Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/671,241

SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
May 22, 2024
Examiner
LUKE, DANIEL M
Art Unit
2896
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Macronix International Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
71%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
4m
Est. Remaining
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 71% — above average
71%
Career Allowance Rate
509 granted / 713 resolved
+3.4% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+18.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
735
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
49.5%
+9.5% vs TC avg
§102
26.1%
-13.9% vs TC avg
§112
21.9%
-18.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 713 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
DETAILED ACTION This office action is in response to the application filed 5/22/2024. Currently, claims 1-20 are pending. Information Disclosure Statement The IDS filed 5/29/2025 includes a reference which is an office action written entirely in a non-English language, and thus cannot be considered by the Examiner. 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 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 18 recites the limitation “a plurality of contacts surrounded by the charge storage structure”. There is no mention of a charge storage layer anywhere else in the claims. Thus, it is not clear what is meant by “the charge storage structure”. 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. Claims 1, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kanda et al. (US 8,315,094). Pertaining to claim 1, Kanda shows, with reference to FIG. 2A, a semiconductor device comprising: a substrate (11) comprising a first region (hosting 15e) and a second region (hosting SGS, MC, SGD); a well region (13) located in the first region and the second region of the substrate; a transistor device (15e) located in the well region of the first region; and a memory device (comprising SGS, MC, SGD) located in the well region of the second region, wherein the well region is continuous between the transistor device and the memory device. Pertaining to claim 20, Kanda shows a top surface of the well region continuously extends from the first region to the second region. In an alternative interpretation, only a memory cell may be interpreted to be the memory device. In this case, Kanda shows a semiconductor device comprising: a substrate (11) comprising a first region (hosting 15e) and a second region (hosting SGS, MC, SGD); a well region (13) located in the first region and the second region of the substrate; a transistor device (15e) located in the well region of the first region; and a memory device (MC) located in the well region of the second region, wherein the well region is continuous between the transistor device and the memory device (continuous under the devices). Pertaining to claim 19, Kanda shows another transistor device (14e) located in the well region of the first region; and another memory device (adjacent MC) located in the well region of the second region, wherein the well region between the transistor device and the another transistor device is continuous, and the well between the memory device and the another memory device is continuous (continuous under the devices). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-17 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 art of record, either singularly or in combination, does not disclose or suggest the semiconductor device as it is claimed in claim 1, wherein a first gate structure of the transistor device and a second gate structure of the memory device each comprise a middle part and a peripheral part, a first opening and a second opening are provided between the middle part and the peripheral part, and the middle part is located between the first opening and the second opening. Thus, claim 2 is found to contain allowable subject matter. Claims 3-17 depend on claim 2, and thus also contain allowable subject matter. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL M LUKE whose telephone number is (571)270-1569. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am-5pm, EST. 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, William Kraig can be reached at (571) 272-8660. 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. /DANIEL LUKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2896
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 22, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 28, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12757721
Barrier Layers for Interconnects in Bonded Wafers
3y 4m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12757597
DISPLAY PANEL HAVING IMPROVED LIGHT-EMITTING STRUCTURE
2y 6m to grant Granted Oct 06, 2026
Patent 12751313
SELECTIVE ALTERATION OF INTERCONNECT PADS FOR DIRECT BONDING
5y 7m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12751223
Treatment to Control Deposition Rate
4y 4m to grant Granted Sep 29, 2026
Patent 12745616
SEMICONDUCTOR STRUCTURE INCLUDING LINES OF DIFFERENT HEIGHT
3y 1m to grant Granted Sep 22, 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
71%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+18.7%)
2y 9m (~4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 713 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