Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/592,840

RECONFIGURABLE TESTING OF AN INTEGRATED CIRCUIT

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Mar 01, 2024
Examiner
TANG, RONG
Art Unit
2111
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
International Business Machines Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
77%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 77% — above average
77%
Career Allow Rate
139 granted / 180 resolved
+22.2% vs TC avg
Strong +17% interview lift
Without
With
+16.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
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
16.3%
-23.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 180 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §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 . Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/01/2024 is being considered by the examiner. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-5, 8-13, 17-18 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kan, US 20230135977, hereinafter Kan. As per claim 9, Kan teaches A system comprising: a plurality of sets of memory arrays (FIG.1, SRAM 108a... 108e); a plurality of built-in self-test (BIST) engines; (FIG.1, [0024] one or more MBIST engines 106) a register ([0030] the registers) to store one or more values ([0024] a test vector) indicating at least a partial order in which the plurality of BIST engines are to respectively test the plurality of sets of memory arrays; ([0034] the MBIST engine 106a may perform a first set of memory tests on a first region of its respective SRAM 108a using a first algorithm) and a logic circuit (Fig.1 the programmable macro BIST controller 104) coupled to the register to cause the plurality of BIST engines to test the plurality of sets of memory arrays based on the one or more values stored in the register. ([0034] the MBIST engines 106 may perform memory tests on the SRAM 108 using the same or different algorithms according to the commands sent from the programmable macro BIST controller 104......) As per claim 10, Kan teaches The system as applied above in claim 9, Kan further teaches wherein the one or more values stored in the register are determined based on tests in hardware or simulation. ([0062], [0069]-[0070]) As per claim 11, Kan teaches The system as applied above in claim 9, Kan further teaches wherein the one or more values stored in the register indicate an ordering of the plurality of BIST engines that balances power across a total period of testing. ([0030] the programmable macro BIST controller 104 may be configured to identify the SRAM power control switch 110 based on the instructions/data read (e.g., the test vector of the first type) from the registers.[0033]) As per claim 12, Kan teaches The system as applied above in claim 9, Kan further teaches wherein the logic circuit selects a first one of the BIST engines to run before other ones of the BIST engines based on the one or more values stored in the register, and wherein the other ones of the BIST engines run in a predetermined sequence following the running of the first one of the BIST engines. ([0042] The Macro_sel is a global MBIST sequence selection setting -indicating to each MBIST engine 106 of the sequence of memory test operations selected for execution.) As per claim 13, Kan teaches The system as applied above in claim 12, Kan further teaches wherein the first one of the BIST engines sends a signal to a second one of the BIST engines upon completion of testing by the first one of the BIST engines to cause the second one of the BIST engines to begin testing. ([0042], [0034]) As per claim 16, Kan teaches The system as applied above in claim 9, Kan further teaches wherein the logic circuit causes a first subset of the BIST engines to run in parallel and a second subset of the BIST engines to run in a serial manner. ([0077] in other implementations, one or more operations, or portions thereof, are performed in a different order, or overlapping in time, in series or parallel, or are omitted, or one or more additional operations are added, or the method is changed in some combination of ways) Claims 1-5, and 8 are method claim of claims 9-13, and 16 respectively, thus they are rejected under the same reason as claims 9-13, and 16 respectively. Claims 17, 18 and 20 are apparatus claim of claims 9, 12, and 16 respectively, thus they are rejected under the same reason as claims 9, 12 and 16 respectively. 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) 6-7, 14-15, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kan, US 20230135977, hereinafter Kan, in view of Parulkar, US 6769081, hereinafter Parulkar. As per claim 14, Kan teaches The system as applied above in claim 9, EXCEPT wherein the one or more values stored in the register indicate a complete order in which the plurality of BIST engines are to sequentially test the plurality of sets of memory arrays. Parulkar teaches wherein the one or more values stored in the register indicate a complete order in which the plurality of BIST engines are to sequentially test the plurality of sets of memory arrays. (15:45-50; FIG.12A, The BIST meta-controller 910 is essentially a state machine that sequences through the BIST tests for each of the sub-blocks of the memory under test.) 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 Kan to incorporate the teaching of the element as indicated above from Parulkar as indicated above, in order to efficiently and cost-effectively test IC devices (Kan, [0014]). As per claim 15, Kan-Parulkar teaches The system as applied above in claim 14, Parulkar further teaches wherein the logic circuit includes a multiplexer coupled to the register to selectively output one of a plurality of possible orders of the BIST engines based on the one or more values stored in the register. (FIG.12B, 16:8-22 The working of the meta-controller is the same as the one in FIG. 12A, except that each BIST DONE signal from each memory sub-block is multiplexed with a "1" before sending it to the meta-controller. The input of the multiplexer is selected based on the value of the binary programmable element 1206.) Claims 6-7 are method claim of claims 14-15 respectively, thus they are rejected under the same reason as claims 14-15 respectively. Claims 19 is apparatus claim of claim 14, thus it is rejected under the same reason as claim 14. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Chickanosky et al., US 20140129888, STAGGERED START OF BIST CONTROLLERS AND BIST ENGINES 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

Mar 01, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 26, 2026
Interview Requested
Apr 06, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 06, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

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
94%
With Interview (+16.8%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 180 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