Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/753,389

MEMORY BLOCK PROGRAMMING USING DEFECTIVITY INFORMATION

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Jun 25, 2024
Examiner
YANG, HAN
Art Unit
2824
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Micron Technology, Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
92%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 92% — above average
92%
Career Allow Rate
818 granted / 887 resolved
+24.2% vs TC avg
Moderate +11% lift
Without
With
+11.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 3m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
908
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.6%
-35.4% vs TC avg
§103
38.9%
-1.1% vs TC avg
§102
33.3%
-6.7% vs TC avg
§112
12.2%
-27.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 887 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . DETAILED ACTION Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 1. 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. 2. Claim(s) 1-3, 5-10, 12-16, 18-20, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by LIU et al (Pub. No.: US 2013/0238835). 3. Regarding independent claim 1, LIU et al teaches a method comprising: retrieving a defectivity footprint (Fig. 3, S33-S34) of a portion of memory (Fig. 2); determining (Fig. 3, S34-S35), based on the defectivity footprint (Fig. 3, S33-S34), a programming order (Fig. 3, S35) for the portion of memory (Fig. 2), wherein the programming order (Fig. 3, S35) is an order from a highest defect severity (Fig. 3, S35) to a lowest defect severity (Fig. 3, S35); and programming (Fig. 3, S36) the portion of memory (Fig. 2) according to the determined programming order (Fig. 3, S35). 4. Regarding claim 2, 9, LIU et al teaches the defectivity footprint (Fig. 3, S33-S34) comprises locations (Fig. 2, #31-#33) of one or more defects and the defect severity (Fig. 3, S35) for each of the one or more defects (Fig. 3, S33-S34). 5. Regarding claim 3, 10, 16, LIU et al teaches the portion of memory (Fig. 2) is composed of a plurality of blocks (Fig. 2, #31-#33), each block (Fig. 2, #31) is composed of a plurality of decks (Fig. 2, 1st-18th), and the programming order (Fig. 3, S35) comprises an order (Fig. 3, S34) in which the plurality of decks (Fig. 2, 1st-18th) is programmed (Fig. 3, S36). 6. Regarding claim 5, 12, 18, LIU et al teaches the plurality of decks (Fig. 2, #31-#33) includes two decks (Fig. 2, #31-#33), each deck comprising half of a block (Fig. 2, 1st, 2nd). 7. Regarding claim 6, 13, 19, LIU et al teaches updating the defectivity footprint (Fig. 3, S33-S34) based on program logs (Fig. 3, S34) indicating areas of the portion of memory (Fig. 2) determined to be defective during operation (Fig. 3, S36) of the portion of memory (Fig. 2). 8. Regarding claim 7, 14, 20, LIU et al teaches the program logs (Fig. 2, S34) comprise logs of locations of uncorrectable errors (Fig. 2, S34) in the portion of memory (Fig. 2). 9. Regarding independent claim 8, LIU teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (Fig. 2) comprising instructions that, when executed by a processing device (Fig. 1, #300), cause the processing device (Fig .1, #10) to: retrieve a defectivity footprint (Fig. 3, S33-S34) of a portion of memory (Fig. 2); determine (Fig. 3, S34-S35), based on the defectivity footprint (Fig. 3, S33-S34), a programming order (Fig. 3, S35) for the portion of memory (Fig. 2), wherein the programming order (Fig. 3, S35) is an order from a highest defect severity (Fig. 3, S35) to a lowest defect severity (Fig. 3, S35); and program (Fig. 3, S36) the portion of memory (Fig. 2) according to the determined programming order (Fig. 3, S35). 10. Regarding independent claim 15, LIU teaches a system (Fig. 1) comprising: a plurality of memory devices (Fig. 2); and a processing device (Fig. 1, #10), operatively coupled with the plurality of memory devices (Fig. 1, #300), to: retrieve a defectivity footprint (Fig. 3, S33-S34) of a portion of memory (Fig. 2); determine (Fig. 3, S34-S35), based on the defectivity footprint (Fig. 3, S33-S34), a programming order (Fig. 3, S35) for the portion of memory (Fig. 2), wherein the defectivity footprint (Fig. 3, S33-S34) comprises locations of one or more defects and a defect severity (Fig. 3, S35) for each of the one or more defects and wherein the programming order (Fig. 3, S35) is an order from a highest defect severity (Fig. 3, S35) to a lowest defect severity (Fig. 3, S35); and program (Fig. 3, S36) the portion of memory (Fig. 2) according to the determined programming order (Fig. 3, S35). Allowable Subject Matter 11. Claims 4, 11, 17, 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. 12. With respect to claim 4, 11, 17, there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation for combination in the prior art to each of the plurality of decks comprises a top side and a bottom side and wherein the programming order further comprises a direction in which each of the plurality of decks is programmed, the direction indicating whether each of the plurality of decks is programmed from the top side to the bottom side or the bottom side to the top side. Conclusion 13. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, Venkatraman et al (Pub. No.: US 2002/0120826A1). Venkatraman et al (Pub. No.: US 2002/0120826A1) shows map bad memory blocks. 14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Han Yang whose telephone is (571) 270-3048. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8am-5pm with alternate Friday off. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Richard Elms can be reached on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. HY 01/07/2026 /HAN YANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2824
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 25, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 07, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596818
Permission Management Method and Terminal Device
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12597449
INDUCTIVE ENERGY HARVESTING AND SIGNAL DEVELOPMENT FOR A MEMORY DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12593621
PHASE CHANGE MULTILAYER HETEROSTRUCTURE WITH MULTIPLE HEATERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12592828
SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PARALLEL MANUFACTURE AND VERIFICATION OF ONE-TIME-PASSWORD AUTHENTICATION CARDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586627
REFRESH PERFORMANCE OPTIMIZATIONS FOR DRAM TECHNOLOGIES WITH SUB-CHANNEL AND/OR PSEUDO-CHANNEL CONFIGURATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 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
92%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+11.3%)
2y 3m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 887 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