Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/792,828

COMPOSITION AND MANUFACTURING METHOD OF SEMICONDUCTOR ELEMENT

Non-Final OA §102§112
Filed
Aug 02, 2024
Priority
Mar 25, 2022 — JP 2022-050467 +1 more
Examiner
ELHILO, EISA B
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Fujifilm Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allowance Rate
1205 granted / 1449 resolved
+23.2% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+16.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 9m
Avg Prosecution
30 currently pending
Career history
1468
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.1%
-38.9% vs TC avg
§103
61.3%
+21.3% vs TC avg
§102
17.8%
-22.2% vs TC avg
§112
12.5%
-27.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1449 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
Claims 1-20 are pending in this application. DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 1 The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Priority 2 Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application 2022-050467 filed in 03/25/2022. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Specification 3 Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details. The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 4 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. Claims 1-20 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. Claims 1, 4-5, 8, 17 and 18 recite the phrase “specific”. The phrase “specific” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. Correction is required. Claim 8 recites the term “substantially”. The term “substantially” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim and the specification does not provide any guidance. Clarification or Correction is required. Claims 2-3, 6-7, 9-16 and 19-20 dependent upon a rejected based claim. Therefore, claims 2-3, 6-7, 9-16 and 19-20 are rejected as well. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 5 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. 6 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, 4, 6-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)1 as being anticipated by Cornford Et al. (CN 104662141 A). English translation of the Patent No. (CN 104662141 A) is used in this Office action. Cornford et al. (CN’ 141 A) teaches a cleaning composition comprising sorbic acid, citric acid, monoethanol amine (alkanolamine), phosphoric acid and phosphonoalkene (phosphono group) (see page 42, paragraph, 0041) and wherein the cleaning composition has a pH in the range of 4-9 as claimed in claims 1, 4 and 6-7 (see page 47, paragraph, 0066). Cornford et al. (CN’ 141 A) teaches a cleaning composition identical to the claimed composition, which inherently should have same electrical conductivity as claimed in claim 9 and wherein the cleaning composition is free of abrasive grains as claimed in claim 8 and wherein the cleaning composition should have same utility of cleaning a semiconductor substance as claimed in claim 11. Cornford et al. (CN’ 141 A) teaches all the limitations of the instant claims. Hence, Cornford et al. (CN’ 141 A) anticipates the claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EISA B ELHILO whose telephone number is (571)272-1315. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:00 AM to 3:30 PM. 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, Angela Brown-Pettigrew can be reached at (571)272-2817. 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. /EISA B ELHILO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1761
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 02, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12677921
DEVICE FOR THE OXIDATION DYEING OF KERATIN FIBRES
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12680055
ANTHRACENE-9,10-DIONE DERIVATIVES AS PHOTOACTIVATORS IN DETERGENTS
2y 8m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12674059
VIOLET EXCITABLE TANDEM DYES, AND METHODS FOR MAKING AND USING THE SAME
3y 3m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12674119
WATER-SOLUBLE MULTICOMPARTMENT UNIT DOSE ARTICLE
2y 9m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12674117
WATER-SOLUBLE UNIT DOSE ARTICLE COMPRISING A FIBROUS NON-WOVEN SHEET AND A SURFACTANT SYSTEM
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 07, 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
83%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+16.0%)
1y 9m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1449 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