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 .
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 “a first phase driver connected to each word line of the first set of word lines wherein the first phase driver is a single transistor” 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.
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 9, 12-17 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.
Claim 9 recites “a first phase driver connected to each word line of the first set of word lines wherein the first phase driver is a single transistor.” The specification and the drawings do not support a first phase driver is a single transistor and it connected to each word line of the first set of word lines. Fig. 2, shows what seems to be a plurality of transistors at the intersection of 210 and 212. Fig. 2, supports a single transistor connected to a single word line but not connected to all the word lines of the first set of word lines. In addition, if phase driver 210-1 is a single transistor, the phase transistor 210-1 is not connected to all the word lines in the first set of the word lines. Therefore, there is not support for a first phase driver is a single transistor and it connected to each word line of the first set of word lines. Thus, this limitation will not be treated.
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.
Claim(s) 9 and 12-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 2021/0295924 A1) and further in view of Sakui et al. (US 5,818,75635).
Regarding claim 9, Lee teaches a sub word-line driver circuit, comprising:
a first set of word lines arranged in a vertical stack, each word line of the first set of word lines configured to access memory cells of a first set of memory cells (Fig. 3, wordlines WL1 to WLn in the first block BLK1);
a second set of word lines arranged in the vertical stack, each word line of the second set of word lines configured to access memory cells of a second set of memory cells (Fig. 3, wordlines WL1 to WLn in the second block BLK2);
a first set of digit lines, wherein each word line of the first set of word lines couples a memory cell of the first set of memory cells with a digit line of the first set of digit lines (BL11 to BL1m in the first block BLK1);
a second set of digit lines, wherein each word line of the second set of word lines couples a memory cell of the second set of memory cells with a digit line of the second set of digit lines (BL21 to BL2m in the second block BLK2), wherein the second set of digit lines are above and vertically aligned with the first set of digit lines (Fig. 4, The channel regions CH1 and CH2 are part of the digit lines which are vertically aligned with the each other. In addition, a portion of the first digit lines 16 and a portion of the second digit lines 26 are vertically aligned ), and
wherein the second set of digit lines are electrically disconnected from the first set of digit lines (Fig. 3, BL11 to BL1m and BL21 to BL2m are disconnected from each other).
Lee is silent in teaching a second set of word lines, communicatively coupled to the first set of word lines; and a first phase driver of a plurality of phase drivers associated with the first set of word lines wherein the first phase driver is a single transistor.
Sakui teaches a second set of word lines (Fig. 5,
W
L
0
j
t
o
W
L
31
j
) communicatively coupled to the first set of word lines (Fig. 5,
W
L
0
i
t
o
W
L
0
i
); and a first phase driver of a plurality of phase drivers associated with the first set of word lines wherein the first phase driver is a single transistor (a plurality of phase drivers T1i and T34i, wherein each phase driver is a single transistor).
It would have been obvious to a person with the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use Sakui’s invention of using a common driver circuit for two sub arrays or sub blocks in order to reduce the circuitry which would help increase the density of the memory device.
Regarding claim 12, Sakui further teaches the sub word-line driver circuit of claim 11, wherein the first phase driver is disconnected to the second set of word lines (Driver for the signal Ti is disconnected from the second set of word lines Fig. 5,
W
L
0
j
t
o
W
L
31
j
).
Regarding claim 13, Sakui further teaches the sub word-line driver circuit of claim 12, comprising a second phase driver of the plurality of phase drivers associated with the second set of word lines (Fig. 5, driver connected to Tj).
Regarding claim 14, Sakui further teaches the sub word-line driver circuit of claim 13, wherein the second phase driver is disconnected to the first set of word lines (Driver for the signal Tj is disconnected from the first set of word lines).
Regarding claim 15, Sakui further teaches the sub word-line driver circuit of claim 9, further comprising a plurality of word line drivers coupled to the first set of word lines and the second set of word lines (Fig. 5, drivers connected to W0 to W31).
Regarding claim 16, Sakui further teaches the sub word-line driver circuit of claim 15, wherein each word line driver is coupled to a word line in the first set of word lines and a word line in the second set of word lines (W0 is coupled to word line WL0i in the first set and WL0j in the second set of word lines).
Regarding claim 17, Lee and Sakui further teach the sub word-line driver circuit of claim 9, wherein the first set of digit lines is disconnected from the second set of word lines and the second set of digit lines is disconnected from the first set of word lines (Fig. 3, first digit lines BL11 to BL1m in block BLK1 are disconnected from the second set of word lines in block BLK1 and second digit lines BL21 to BL2m in block BLK2 are disconnected from the first set of word lines in block BLK1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant’s representative is arguing about a limitation that is currently rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a). The current limitation does not have support in the specification and was not treated for prior art rejection.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 9 and 12-17 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 KHAMDAN N ALROBAIE whose telephone number is (571)270-7099. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday (8AM till 6PM).
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, Richard Elms can be reached at (571) 272-1869. 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.
/Khamdan N. Alrobaie/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2824
Prosecution Insights