Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 23, 2026
Application No. 18/691,795

RADIATION RESISTANT SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SAME

Final Rejection §102§103
Filed
Mar 13, 2024
Priority
Oct 15, 2021 — nonprovisional of PCTJP2021038268
Examiner
DIAZ, JOSE R
Art Unit
2815
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Mitsubishi Electric Corporation
OA Round
2 (Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
95%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allowance Rate
842 granted / 968 resolved
+19.0% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+7.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 5m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
991
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
42.2%
+2.2% vs TC avg
§102
34.1%
-5.9% vs TC avg
§112
8.4%
-31.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 968 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
CTNF 18/691,795 CTNF 77450 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-12-aia AIA (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. 07-15-03-aia AIA Claim s 1, 5, 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US 2022/0173209) . Regarding claim 1, Lee discloses a radiation resistant semiconductor device comprising: a semiconductor substrate (11) [Fig. 3]; a field effect transistor (10) formed on the semiconductor substrate [Fig. 3]; and a MIM capacitor (1) having a lower electrode (100), an insulation film (300), and an upper electrode (200) which are in order laminated on the semiconductor substrate [Fig. 3 and paragraph 0073], wherein a metallic element is added to the insulation film [paragraphs 0032-0035], and the metallic element is mingled with the insulation film (300) as a stoichiometric oxide and is an element in one of groups 2 to 6 and one of fourth to sixth periods [paragraphs 0034-0035]. Regarding claim 5, Lee discloses wherein plural elements are added to the insulation film as the metallic element paragraphs 0034-0035]. Regarding claim 8, Lee discloses a method for manufacturing a radiation resistant semiconductor device comprising: forming a field effect transistor (10) on a semiconductor substrate (11) [Fig. 3]; and laminating a lower electrode (100), an insulation film (300) to which a metallic element is added, and an upper electrode (200) in order on the semiconductor substrate to form a MIM capacitor (1) [Fig. 3 and paragraphs 0034-0035 and 0073], wherein the metallic element is mingled with the insulation film as a stoichiometric oxide and is an element in one of groups 2 to 6 and one of fourth to sixth periods [paragraph 0034-0035]. Regarding claim 16, Lee discloses forming a gate insulation film (12a) to which the metallic element is added on the semiconductor substrate [Fig. 3 and paragraph 0071]; and forming a gate electrode (12b) of the field effect transistor on the gate insulation film [Fig. 3 and paragraph 0073] . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2022/0173209) . Regarding claims 4 and 11, Lee discloses wherein a content rate of the metallic element in the insulation film is equal to or higher than 5% and lower than 28.6% [paragraph 0036]. In regards to the claimed ranges, the court has held that in the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of obviousness exists. In re Wertheim , 541F.2d 257,191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff , 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2022/0173209) in view of Sato Hiroshi et al. (JP2010-147349 A, cited by applicant) . Regarding claim 17, Lee discloses a field effect transistor (10) and a capacitor (1) on a substrate [Fig. 3 and paragraph 0073]. However, Lee fails to disclose wherein the insulation film and the gate electrode-insulation film are simultaneously formed. Sato Hiroshi teaches the limitation wherein the insulation film and the gate electrode-insulation film are simultaneously formed [paragraph 0076, English Translation]. Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have been motivated to modify Lee by simultaneously forming the capacitor insulation film and the gate electrode-insulation film as taught by Sato Hiroshi because it helps to simplify the process [paragraph 0076, English translation] . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim s 6-7 and 12-13 are allowed. 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 14-15 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSE R DIAZ whose telephone number is (571)272-1727. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday. 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, Joshua Benitez can be reached at 571-270-1435. 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. /Jose R Diaz/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2815 Application/Control Number: 18/691,795 Page 2 Art Unit: 2815 Application/Control Number: 18/691,795 Page 3 Art Unit: 2815 Application/Control Number: 18/691,795 Page 5 Art Unit: 2815 Application/Control Number: 18/691,795 Page 6 Art Unit: 2815
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 13, 2024
Application Filed
May 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Jul 08, 2026
Interview Requested
Jul 16, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Jul 16, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Aug 07, 2026
Response Filed
Oct 21, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12770798
THIN FILM CAPACITORS
4y 1m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12772855
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE PACKAGE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
3y 10m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12772466
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREOF
3y 3m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12772912
SEMICONDUCTOR PACKAGE AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12765383
MULTI-CHIP INTEGRATED CIRCUIT DEVICES HAVING RECESSED REGIONS THEREIN THAT SUPPORT HIGH YIELD DICING
3y 9m to grant Granted Oct 13, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
95%
With Interview (+7.9%)
2y 5m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 968 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