Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 29, 2026
Application No. 18/803,630

Memory Device Comprising Electrically Floating Body Transistor

Non-Final OA §DOUBLEPATENT
Filed
Aug 13, 2024
Priority
Aug 15, 2014 — provisional 62/038,188 +10 more
Examiner
PHAM, LY D
Art Unit
2827
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Zeno Semiconductor Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
94%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
97%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 94% — above average
94%
Career Allowance Rate
963 granted / 1025 resolved
+26.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +3% lift
Without
With
+3.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 8m
Avg Prosecution
15 currently pending
Career history
1038
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.6%
-31.4% vs TC avg
§103
34.3%
-5.7% vs TC avg
§102
36.7%
-3.3% vs TC avg
§112
6.7%
-33.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1025 resolved cases

Office Action

§DOUBLEPATENT
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 – 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 – 20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,250,905 (hereinafter 905’) in view of claims 1 and 11 of US Pat 12,094,526 (hereinafter 526’). Namely: Pending claim 1 corresponds to patented claim 1 of 905’ in view of patented claim 1 of 526’. Pending claim 2 corresponds to patented claim 2 of 905’. Pending claim 3 corresponds to patented claim 3 of 905’. Pending claim 4 corresponds to patented claim 4 of 905’. Pending claim 5 corresponds to patented claim 5 of 905’. Pending claim 6 corresponds to patented claim 6 of 905’. Pending claim 7 corresponds to patented claim 7 of 905’. Pending claim 8 corresponds to patented claim 8 of 905’. Pending claim 9 corresponds to patented claim 9 of 905’. Pending claim 10 corresponds to patented claim 10 of 905’. Pending claim 11 corresponds to patented claim 11 of 905’ in view of patented claim 11 of 526’. Pending claim 12 corresponds to patented claim 12 of 905’. Pending claim 13 corresponds to patented claim 13 of 905’. Pending claim 14 corresponds to patented claim 14 of 905’. Pending claim 15 corresponds to patented claim 15 of 905’. Pending claim 16 corresponds to patented claim 16 of 905’. Pending claim 17 corresponds to patented claim 17 of 905’. Pending claim 18 corresponds to patented claim 18 of 905’. Pending claim 19 corresponds to patented claim 19 of 905’. Pending claim 20 corresponds to patented claim 20 of 905’. 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 23, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 13, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DOUBLEPATENT
May 15, 2026
Response Filed
May 15, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12639559
CALIBRATION OF ELECTRICAL PARAMETERS IN A DEEP LEARNING ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK
4y 1m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12642102
SEMICONDUCTOR MODULE
2y 8m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12640222
ENABLING OR DISABLING ON-DIE ERROR-CORRECTING CODE FOR A MEMORY BUILT-IN SELF-TEST
2y 1m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12638990
SECOND READ INITIALIZATION ON LATCH-LIMITED MEMORY DEVICE
1y 10m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12633883
SENSING AND AMPLIFYING CIRCUIT RELATED TO A SENSING MARGIN
3y 4m to grant Granted May 19, 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
94%
Grant Probability
97%
With Interview (+3.3%)
1y 8m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1025 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