Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/785,018

SYNTHETIC ANTIFERROMAGNET, MAGNETIC TUNNELING JUNCTION DEVICE INCLUDING THE SYNTHETIC ANTIFERROMAGNET, AND MEMORY DEVICE INCLUDING THE MAGNETIC TUNNELING JUNCTION DEVICE

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Jul 26, 2024
Examiner
PHAM, LY D
Art Unit
2827
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
94%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 11m
To Grant
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 94% — above average
94%
Career Allow Rate
956 granted / 1018 resolved
+25.9% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+3.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 11m
Avg Prosecution
17 currently pending
Career history
1035
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.2%
-32.8% vs TC avg
§103
22.3%
-17.7% vs TC avg
§102
39.4%
-0.6% vs TC avg
§112
12.9%
-27.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1018 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 . 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 – 19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 – 17 and 31 – 34 of U.S. Patent No. 12,080,459. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because each and every limitation claimed herein has in fact been claimed and patented. Namely: Pending claim 1 corresponds to patented claims 14 and 15 (including base claims 1 and 11). Pending claim 2 corresponds to patented claim 2. Pending claim 3 corresponds to patented claim 3. Pending claim 4 corresponds to patented claim 4. Pending claim 5 corresponds to patented claim 5. Pending claim 6 corresponds to patented claim 6. Pending claim 7 corresponds to patented claim 7. Pending claim 8 corresponds to patented claim 8. Pending claim 9 corresponds to patented claim 9. Pending claim 10 corresponds to patented claim 10. Pending claim 11 corresponds to patented claim 11. Pending claim 12 corresponds to patented claim 12. Pending claim 13 corresponds to patented claim 13. Pending claim 14 corresponds to patented claim 16. Pending claim 15 corresponds to patented claim 17. Pending claim 16 corresponds to patented claims 31 and 32 (including base claim 18). Pending claim 17 corresponds to patented claim 33. Pending claim 18 corresponds to patented claim 34. Pending claim 19 corresponds to patented claims 14 & 15 in view of claim 35, or claims 31 & 32 in view of claim 35. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LY D PHAM whose telephone number is (571)272-1793. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8am-5pm. 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, Amir Zarabian can be reached at 571-272-1852. 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. /LY D PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2827 February 12, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 26, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597480
MEMORY DEVICE, AND MEMORY SYSTEM AND OPERATION METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597474
READING VOLTAGE MANAGEMENT METHOD AND STORAGE DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593433
METHOD OF FABRICATING SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592294
APPARATUSES, SYSTEMS, AND METHODS FOR STORING ERROR INFORMATION AND PROVIDING RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586622
DIGITAL DEVICE HAVING A RESET PAD CIRCUIT THAT MAY BE SUBJECT TO HACKER ATTACK
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
94%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+3.4%)
1y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1018 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow 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