Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 16, 2026
Application No. 18/415,628

COLLABORATIVE DECODING WITH ERASURE SEARCH TO RECOVER CORNER FAILS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jan 17, 2024
Examiner
TANG, RONG
Art Unit
2111
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Micron Technology, INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
139 granted / 180 resolved
+22.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
9 currently pending
Career history
189
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
17.8%
-22.2% vs TC avg
§103
47.7%
+7.7% vs TC avg
§102
12.2%
-27.8% vs TC avg
§112
16.4%
-23.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 180 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Examiner Note The examination is for claims submitted on 03/07/2024. 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. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwok, US 20160283325, hereinafter Kwok, in view of Georg Schmidt, "Collaborative Decoding of InterleaveReed-Solomon Codes and Concatenated Code Designs," IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, Vol. 55, No. 7, July 2009, hereinafter Georg. As per claim 1, Kwok teaches A memory system comprising: a plurality of memory components; (FIG.1, memory device 1 110, memory device 2 112; [0018]) and a controller in communication with the plurality of memory components and configured to: (FIG.1, controller 142; [0018]) perform error correction code (ECC) decoding on first and second received codewords read from the plurality of memory components; respectively calculate first and second syndromes for the first and second received codewords in parallel; (FIG.3, syndrome calculator 220) Except combine results of the first and second syndromes in a multiple shift register computation to generate a single error location polynomial; produce a set of polynomial roots from the single error location polynomial; determine whether each of the first and second codewords have non-zero syndrome values when the produced set of polynomial roots is invalid; perform an erasure search (i) on symbols in only one the first and second codewords (ii) when only the first codeword or the second codeword has a non-zero syndrome value; and correct each of the first and second codewords responsive to the performed erasure search. Georg teaches combine results of the first and second syndromes in a multiple shift register computation to generate a single error location polynomial; (Pg. 2994, Chap. D. 1st para. combine the syndrome coefficients of the received words…...This is equivalent to synthesizing the shortest linear feedback shift-register capable of generating the syndrome sequences) produce a set of polynomial roots from the single error location polynomial; (Pg. 2994, Chap. D. last para., However, by the definition of the error locator polynomial, A(x) is only a valid error locator polynomial, if it has exactly distinct roots) determine whether each of the first and second codewords have non-zero syndrome values when the produced set of polynomial roots is invalid; (Pg. 2996, 1st para.) perform an erasure search (i) on symbols in only one the first and second codewords (ii) when only the first codeword or the second codeword has a non-zero syndrome value; and correct each of the first and second codewords responsive to the performed erasure search. (Pg.2995-2996, Chap. E. Joint Error and Erasure Correction) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling data of the claimed invention to have modified Kwok to incorporate the teaching of the elements from Georg as indicated above, in order to efficiently decoding both homogeneous and heterogeneous IRS codes (Georg, Pg 3008). As per claim 2, Kwok- Georg teaches The memory system applied above in claim 1, Kwok further teaches wherein the erasure search is performed in accordance with Chien search principles. ([0078] . The error locator polynomial 512 is provided to a logic for a Chien search 514 to generate the roots) As per claim 3, Kwok- Georg teaches The memory system applied above in claim 2, Kwok further teaches wherein the search is performed on each of the symbols in the only one codeword in an iterative manner. ([0078]) As per claim 4, Kwok- Georg teaches The memory system applied above in claim 3, Georg further teaches wherein the correcting further comprises validating roots of the identified error locations of the only one codeword. (Pg.2994, Chap.D, last para.) As per claim 5, Kwok- Georg teaches The memory system applied above in claim 4, Georg further teaches wherein the roots are valid if only one search attempt was performed. (Pg.2994, algorithm 1) As per claim 6, Kwok- Georg teaches The memory system applied above in claim 5, Georg further teaches wherein error locations of the valid roots are identified. (Pg.2994, algorithm 1) As per claim 7, Kwok- Georg teaches The memory system applied above in claim 6, Kwok further teaches further comprising calculating error magnitudes for each of the first and second codewords responsive to the error locations of the valid roots. (Pg.2994, algorithm 1) Claims 8-14 are corresponding method claims of claims 1-7, they are rejected under the same reason respectively as claims 1-7. Claims 15-20 are corresponding method claim stored as computer executable instructions in a non-transitory computer readable medium of claims 1-6, they are rejected under the same reason respectively as claims 1-6. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Berman et al., US 11855658, Efficient Hard Decision Decoding Of Generalized Reed-Solomon Codes In Presence Of Erasures And Errors Within The Singleton Bound Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONG TANG whose telephone number is (469)295-9106. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30-5. 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, Mark Featherstone can be reached on (571) 270-3750. 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. /RONG TANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2111 /MARK D FEATHERSTONE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2111
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 17, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 27, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 09, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 09, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 01, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12573468
MEMORY DEVICE WITH DUAL INTERFACE, TEST METHOD AND TEST SYSTEM THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12562844
Medium Access Control Application Timing in Non-Terrestrial Networks
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12553948
STORAGE TESTING DEVICE FOR TESTING A STORAGE SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12556200
MULTI-CHANNEL DECODER WITH DISTRIBUTED SCHEDULING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12549283
SLOT-BASED FEEDBACK CODEBOOK TYPE SWITCHING
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 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
77%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+11.0%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 180 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month