Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 19/227,765

SPACER FILM SCHEME FORM POLARIZATION IMPROVEMENT

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Jun 04, 2025
Examiner
SASINOWSKI, ANDREW
Art Unit
2625
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 1m
To Grant
90%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allow Rate
664 granted / 855 resolved
+15.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
9 currently pending
Career history
864
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.0%
-36.0% vs TC avg
§103
43.6%
+3.6% vs TC avg
§102
35.7%
-4.3% vs TC avg
§112
9.8%
-30.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 855 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 and 7 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 8 and 10 of U.S. Patent No. 12,354,633. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they recite substantially similar claim language. The claims are compared below: Present claim 1 Claim 8 of patent 12,354,633 An integrated chip, comprising: a lower electrode; a high-k dielectric material disposed over the lower electrode; an upper electrode disposed over a central region of the high-k dielectric material; and a dielectric spacer arranged on a peripheral region of the high-k dielectric material, wherein the high-k dielectric material comprises non-zero concentrations of a tetragonal phase and a monoclinic phase, t he non-zero concentrations of the tetragonal phase and the monoclinic phase being lower than a concentration of orthorhombic phase within the high-k dielectric material. An integrated chip, comprising: a lower electrode; a high-k material structure disposed over the lower electrode; an upper electrode disposed over a central region of the high-k material structure; and a stressed dielectric spacer arranged on a peripheral region of the high-k material structure, wherein the high-k material structure has an orthorhombic phase concentration that varies between the central region and the peripheral region wherein the ferroelectric layer further comprises non-zero concentrations of a tetragonal phase and a monoclinic phase, the non-zero concentrations of the tetragonal phase and the monoclinic phase being lower than a concentration of the orthorhombic phase within the ferroelectric layer. Present claim 7 Claim 10 of 12,354,633 An integrated chip, comprising: a lower electrode a dielectric data storage structure disposed over the lower electrode; an upper electrode disposed over a central region of the dielectric data storage structure; and a dielectric spacer arranged over a peripheral region of dielectric data storage structure, wherein the dielectric data storage structure has a minimum orthorhombic phase concentration that is greater than approximately 40%. A device, comprising: a bottom electrode; a ferroelectric layer disposed on the bottom electrode; a top electrode disposed on the ferroelectric layer; and a spacer layer disposed on the ferroelectric layer and adjacent to the top electrode, wherein the ferroelectric layer has a higher concentration of orthorhombic phase within an edge region than within a central region. wherein a concentration of the orthorhombic phase within the central region is greater than approximately 40% Allowable Subject Matter Claims 14-20 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Regarding claims 14-20, the prior art does not teach “…forming a lower electrode layer over a substrate; forming a high-k data storage layer over the lower electrode layer; forming an upper electrode over the high-k data storage layer; forming one or more stressed sidewall spacers laterally surrounding the upper electrode; increasing an orthorhombic phase concentration within parts of the high-k data storage layer after forming the one or more stressed sidewall spacers; and patterning the high-k data storage layer and the lower electrode layer outside of the upper electrode and the stressed sidewall spacer to form a high-k data storage structure and a lower electrode.” Claims 2-6 and 8-13 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Song (2024/0130136], Huang (2022/0285519), Zhu (2009/0108378) and Arghavani (2008/0061285). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW SASINOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-5883. The examiner can normally be reached 7am - 4pm, Mon.-Fri. EST. 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, William Boddie can be reached at 571-272-0666. 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. /ANDREW SASINOWSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2625
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 04, 2025
Application Filed
Feb 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12592249
HEAT ASSISTED MAGNETIC RECORDING WRITER HAVING A NOTCHED WRITE POLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12578788
Persistent Human-Machine Interfaces via Gaze and Eye Direction Tracking
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573339
DISPLAY DEVICE OPERATING WITH TIME-DIVISION AND CONTROL METHOD THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12567362
DISPLAY DEVICE, METHOD OF DRIVING THE DISPLAY DEVICE, AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE INCLUDING THE DISPLAY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12567381
DRIVING CONTROLLER AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE INCLUDING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 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
78%
Grant Probability
90%
With Interview (+12.0%)
2y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 855 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