Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/789,837

RECONFIGURABLE IN-MEMORY PHYSICALLY UNCLONABLE FUNCTION DEVICE AND METHOD OF OPERATING THE SAME

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 31, 2024
Examiner
BUI, THA-O H
Art Unit
2825
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 4m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
849 granted / 965 resolved
+20.0% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+4.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 4m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
993
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.3%
-38.7% vs TC avg
§103
41.9%
+1.9% vs TC avg
§102
34.0%
-6.0% vs TC avg
§112
10.7%
-29.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 965 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of 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 . Claims 1-20 are pending in the application. Information Disclosure Statement The information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Form PTO-1449, filed 07/31/2024, 11/11/2024, 05/25/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosed therein was considered by the examiner. Drawings The drawings submitted on 07/31/2024. These drawings are review and accepted by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 the same under either status. 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. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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. Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dwivedi et al (US 9,404,966 B2 hereinafter “Dwivedi”) in view of Gong et al (US 10,784,313 B1 hereinafter “Gong”). 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. Regarding Independent Claim 1, Dwivedi, for example in Figs. 1-12, discloses a semiconductor device (e.g., SELF-COMPENSATING DELAY CHAIN; in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12) comprising: an array of M inverters (e.g., inverter 50, 52, 54, 56; in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12), M being an integer of at least 2 such that the array of M inverters includes at least a first inverter and a second inverter (e.g., inverter 50, 52; in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12); (M-1) pairs of Dynamic Random Access Memory (DRAM) coupled to the array of M inverters (i.e., DRAM cell having elements 60 and 65; in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12), wherein: (M-1) inverters of the array of M inverters are each connected in parallel with a pair of DRAMs of the (M-1) pairs of DRAMs (see for example in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12). However, Dwivedi is silent with regard to (M-1) pairs of resistive memory devices (RMDs) coupled to the array of M inverters; and a write line coupled to an input of the first inverter. In the same field of endeavor, Gong, for example in Figs. 1-9, discloses (M-1) pairs of resistive memory devices (RMDs) coupled to the array of M inverters (e.g., PCM/RRAM; in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9); and a write line (e.g., WL 12; in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9) coupled to an input of the first inverter (e.g., inverter 50; in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9). It would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teaching of Dwivedi such as performance characteristic monitoring circuit and method (see for example in Figs. 1-12 of Dwivedi) by incorporating the teaching of Gong such as integrated resistive processing unit to avoid abrupt set of RRAM and abrupt reset of PCM (see for example in Figs. 1-9 of Gong). In order to provide a memory structure having multiple of inverter devices and resistive memory are connected in parallel (see for example in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9 of Gong). Regarding claim 2, the above Dwivedi/Gong, combination discloses wherein: the second inverter (e.g., inverter 52; in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12 of Dwivedi and also see in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9 of Gong, as discussed above) has an input coupled to an output of the first inverter (e.g., inverter 50; in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12 of Dwivedi and also see in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9 of Gong, as discussed above), a first pair of RMDs of the (M-1) pairs of RMDs is coupled in parallel with the second inverter, the first pair of RMDs includes a first RMD and a second RMD, the first RMD is coupled between the input of the second inverter and an output node, and the second RMD is coupled between an output of the second inverter and the output node (see for example in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12 of Dwivedi and also see in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9 of Gong, as discussed above). Regarding claim 3, the above Dwivedi/Gong, combination discloses wherein: the (M-1) pairs of RMDs are controllable whereby the array of M inverters and the (M-1) pairs of RMDs are configured to be controllably programmed as each of a NOT gate and a YES gate (see for example in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12 of Dwivedi and also see in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9 of Gong, as discussed above). Regarding claim 4, the above Dwivedi/Gong, combination discloses wherein: the (M-1) pairs of RMDs have commonly-coupled output nodes (see for example in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12 of Dwivedi and also see in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9 of Gong, as discussed above). Regarding claim 5, the above Dwivedi/Gong, combination discloses wherein: the commonly-coupled output nodes are configured to carry an output signal of each of the NOT gate and the YES gate (see for example in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12 of Dwivedi and also see in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9 of Gong, as discussed above). Regarding claim 6, the above Dwinvedi/Gong, combination discloses wherein: the array of M inverters and the (M-1) pairs of RMDs are configured to perform a physically unclonable function (see for example in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12 of Dwivedi and also see in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9 of Gong, as discussed above), and in a randomized programming operation of a first pair of RMDs of the (M-1) pairs of RMDs (see for example in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12 of Dwivedi and also see in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9 of Gong, as discussed above), the semiconductor device is configured to apply a first voltage to the write line while floating a common output node of the first pair of RMDs (see for example in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12 of Dwivedi and also see in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9 of Gong, as discussed above). The structure in of the prior art (Dwivedi/Gong) is substantially identical to the structure of the claims. MPEP 2112.01(I). The manner of operation does not distinguish this apparatus claim from the prior art apparatus. MPEP 2114 (II). Regarding claim 7, the above Dwivedi/Gong, combination discloses wherein: in a read operation of the first pair of RMDs, the semiconductor device is configured to apply a second voltage to the write line and output a measurement voltage from the common output node (see for example in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12 of Dwivedi and also see in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9 of Gong, as discussed above). Also, the structure in of the prior art (Dwivedi/Gong) is substantially identical to the structure of the claims. MPEP 2112.01(I). The manner of operation does not distinguish this apparatus claim from the prior art apparatus. MPEP 2114 (II). Regarding Independent Claim 8, Dwivedi, for example in Figs. 1-12, discloses a semiconductor device (e.g., SELF-COMPENSATING DELAY CHAIN; in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12), comprising: M inverters, M being a positive integer, the M inverters being electrically connected serially (e.g., inverter 50, 52, 54, 56; in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12); and (M-1) pairs of Dynamic Random Access Memory (DRAMs) (i.e., DRAM cell having elements 60 and 65; in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12), wherein: a first inverter of the M inverters is electrically connected to a first node, the first node being electrically connected to a first DRAM of a first pair of DRAMs of the (M-1) pairs of DRAMs and to a second inverter of the M inverters (see for example in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12), and each inverter after the first inverter of the M inverters is electrically connected in parallel with a pair of DRAMs of the (M-1) pairs of DRAMs (see for example in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12). However, Dwivedi is silent with regard to (M-1) pairs of resistive memory devices (RMDs) coupled to the array of M inverters. In the same field of endeavor, Gong, for example in Figs. 1-9, discloses (M-1) pairs of resistive memory devices (RMDs) coupled to the array of M inverters (e.g., PCM/RRAM; in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9). It would have been obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the teaching of Dwivedi such as performance characteristic monitoring circuit and method (see for example in Figs. 1-12 of Dwivedi) by incorporating the teaching of Gong such as integrated resistive processing unit to avoid abrupt set of RRAM and abrupt reset of PCM (see for example in Figs. 1-9 of Gong). In order to provide a memory structure having multiple of inverter devices and resistive memory are connected in parallel (see for example in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9 of Gong). Regarding claim 9, the above Dwivedi/Gong, combination discloses further comprising: a write line configured to program one or more RMDs of the (M-1) pairs of RMDs, the write line being electrically connected to an input of the first inverter of the M inverters (see for example in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12 of Dwivedi and also see in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9 of Gong, as discussed above). Regarding claim 10, the above Dwivedi/Gong, combination discloses further comprising: a plurality of output nodes, wherein each output node electrically connects the RMDs of a corresponding pair of the (M-1) pairs of RMDs to one another (see for example in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12 of Dwivedi and also see in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9 of Gong, as discussed above). Regarding claim 11, the above Dwinvedi/Gong, combination discloses wherein: a first RMD of a corresponding pair of RMDs is electrically connected to a first inverter output, a second inverter input, and a first output node of the plurality of output nodes (see for example in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12 of Dwivedi and also see in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9 of Gong, as discussed above). Regarding claim 12, the above Dwivedi/Gong, combination discloses wherein: a second RMD of the corresponding pair of RMDs is electrically connected to a second inverter output, a third inverter input, and the first output node of the plurality of output nodes (see for example in Fig. 3 related in Figs. 1-2, 4-12 of Dwivedi and also see in Fig. 1 related in Figs. 2-9 of Gong, as discussed above). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 13-14 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 13, the prior arts of record fail to teach or suggest a semiconductor device as recited in claim13, and particularly, further comprising: a first level of the semiconductor device including the M inverters being first M inverters of a plurality of M inverters and the (M-1) pairs of RMDs being first (M-1) pairs of RMDs of a plurality of (M-1) pairs of RMDs; and a second level of the semiconductor device above the first level of the semiconductor device, the second level of the semiconductor device including: second M inverters of the plurality of M inverters, the second M inverters being electrically connected serially; and second (M-1) pairs of RMDs of the plurality of (M-1) pairs of RMDs, the second (M-1) pairs of RMDs being electrically connected in parallel with the second M inverters except for a first inverter of the second M inverters, wherein an input of the first inverter of the second M inverters is electrically connected to an output node of a corresponding pair of RMDs of the first (M-1) pairs of RMDs. Regarding claim 14, the prior arts of record fail to teach or suggest a semiconductor device as recited in claim14, and particularly, wherein: the M inverters are first M inverters of a plurality of M inverters, the (M-1) pairs of RMDs are first (M-1) pairs of RMDs of a plurality of (M-1) pairs of RMDs, and the semiconductor device further comprises: second M inverters of the plurality of M inverters, the second M inverters being parallel to the first M inverters; and second (M-1) pairs of RMDs of the plurality of (M-1) pairs of RMDs, the second (M-1) pairs of RMDs being electrically connected in parallel with the second M inverters except for a first inverter of the second M inverters, wherein an input of the first inverter of the second M inverters is electrically connected to an output node of a pair of RMDs of the first (M-1) pairs of RMDs. Claims 15-20 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art made of record and considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure does not teach or suggest the claimed limitations. Dwivedi et al (US 9,404,966 B2 hereinafter “Dwivedi”) and Gong et al (US 10,784,313 B1 hereinafter “Gong”), taken individually or in combination, do not teach the claimed invention having the following limitations, in combination with the remaining claimed limitations: Per claim 15, there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation for combination in the prior art to the steps of setting a first resistive memory device (RMD) of a pair of RMDs in a first programming operation; setting a second RMD of the pair of RMDs in a second programming operation; randomly resetting one of the first or second RMDs in a third programming operation; and performing a read operation on the pair of RMDs. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THA-O H BUI whose telephone number is (571)270-7357. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00AM - 3:00PM. 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, ALEXANDER SOFOCLEOUS can be reached at 571-272-0635. 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. /THA-O H BUI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2825 01/10/2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 31, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 10, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12597476
PROGRAM VERIFY COMPENSATION IN A MEMORY DEVICE WITH A DEFECTIVE DECK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12580034
MEMORY DEVICE AND METHOD OF FABRICATING MEMORY DEVICE INCLUDING A TEST CIRCUIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12573457
NON-VOLATILE MEMORY DEVICE AND OPERATING METHOD THEREOF INCLUDING A NEGATIVE DISCHARGE VOLTAGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12567468
PASS VOLTAGE ADJUSTMENT FOR PROGRAM OPERATION IN A MEMORY DEVICE WITH A DEFECTIVE DECK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12555635
MEMORY DEVICE HAVING CACHE STORAGE UNIT FOR STORAGE OF CURRENT AND NEXT DATA PAGES AND PROGRAM OPERATION THEREOF
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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
88%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+4.3%)
2y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 965 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