Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 02, 2026
Application No. 18/833,659

THERMAL CONDUCTIVE STACKED INSULATIVE SUBSTRATE

Final Rejection §112
Filed
Jul 26, 2024
Priority
Feb 22, 2022 — JP 2022-025356 +2 more
Examiner
DICUS, TAMRA
Art Unit
1787
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Shin-Etsu Chemical Co., Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
30%
Grant Probability
At Risk
3-4
OA Rounds
1y 9m
Est. Remaining
52%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 30% of cases
30%
Career Allowance Rate
198 granted / 649 resolved
-34.5% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+21.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 11m
Avg Prosecution
57 currently pending
Career history
710
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.7%
-39.3% vs TC avg
§103
59.9%
+19.9% vs TC avg
§102
13.4%
-26.6% vs TC avg
§112
17.9%
-22.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 649 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Applicants' arguments have been fully considered. Rejections and/or objections not reiterated from previous office actions are hereby withdrawn due to Applicant's amendments and/or arguments. The following rejections and/or objections are either reiterated or newly applied. NEW REJECTIONS: NECESSITATED BY AMENDMENT Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 6-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The Examiner believes that independent claim 6 (amended) does not have the proper support in the original specification as filed because the specification does not provide any teaching or discussion on an elastic layer without thermal conductive powders or its usage with Applicant’s claimed thermal conductive stacked insulative substrate and thus said term(s) is considered new matter. Claim 6 has been amended to recite that the elastic layer “does not contain thermal conductive powders”. However, the cited phraseology clearly signifies a “negative” or “exclusionary” limitation for which the applicants have no support in the original disclosure. Negative limitations in a claim which do not appear in the specification as filed introduce new concepts and violate the description requirement of 35 USC 112, first paragraph, Ex Parte Grasselli, Suresh, and Miller, 231 USPQ 393, 394 (Bd. Pat. App. and Inter. 1983); 783 F. 2d 453. The insertion of the above phraseology as described above positively excludes a metal film, however, there is no support in the present specification for such exclusions. As support for the amendment, applicant points to paragraphs 0113, 0115, 0127, and 0129 of the present specification and cites In re Johnson case law. However, while In re Johnson does state that if alternative elements are positively recited, they may be explicitly excluded in the claims, these cited paragraphs do not recite any alternative elements for the substrate that includes an elastic layer as claimed. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments are not convincing. The specification recites the required thermal conductive powders for the thermal conductive substrate. See instant specification at paragraphs 9-12 for instance. Applicant is reminded support for new limitations should be pointed to in the reply. In this instance, none was cited. Once the new matter is removed in the next reply, the subsequent rejection will come forward and be made FINAL. Conclusion Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAMRA L. DICUS whose telephone number is (571)272-2022. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am 4:00 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, Callie Shosho can be reached at 571-272-1123. 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. TAMRA L. DICUS Primary Examiner Art Unit 1787 /TAMRA L. DICUS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1787
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 26, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 25, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112
Jun 16, 2026
Response Filed
Aug 20, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12674061
PAINT COMPOSITION
2y 7m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12668705
ORGANIC-INORGANIC ADHESIVE COMPOSITION, AND GAS BARRIER FILM COMPRISING SAME
3y 4m to grant Granted Jun 30, 2026
Patent 12643311
FILMS, LAMINATES, AND METHODS OF MAKING COMPOSITIONS
2y 4m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Patent 12637787
LAMINATED STRUCTURE AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING LAMINATED STRUCTURE
4y 3m to grant Granted May 26, 2026
Patent 12636854
MULTILAYER FILM
3y 10m to grant Granted May 26, 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

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
30%
Grant Probability
52%
With Interview (+21.4%)
3y 11m (~1y 9m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 649 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