alternative Friday off. 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. /DUY T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2818 9/17/26
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 29, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12772432
METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE INCLUDING 3D MEMORY STRUCTURE
3y 3m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12765201
DISPLAY APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12757404
HIGHLY INTEGRATED SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
3y 7m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12740167
SOLID-STATE IMAGING ELEMENT
3y 3m to grant Granted Sep 15, 2026
Patent 12733186
Metal-Insulator-Metal Capacitors And Methods Of Forming The Same
3y 5m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
79%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+16.7%)
2y 8m (~2m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1088 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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