Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/738,213

SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING APPARATUS

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Jun 10, 2024
Examiner
LUND, JEFFRIE ROBERT
Art Unit
1716
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Toto LTD.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
60%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 12m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 60% of resolved cases
60%
Career Allow Rate
440 granted / 734 resolved
-5.1% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 12m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
757
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.8%
-39.2% vs TC avg
§103
47.5%
+7.5% vs TC avg
§102
22.2%
-17.8% vs TC avg
§112
19.6%
-20.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 734 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 . 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. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in claim 1 line 12, the limitation “the particle resistant layer” should read --the particle-resistant layer--. Appropriate correction is required. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-8 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,051,568 B2 (‘568) in view of Jun et al, JP2005158933. ‘568 teaches all of the limitations of the present invention except that the particle-resistant layer being formed by aerosol deposition. Jun et al teaches forming a particle-resistant layer by aerosol deposition (Abstract). The motivation for forming the particle-resistant layer of ‘568 by aerosol deposition as taught by Jun et al is to provide a well known method of depositing a particle-resistant layer. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to form the particle-resistant layer of ‘568 by aerosol deposition as taught by Jun et al. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The cited art teaches the technological background of the invention. The following references also teach deposition by aerosol deposition: US 11142829 B2; US 11127569 B2; US 10287212 B2; US 10221105 B2; US 11623898 B2; or US 12304875 B2. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jeffrie R Lund whose telephone number is (571)272-1437. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am-5 pm (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, Parviz Hassanzadeh can be reached at (571) 272-1435. 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. /Jeffrie R Lund/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1716
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 10, 2024
Application Filed
May 26, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 08, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Mar 30, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12601059
SUBSTRATE PROCESSING APPARATUS, METHOD OF MANUFACTURING SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE, AND RECORDING MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12595560
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR SUPPLYING IMPROVED GAS FLOW TO A PROCESSING VOLUME OF A PROCESSING CHAMBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12590367
PRECURSOR SUPPLY CHAMBER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12584224
COATING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12584221
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR DEPOSITING A LAYER
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
60%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+24.5%)
3y 12m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 734 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month