Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 18/887,429

METHOD FOR PROTECTING DATA STORED IN A MEMORY, AND CORRESPONDING INTEGRATED CIRCUIT

Non-Final OA §101
Filed
Sep 17, 2024
Priority
Jul 24, 2019 — FR 1908376 +2 more
Examiner
ROLAND, CHRISTOPHER M
Art Unit
2893
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
STMicroelectronics N.V.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 1m
Est. Remaining
86%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% of resolved cases
65%
Career Allowance Rate
362 granted / 560 resolved
-3.4% vs TC avg
Strong +21% interview lift
Without
With
+20.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
599
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
51.4%
+11.4% vs TC avg
§102
21.0%
-19.0% vs TC avg
§112
24.6%
-15.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 560 resolved cases

Office Action

§101
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 . Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 18/206923, filed on 6 May 2024. Information Disclosure Statement Information disclosure statements filed 17 September 2024 and 10 March 2025 have been fully considered. Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the subject matter of claim 12, “wherein the second trench has a same depth as a trench for the vertical gate region,” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Specification The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the subject matter of claim 12, “wherein the second trench has a same depth as a trench for the vertical gate region,” must find support in the specification. The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: FOR PROTECTING DATA STORED IN A MEMORY. Double Patenting A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957). A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101. Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 15-25 and 27-29 of prior U.S. Patent No. 11,715,705. This is a statutory double patenting rejection. Claim 1 of the instant application recites the same language substantially verbatim as claim 15 of prior U.S. Patent No. 11,715,705 having the same inventive entity and commonly assigned. The minor differences in language: “by storage of a charge, representative of the data value, in the floating gate,” of the instant application versus, “by storage of a charge representative of the respective data value in the floating gate,” of U.S. Patent No. 11,715,705; “if an aqueous solution is brought into contact with the dielectric body,” of the instant application versus, “in response to an aqueous solution brought into contact with the dielectric body,” of U.S. Patent No. 11,715,705; and “to lose the corresponding data,” of the instant application versus, “to lose the respective data value,” of U.S. Patent No. 11,715,705 do not constitute a patentably distinct change in scope. Claims 2-16 of the instant application recite the same language substantially verbatim as claims 16-25 and 27-29 of prior U.S. Patent No. 11,715,705 having the same inventive entity and commonly assigned. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Christopher M. Roland whose telephone number is (571)270-1271. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:00AM-7:00PM Eastern. 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, Yara Green can be reached at (571)270-3035. 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. /C.M.R./Examiner, Art Unit 2893 /YARA B GREEN/Supervisor Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2893
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 17, 2024
Application Filed
Oct 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §101 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12772813
BOTTOM DIELECTRIC ISOLATION INTEGRATION WITH BURIED POWER RAIL
4y 11m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12765372
EMBEDDED AND PACKAGED HEAT DISSIPATION STRUCTURE AND MANUFACTURING METHOD THEREFOR, AND SEMICONDUCTOR
2y 9m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12733500
SEAL STRUCTURES INCLUDING PASSIVATION STRUCTURES
4y 5m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12733240
STRUCTURE WITH SELF-ALIGNED OFFSET GATE CONTACT AND DIRECT BACKSIDE CONTACT
3y 0m to grant Granted Sep 08, 2026
Patent 12707648
BIT-LINE RESISTANCE REDUCTION
4y 5m to grant Granted Aug 11, 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
65%
Grant Probability
86%
With Interview (+20.9%)
3y 2m (~1y 1m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 560 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