DETAILED ACTION
As per MPEP 2111 and 2111.01, the claims are given their broadest reasonable interpretation and the words of the claims are given their plain meaning consistent with the specification without importing claim limitations from the specification.
In responding to this Office action, the applicant is requested to include specific references (figures, paragraphs, lines, etc.) to the drawings/specification of the present application and/or the cited prior arts that clearly support any amendments/arguments presented in the response, to facilitate consideration of the amendments/arguments.
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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be
Amendment
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's Amendment, filed 12-02-2025. The changes and remarks disclosed therein have been considered.
Claim(s) 1, 5, and 11 has/have been amended, claim(s) 8 and 9 has/have been cancelled, and claim(s) 1, 3-7, 10-13, and 15-22 remain(s) pending in the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yang, US 20190198098 A.
As to claim 1, Yang discloses an apparatus (see Fig 2), comprising:
a plurality of bit lines (see Fig 2 Ref BL0-BL2) intersecting with a plurality of word lines (see Fig 2 Ref WL0-WL2); a plurality of cross-point devices (see Para [0006] and Fig 2 Ref Mc1), wherein
each of the plurality of cross-point devices is connected to at least one of the plurality of word lines and at least one of the plurality of bit lines (see Fig 2); one or more first capacitors operatively connected to the plurality of bit lines (see Fig 3 Ref C1); and a first plurality of switches (see Fig 2 Ref 100; Decoders are inherently a plurality of switches.), wherein
the one or more first capacitors are connected to the plurality of bit lines or reset to ground via the first plurality of switches (see Fig 3 Ref C1; Connected does not imply directly connected, and the capacitor is connected to the switches through the elements depicted in figure 3).
As to claim 3, Yang discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein
the one or more first capacitors are operatively connected to each of the plurality of bit lines via a respective switch of the first plurality of switches (see Fig 2 Ref 100; Decoders require a particular switch when accessing a particular bit line.).
As to claim 6, Yang discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein
the plurality of cross-point devices comprises at least one of a memristor, a phase-change memory (PCM) device (see Para [0061]), a floating gate device, a spintronic device, a ferroelectric device, or a resistive random-access memory (RRAM) device.
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 of this title, 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) 4, 5, 7, 10, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang, US 20190198098 A1, in view of Ling, US 20230044919 A1.
As to claim 4, Yang discloses the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising
elements operatively connected to the plurality of word lines.
Yang does not appear to disclose one or more second capacitors.
Ling discloses one or more second capacitors (see Ling Fig 3A Ref 275).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art at the time of the effective filing of the invention that an apparatus, as disclosed by Yang, may implement particular capacitor enabling circuitry, as disclosed by Ling. The inventions are well known variants of cross point arrays and the combination of known inventions which produces predictable results is obvious and not patentable. Further evidence to the obviousness of their combination is Ling’s attempt to improve the linear response of cross point arrays (see Ling Para [0082]).
As to claim 5, Yang and Ling disclose the apparatus of claim 4, further comprising
a second plurality of switches (see Yang Fig 2 Ref 104, and see Ling Para [0091]), wherein
the one or more second capacitors are connected to the plurality of word lines or reset to ground via the second plurality of switches (see Ling Para [0091]; The capacitors are a passive element and are inoperative without the connection to the switches.).
As to claim 7, Yang and Ling disclose the apparatus of claim 1, further comprising
a plurality of select lines (see Ling Fig 3A Ref 305) connected to the plurality of cross-point devices, wherein
the plurality of cross-point devices comprises at least one transistor that connects to at least one of the plurality of select lines (see Ling Fig 3A Ref 254).
As to claim 10, Yang and Ling disclose the apparatus of claim 7, further comprising
one or more third capacitors operatively connected to the plurality of select lines (see Ling Fig 3A Ref 275; The capacitors are required for the device to operate as disclosed. Connected does not imply directly connected.).
As to claim 11, Yang and Ling disclose the apparatus of claim 10, further comprising
a third plurality of switches (see Yang Fig 2 Ref 104, and see Ling Para [0091]), wherein
the one or more third capacitors are connected to each of the plurality of select lines or reset to ground via a respective switch of the third plurality of switches (see Ling Para [0091]; The capacitors are a passive element and are inoperative without the connection to the switches. Connected does not imply directly connected.).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/02/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The language “connected” does not imply directly connected, and the relied upon capacitor is connected to the relied upon switches. The language “or reset to ground” broadens the claim’s scope the previous interpretation of the prior art still stands.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 12, 13, and 15-22 is/are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art does not appear to disclose (as recited in claim 12):
connecting one or more second capacitors of the crossbar circuit to a first word line of the crossbar circuit prior to the application of the programming voltage to the first word line or the first bit line.
The prior art does not appear to disclose (as recited in claim 21):
connecting one or more third capacitors of the crossbar circuit to a select line of the crossbar circuit prior to the application of the programming voltage to the first word line or the first bit line.
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.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEROME LARRY LEBOEUF whose telephone number is (571)272-7612. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 8:00AM - 6:00PM 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, RICHARD ELMS can be reached at (517)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.
/JEROME LEBOEUF/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2824 - 01/14/2026