DETAILED ACTION
The current Office Action is in response to the papers submitted 01/09/2026. Claims 1, 3, 5 – 6, 8 – 11, 13, 15 – 16, 18 – 30 are pending.
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5 – 6, 8, 10 – 11, 13, 15 – 16, 18 – 21, 25 – 26, and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung et al. (Pub. No.: US 2014/0029367) referred to as Jung in view of Sprouse (Pat 9,524,235) referred to as Sprouse in view of Agarwala (Pat 9,448,927) referred to as Agarwala in view of Keeth (Pub. No.: US 2022/0121393) referred to as Keeth.
Regarding claim 1, Jung teaches a memory controller [100, Fig 1] coupled to a memory array [200a – 200n, Fig 1] through a first bus [TL1 – TL3, Fig 2] and configured to access data stored in the memory array [200a – 200n, Fig 1] through the first bus [TL1 – TL3, Fig 2; Paragraph 0077; Data is stored in the memory array or read from the memory array through TL1 – TL2], the memory controller [100, Fig 1] configured to couple to a host device [20, Fig 1] through a channel [Fig 1; The data path between items 20 and 100] and configured to perform operations comprising:
a hash filter indicating a first subset of rows [Paragraphs 0031 and 0126; The bloom filter is a hash filter that is used to select an address in the memory which is comprised of rows] in the memory array [200a – 200n, Fig 1] wherein the hash filter indicates rows of the memory array [200a – 200n, Fig 1] as the first subset of rows [Paragraphs 0031 and 0126; The memory is organized in rows. The addresses output from the bloom filter are addresses of rows in memory]; and
refreshing, by the memory controller [100, Fig 1], only the first subset of rows [Paragraphs 0031 and 0126; The bloom filter is a hash filter that is used to select an address in the memory which is comprised of rows] in the memory array [200a – 200n, Fig 1] based on the hash filter [Paragraphs 0096 and 0126; The bloom filter selects an additional address for a refresh operation, which includes a row of the memory since the memory is constructed in rows, when the output of the bloom filter is positive. Only the addresses indicated in the bloom filter are refreshed].
However, Jung may not specifically disclose the limitation of obtaining, from the host device through the channel, the hash filter and the hash filter indicating first locations in memory storing valid data and second locations in the memory not storing valid data, and receiving, from the host device through the channel, an indication to enter self-refresh mode and refreshing after receiving the indication according to the self-refresh mode.
Sprouse discloses obtaining, from the host device through the channel, the hash filter [131, Fig 1; Column 6, Lines 47 – 67; The bloom filter is sent through a channel from the host in elements].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Sprouse in Jung, because it reduces data transfer from a host and a controller [Column 6, Lines 47 – 67; Column 7, Lines 1 – 27] and it allows the bloom filter to be updated as needed by adding new elements.
However, Jung in view of Sprouse may not specifically disclose the limitation of the hash filter indicating first locations in memory storing valid data and second locations in the memory not storing valid data, and receiving, from the host device through the channel, an indication to enter self-refresh mode and refreshing after receiving the indication according to the self-refresh mode.
Agarwala discloses the hash filter indicating first locations in memory storing valid data and second locations in the memory not storing valid data [Column 3, Lines 36 – 54; Column 7, Lines 3 – 32; The hash filter, in the form of a bloom filter, stores a list of valid objects/data in the memory which would indicate where the objects are for use in garbage collection. The list of valid objects/data also indicates objects/data not in the list are not valid].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Agarwala in Jung in view of Sprouse, because it improves the previous method of using a tree structure storing information of which objects are live which can get so large that it cannot fit in memory [Column 3, Lines 19 – 54].
However, Jung in view of Sprouse in view of Agarwala may not specifically disclose the limitation(s) of receiving, from the host device through the channel, an indication to enter self-refresh mode and refreshing after receiving the indication according to the self-refresh mode.
Keeth discloses receiving, from the host device through the channel, an indication to enter self-refresh mode and refreshing after receiving the indication according to the self-refresh mode [Fig 9; Fig 9; Paragraphs 0025 and 0075; The refresh controller 916 performs refresh operations based on signals from the host sent through a channel to 916].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Keeth in Jung in view of Sprouse in view of Agarwala, because it saves power when performing refresh operations [Fig 9; Paragraphs 0025 and 0075].
Regarding claim 3, Jung teaches the hash filter comprises at least one of a Bloom filter [Paragraph 0126], a Cuckoo filter, a linear probing filter, or a XOR filter.
Regarding claim 5, Jung teaches the hash filter [Paragraphs 0031 and 0126] and the self-refresh mode [Paragraph 0096].
Spouse discloses the hash filter is received [131, Fig 1; Column 6, Lines 47 – 67; The bloom filter is sent through a channel from the host in elements] to enter a refresh mode [Column 6, Lines 47 – 67; Sending the bloom filter elements indicate the controller is to go into a mode of refreshing the bloom filter with new elements].
Keeth discloses receiving information as part of the indication to enter the self-refresh mode [Fig 9; Paragraphs 0025 and 0075; The indication is information telling 916 what to do].
Regarding claim 6, Jung teaches receiving the indication to enter the self-refresh mode [Paragraph 0096].
Keeth discloses receiving the indication comprises receiving an indication of the host device entering a sleep mode [Fig 9; Paragraphs 0025 and 0075].
Regarding claim 8, Jung teaches refreshing the first subset of rows based on the hash filter [Paragraphs 0096 and 0126] comprises:
incrementing a counter from a starting value to a count value [Figs 10 – 12; Paragraphs 0120 – 0125; The address information is incremented sequentially from an initial starting value based on the CLK signal in a refresh operation]; and
for each value of the counter:
determining a row address corresponding to a counter value based on the hash filter; and
refreshing the memory array at the row address [Paragraphs 0120 – 0126; The address values output from 520, which are values of the counter, is used as information to know which row of memory to refresh in the refresh operation].
Regarding claim 10, Jung teaches the memory controller [100, Fig 1] is configured to communicate with a memory module comprising a low power double data rate (LPDDR) memory module [Paragraph 0079; A LPDDR SDRAM is a LPDDR memory module].
Claims 11, 13, 15 – 16, and 18 – 20 are method and apparatus claims corresponding to claims 1, 3, 5 – 6, 8, and 10 and are rejected using the same prior art and similar reasoning. The prior art teaches the method [Jung, Figs 29 – 31; Sprouse, Figs 4A – 4B; Agarwala, Figs 3B – 5 and 7; Keeth, Figs 10].
Regarding claim 21, Jung teaches at least one processor [20, Fig 1; A host is understood in the art to contain a processor of some sort]; and
a memory controller [100, Fig 1] coupled to the at least one processor [20, Fig 1] and to a memory system [200a – 200n, Fig 1] through a channel [TL1 – TL3, Fig 2] and configured to communicate with the memory system [200a – 200n, Fig 1] through the channel [TL1 – TL3, Fig 2; Paragraph 0077; Data is stored in the memory array or read from the memory array through TL1 – TL2],
wherein the at least one processor [20, Fig 1] is configured to perform operations including:
saving data to a first subset of rows [Paragraphs 0031 and 0077; The memory is organized in rows and the processor of the host saves data to the memory array or reads data from the memory array] in a memory array [200a, Fig 1; Each memory device is a memory array] of the memory system [200a – 200n, Fig 1] through the memory controller [100, Fig 1];
a hash filtering corresponding to the first subset of rows [[Paragraphs 0031 and 0126], wherein the hash filter indicates rows of the memory array [200a – 200n, Fig 1] as the first subset of rows [Paragraphs 0031 and 0126; The memory is organized in rows. The addresses output from the bloom filter are addresses of row in memory making the rows valid since they can be addressed]; and
copying, through the memory controller [100, Fig 1], data to the memory system [200a – 200n, Fig 1; Paragraph 0077; Data is copied from the host to the memory through the controller].
However, Jung may not specifically disclose the limitations of determining a hash filter corresponding to the memory, the hash filter indicating locations in memory storing valid data, receiving an indication to enter a sleep mode, wherein saving the data is performed after receiving the indication to enter the sleep mode, transmitting, by the at least one processor, an indication to enter self-refresh mode to the memory system through the memory controller after receiving the indication to enter the sleep mode, and copying the hash filter to the memory system.
Spouse discloses determining a hash filter corresponding to the memory and copying the hash filter to the memory system [131, Fig 1; Column 6, Lines 47 – 67; The bloom filter is sent through a channel from the host in elements. The sending of the elements is a determination of what the bloom filter is based on the elements].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Sprouse in Jung, because it reduces data transfer from a host and a controller [Column 6, Lines 47 – 67; Column 7, Lines 1 – 27] and it allows the bloom filter to be updated as needed by adding new elements.
However, Jung in view of Sprouse may not specifically disclose the limitation of the hash filter indicating locations in memory storing valid data.
Agarwala discloses the hash filter indicating locations in memory storing valid data [Column 3, Lines 36 – 54; Column 7, Lines 3 – 32; The hash filter, in the form of a bloom filter, stores a list of valid objects/data in the memory which would indicate where the objects are for use in garbage collection].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Agarwala in Jung in view of Sprouse, because it improves the previous method of using a tree structure storing information of which objects are live which can get so large that it cannot fit in memory [Column 3, Lines 19 – 54].
However, Jung in view of Sprouse in view of Agarwala may not specifically disclose the limitation(s) of receiving an indication to enter a sleep mode, wherein saving the data is performed after receiving the indication to enter the sleep mode, transmitting, by the at least one processor, an indication to enter self-refresh mode to the memory system through the memory controller after receiving the indication to enter the sleep mode.
Keeth discloses receiving an indication to enter a sleep mode, wherein saving the data is performed after receiving the indication to enter the sleep mode, transmitting, by the at least one processor, an indication to enter self-refresh mode to the memory system through the memory controller after receiving the indication to enter the sleep mode [Fig 9; Paragraphs 0025 and 0075; The host determines a sleep mode is being entered based on a signal that is processed by a processor in the host to send a signal to 916 to perform the refresh operation].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Keeth in Jung in view of Sprouse in view of Agarwala, because it saves power when performing refresh operations [Fig 9; Paragraphs 0025 and 0075].
Regarding claim 25, Jung teaches the memory controller [100, Fig 1] is configured to communicate with a double data rate (DDR) memory system [200a – 200n, Fig 1; Paragraph 0079; Multiple examples of DDR memory are discussed for the memory system].
Claim 26 and 30 are method claims corresponding to claims 21 and 25 and are rejected using the same prior art and similar reasoning. The prior art teaches the method [Jung, Figs 29 – 31; Sprouse, Figs 4A – 4B; Agarwala, Figs 3B – 5 and 7; Keeth, Figs 10].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 22 – 24 and 27 - 29 are 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant agues on pages 9 – 11 with regard to claims 1, 11, 21, and 26 that Jung fails to teach the amended limitations of the claims and that the additional prior art references fail to overcome the deficiencies of Jung. After careful consideration of the applicant’s arguments the examiner respectfully disagrees.
Jung is not used alone to teach the limitations regarding the amendments to the claims. Claim 1 is rejected based on the combination of Jung, Sprouse, Agarwala, and Keeth. Jung is only used to teach part of the previous limitations and the amended limitations. Sprouse, Agarwala, and Keeth are used to teach additional limitations from the previous limitations and the newly amended limitations as indicated in the rejections above. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
The applicant argues on page 12 with regard to claims 3, 5 – 6, 8, 10, 13, 15 – 16, 18 – 20, 25, and 30 that the additional prior art reference in the additional dependent claim rejections fail to overcome the argued deficiencies of base claims 1, 11, 21, and 26 above. After careful consideration of the applicant’s arguments the examiner respectfully disagrees.
The examiner has indicated in the rejections above how Jung and the additional prior art references teach the limitations of base claims 1, 11, 21, and 26. The rejections of claims 3, 5 – 6, 8, 10, 13, 15 – 16, 18 – 20, 25, and 30 are maintained based in part on the rejections of claims 1, 11, 21, and 26.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER D BIRKHIMER whose telephone number is (571)270-1178. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5 Hoteling.
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, Charles Rones can be reached at 571-272-4085. 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.
/Christopher D Birkhimer/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2138