Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/704,378

SUSCEPTOR

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Apr 24, 2024
Priority
Oct 28, 2021 — RE 10-2021-0145177 +2 more
Examiner
MCDONALD, RODNEY GLENN
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Point Engineering Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
63%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 1m
Est. Remaining
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 63% of resolved cases
63%
Career Allowance Rate
797 granted / 1260 resolved
+3.3% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
47 currently pending
Career history
1306
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
76.5%
+36.5% vs TC avg
§102
3.1%
-36.9% vs TC avg
§112
6.5%
-33.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1260 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 . 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 8 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 8, lines 3 and 4, the metes and bounds of “relatively large size” is unclear. Claim 8, lines 4 and 5, the metes and bounds of “relatively small size” is unclear. 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. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim(s) 1-3, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (KR 10-2004-0093518 A) in view of Noda et al. (JP 2020-042926 A). INDEPENDENT CLAIM 1: Regarding claim 1, Sun teaches a first plate (26 or 27); a second plate (28 or 29) provided under the first plate (26 or 27); and a heater (heating wire 30) provided between the first and second plates. (See Figs. 2-8; Paragraph 0017) The difference between Sun and claim 1 is that the heater being a planar heater in the form of a planar surface and comprises a heating pattern corresponding to an area of the planar surface is not discussed. Regarding the heater being a planar heater in the form of a planar surface and comprises a heating pattern corresponding to an area of the planar surface (Claim 1), Noda et al. teach a planar heater (10) having a structure in which a planar heating element (3) includes a base layer (31), an electrode part (32) and a heating layer (33), and a base material (5) stacked by means of an adhesive layer (4). (Paragraphs 0072, Figs. 1, 5, 7) DEPENDENT CLAIM 2: The difference not yet discussed is wherein the planar heater comprises a first film; a second film provided under the first film and a heating pattern formed on at least one of the first and second films and provided between the first and second films. Regarding claim 2, Noda et al. teach the planar heater comprises a first film; a second film provided under the first film and a heating pattern formed on at least one of the first and second films and provided between the first and second films. (Paragraphs 0072, Figs. 1, 5, 7) DEPENDENT CLAIM 3: The difference not yet discussed is wherein the heating pattern is formed corresponding to an area of a planar surface of at least one of the first and second films. Regarding claim 3, Noda et al. teach the heating pattern is formed corresponding to an area of a planar surface of at least one of the first and second films. (Paragraphs 0072, Figs. 1, 5, 7) DEPENDENT CLAIM 10: The difference not yet discussed is wherein the susceptor comprises a heater seating recess provided in at least one of the first and second plates. Regarding claim 10, Sun teaches a heater seating recess provided in at least one of the first and second plates. (See Fig. 2) The motivation for utilizing the features of Noda et al. is that it allows for utilizing a heater having PTC characteristics without pinholes. (Abstract; Paragraph 0002) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Sun by utilizing the features of Noda et al. because it allows for utilizing a heater having PTC characteristics without pinholes. Claim(s) 4-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Noda et al. as applied to claims 1-3, 10 above, and further in view of Kim (KR 10-2011-0101365 A). DEPENDENT CLAIM 4: The difference not yet discussed is wherein the planar heater comprises: at least one post hole; and a terminal portion provided at a side of the planar heater. Regarding claim 4, Kim teaches a post hole formed at a thick film heater (14) and a heater power line connected to thereto through the inside of a shaft (16). (Paragraphs 0042, 0057) DEPENDENT CLAIM 5: The difference not yet discussed is wherein the planar heater is divided, wherein the divided planar heater is disposed so that the terminal portion of the planar heater corresponds to a hollow shaft of the second plate. Noda et al. teach a divided planar heater. (See Noda et al. discussed above) Kim teach the heater power line is connected through the inside of the a shaft. (See Kim discussed above) DEPENDENT CLAIM 6: The difference not yet discussed is wherein at least one of the first and second plates comprises a post and a remaining one of the first and second plates comprises a post insertion portion, wherein the first and second plates are joined by welding an insertion area where the post is inserted into the post insertion portion. Sun teaches a support pin (31) penetrating an upper plate (27) and a lower plate (29) and a support pin hole (32). (Paragraph 0017, Figs. 2-8) Kim teaches as post hole formed at the thick film heater (14) corresponding to a post insertion part of the lower plate (12) and a post of the upper plate (11)(Figs. 2, 3) and respective members are stacked, pressed and bonded by welding. (Paragraphs 0042, 0043) DEPENDENT CLAIM 7: The difference not yet discussed is wherein the planar heater comprises at least one post hole corresponding to the post and the post insertion portion, and the susceptor comprises a lift pin hole provided in a welding area corresponding to the post hole, the post, and the post insertion portion. Regarding claim 7, Kim teach at least one post hole corresponding to the post and the post insertion portion. (See Kim Figs. 2, 3) Sun teaches a susceptor comprising a lift pin hole. (See Sun discussed above Fig. 2) Kim teaches that all members of a susceptor can be stacked and pressed and bonded by welding. (Paragraphs 0042, 0043) DEPENDENT CLAIM 8: The difference not yet discussed is wherein the at least one post hole comprises a plurality of post holes, wherein a portion of the post holes has a relatively large size and a remaining portion of the post holes has a relatively small size, and the lift pin hole is provided in the post hole having the large size. Kim teach at least one post hole comprises a plurality of post holes. (See Fig. 2) Sun teaches a lift pin holes with lift pins. (See Fig. 3) With regarding to the hole sizes the change in hole sizes for the various holes can be selectable as changes in shape and size have been held to be obvious. See MPEP 2144.04 – IV Changes in Size, Shape, or Sequence of Adding Ingredients. DEPENDENT CLAIM 9: The difference not yet discussed is wherein the second plate comprises a hollow shaft extending from a center thereof toward a floor surface, wherein the planar heater is disposed so that the terminal portion corresponds to the hollow shaft. Sun teaches wherein a central support part (34) is coupled to the lower plate so as to supply power to the heating wire (30) and support a heater assembly, and an electric wire (36)is arranged inside the central support part (34) so as to supply power to the heating wire (30). (Paragraph 0017, Figs. 2 and 8) The motivation for utilizing the features of Kim is that it allows for easily replacing the heater chuck. (See Abstract) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have utilized the features of Kim because it allows for easily replacing the heater chuck. Claim(s) 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun (KR 10-2004-0093518 A) in view of Kim (KR 10-2011-0101365 A). INDEPENDENT CLAIM 11: Regarding claim 11, Sun teaches a susceptor (15) provided by joining a first plate and a second plate together (weld 35), wherein at least one of the first and second plates comprises a post (31) and a remaining one of the first and second plates comprises a post insertion portion, wherein an internal space in which a heater (30) is provided is provided inside a border portion of the at least one of the first and second plates, and the post is provided in the internal space, wherein border portions of the first and second plates are welded (weld 35) and integrated together. (Paragraph 0017, 0020, Figs. 2-8) The difference between Sun and claim 11 is that an insertion area where the insertion portion where the post is inserted into the post insertion portion is welded. Regarding claim 11, Kim teaches an insertion area where the insertion portion where the post is inserted into the post insertion portion is welded. Specifically Kim teaches a heating damper (13), the thick film heater (14), and a heat-insulating plate (15) are stacked between the upper plate (11) and lower plate (12), the post of the upper plate (11) is inserted into the post insertion part of the lower plate (12) so as to be coupled thereto (Figs. 2, 3) and respective members are stacked, pressed and finally bonded by E-beam welding or brazing welding. (Paragraphs 0042, 0043) The motivation for utilizing the features of Kim is that it allows for easily replacing the heater chuck. (See Abstract) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Sun by utilizing the features of Kim because it allows for easily replacing the heater chuck. Claim(s) 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Kim as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Noda et al. (JP 2020-042926 A). DEPENDENT CLAIM 13: The difference not yet discussed is wherein the heater is provided as a planar heater, wherein the planar heater comprises: a first film; a second film provided under the first film; and a heating pattern formed on at least one of the first and second films and provided between the first and second films, wherein the heating pattern is formed corresponding to an area of a planar surface of at least one of the first and second films. Noda et al. teach the planar heater comprises a first film; a second film provided under the first film and a heating pattern formed on at least one of the first and second films and provided between the first and second films, wherein the heating pattern is formed corresponding to an area of a planar surface of at least one of the first and second films. (Paragraphs 0072, Figs. 1, 5, 7) DEPENDENT CLAIM 14: The difference not yet discussed is wherein the planar heater comprises: at least one post hole; and a terminal portion provided at a side of the planar heater. Kim teaches a post hole formed at a thick film heater (14) and a heater power line connected to thereto through the inside of a shaft (16). (Paragraphs 0042, 0057) DEPENDENT CLAIM 15: The difference not yet discussed is wherein the post hole corresponds to the post provided in the at least one of the first and second plates and the post insertion portion provided in the remaining one of the first and second plates, and the susceptor comprises a lift pin hole provided in a welding area corresponding to the post hole, the post, and the post insertion portion. Sun teaches a support pin (31) penetrating an upper plate (27) and a lower plate (29) and a support pin hole (32). (Paragraph 0017, Figs. 2-8) Kim teaches as post hole formed at the thick film heater (14) corresponding to a post insertion part of the lower plate (12) and a post of the upper plate (11)(Figs. 2, 3) and respective members are stacked, pressed and bonded by welding. (Paragraphs 0042, 0043) DEPENDENT CLAIM 16: The difference not yet discussed is wherein the second plate comprises a hollow shaft extending from a center thereof toward a floor surface, wherein the planar heater is disposed so that the terminal portion corresponds to the hollow shaft. Sun teaches wherein a central support part (34) is coupled to the lower plate so as to supply power to the heating wire (30) and support a heater assembly, and an electric wire (36)is arranged inside the central support part (34) so as to supply power to the heating wire (30). (Paragraph 0017, Figs. 2 and 8) The motivation for utilizing the features of is that it allows for utilizing a heater having PTC characteristics without pinholes. (Abstract; Paragraph 0002) Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have utilized the features of Noda et al. because it allows for utilizing a heater having PTC characteristics without pinholes. Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sun in view of Kim as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (KR 10-2007-0106169). The difference not yet discussed is wherein the insertion area is welded by friction stir welding. Regarding claim 12, Lee et al. teach utilizing friction stir welding to join pieces of a susceptor. (See Abstract) The motivation for utilizing the features of Lee et al. is that it allows for more easily joining pieces cleanly. (See Abstract) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have utilized the features of Lee et al. because it allows for more easily joining pieces cleanly. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RODNEY GLENN MCDONALD whose telephone number is (571)272-1340. The examiner can normally be reached Hoteling: M-Th every Fri 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, James Lin can be reached at 571-272-8902. 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. /RODNEY G MCDONALD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794 RMJune 3, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Apr 24, 2024
Application Filed
Jun 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12674730
METHODS FOR SELECTIVELY SEPARATING SAMPLES FROM SUBSTRATE
8y 2m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12662734
SUBSTRATE PROCESSING METHOD AND SUBSTRATE PROCESSING APPARATUS
3y 5m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12662731
SPUTTERING MACHINES, SUBSTRATE HOLDERS, AND SPUTTERING PROCESSES WITH MAGNETIC BIASING
2y 4m to grant Granted Jun 23, 2026
Patent 12655518
WAFER SUSCEPTOR
3y 6m to grant Granted Jun 16, 2026
Patent 12644186
SUBSTRATE PROCESSING APPARATUS AND SUBSTRATE PROCESSING METHOD
2y 11m to grant Granted Jun 02, 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
63%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+24.3%)
3y 4m (~1y 1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1260 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