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
This action is responsive to the Application filed July 31, 2024.
Status of claims to be treated in this office action:
a. Independent: 1, 10, 19
b. Pending: 1-20
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding paras. [002] and [009], make the following change:
“[[at]]in the memory”
Regarding the last sentence of para. [0012], make the following changes:
“such as to store data [[on]]in a memory device [[at]]in the memory sub-system and to read data from the memory device [[on]]in the memory sub-system.”
Regarding the first sentence of para. [0013], make the following change:
“During a read operation, the processing logic within the memory subsystem [[is ]]determines the data stored in a memory cell.”
Regarding the second sentence of para. [0019] and the second sentence of para. [0039], make the following changes:
“the system of the present disclosure re-distributes RWB from memory cells associated with [[a]]one page type (e.g., a “victim page type”) to another”
Regarding the first sentence of para. [0021], make the following changes:
“Advantages of the present disclosure include[[s]], but [[is]]are not limited to, higher reliability with increased performance.”
Regarding the first sentence of para. [0032], make the following change:
“or erasing data [[at]]from the memory devices 130 and other such operations.”
Regarding the second sentence of para. [0042], make the following change:
“In some embodiments, there can be multiple benefactor[[s]] page types”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-3, 7-12, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Koudele et al. (US Pub. 20180341416 A1; “Koudele”).
Regarding independent claim 1, Koudele discloses a system (Fig. 1: memory system 100; [0022]), comprising:
a memory device (memory device 102; [0022]); and
a processing device (processor 130; [0028]), operatively coupled with the memory device ([0028]: a processor 130 configured to execute instructions stored in memory), to perform operations comprising:
identifying a victim page type and a benefactor page type (Fig. 7: block 706; [0140]: At block 706 the target calibration mechanism 178 can identify specific pages for adjusting the distribution targets 404. The memory system 100 can identify a high performance page 718 and a low performance page 720…based on comparing the error-difference measure 322, the error measure 166, or a combination thereof corresponding to the distribution targets 404, the distribution valleys 406, or a combination thereof, such as for the target-performance profile 716. Examiner asserts that the high performance page 718 is analogous to a victim page and the low performance page 720 is analogous to the benefactor page);
selecting a target wordline from a set of wordlines (Fig. 7: block 702; [0130]: At block 702, the target calibration mechanism 178 can get the target profile 402 for a grouping of the memory cells 122 (FIG. 1)…the target calibration mechanism 178 can be implemented independently within each of the word-line group 144 (FIG. 1), regardless of the page map 142 (FIG. 1); [0149]: The memory system 100 can generate the adjusted target 420 within the die, within the word-line group 144, regardless of the page map 142, or a combination thereof), wherein the target wordline is connected to a set of memory cells associated with the victim page type and the benefactor page type ([0080]: The memory system 100 can iteratively sample the selected page 124 with the read level voltage 158 corresponding to the lower page 148 (FIG. 1), the upper page 150 (FIG. 1), the extra page 152 (FIG. 1), or a combination thereof available for the corresponding word-line group. The memory system 100 can thus select such that all trims or processing levels 154 of all page types for each word-line group can be sampled for the same pages); and
allocating a portion of a read window budget (RWB) ([0137]; [0142]) corresponding to the victim page type to the benefactor page type, wherein the RWB represents a margin between neighboring threshold voltage distributions of memory cells (Fig. 7: block 708; [0145]; [0156]: the target adjustment values 422 can represent an amount or magnitude of separation or the valley reduced or taken from the high performance page 718 and given or added to the low performance page 720. The valley corresponding to the high performance page 718 and the RWB associated thereto can be reduced, and the same reduction can be used to increase the valley corresponding to the low performance page 720 and the RWB associated thereto; see [0143]-[0155]).
Regarding claim 2, Koudele discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further
through Koudele:
performing a read operation on the set of memory cells associated with the victim page type and the benefactor page type ([0131]: For the selected grouping of the memory cells 122, the memory system 100 can determine, such as by accessing or reading, a current corresponding instance of the target profile 402; [0064]: The target profile 402 can include a distribution target 404 for each logical value or corresponding voltage levels).
Regarding claim 3, Koudele discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further
through Koudele:
wherein the target wordline has a lowest cumulative RWB of the set of wordlines ([0140]).
Regarding claim 7, Koudele discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further
through Koudele:
wherein allocating the portion of the RWB corresponding to the victim page type to the benefactor page type ([0145]; [0156]) comprises:
adjusting a program verify level of memory cells of the victim page type ([0145]: At block 708, the target calibration mechanism 178 can adjust the PV targets represented by the target profile 402. The memory system 100 can adjust or calibrate the target profile 402 by adjusting one or more of the distribution targets 404, one or more of the distribution valleys 406, or a combination thereof; [0165]: When the reference page type 724 corresponds to the error count 168 lower than the first page type 726, the reference page type 724 or a valley associated thereto can give up or reduce the PV margin by the target adjustment value 422. Examiner notes that per [0063], PV means program-verify).
Regarding claim 8, Koudele discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further
through Koudele:
wherein allocating the portion of the RWB corresponding to the victim page type to the benefactor page type ([0145]; [0156]) comprises distributing the portion of the RWB across multiple benefactor page types based on a target distribution ([0153]: The memory system 100 can also generate the adjusted targets 420 based on balancing the error measure 166 across the page types 146 for the memory cells 122. The memory system 100 can generate the adjusted targets 420 that would balance and achieve similar levels of the BER, the error count, the valley depth 714, or a combination thereof across the page types 146 for the memory cells 122; [0029]: the memory pages 124 can further correspond to a logical page type 146, such as a lower page (LP) 148, an upper page (UP) 150, or an extra page (EP) 152. Examiner concludes that there may be more than one benefactor page type, and that RWB distribution may occur either from a single victim page type to multiple benefactor page types or from multiple victim page types to a single benefactor page type due to the broadest reasonable interpretation of “balance…across the page types 146”).
Regarding claim 9, Koudele discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further
through Koudele:
wherein allocating the portion of the RWB corresponding to the victim page type to the benefactor page type ([0145]; [0156]) comprises distributing the portion of the RWB from multiple victim page types to the benefactor page type based on a target distribution ([0153]; [0029]. See explanation in rejection of claim 8).
Independent claim 10 contains the same limitations as claim 1 except for being drafted in method format, and is thus rejected for the same reasons using Koudele.
Regarding claims 11, 12, and 16-18, Koudele discloses the limitations of claim 10. The limitations of claims 11, 12, and 16-18 are the same as limitations from claim 2, 3, and 7-9, respectively, and are thus rejected for the same reasons.
Independent claim 19 contains mostly the same limitations as claims 1 and 10 except for relating to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, and is thus rejected for the same reasons using Koudele.
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.
Claims 4-6, 13-15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koudele (US Pub. 20180341416 A1) as applied to claims 1, 10, and 19 above, and further in view of Sharon (US Pub. 20210406122 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Koudele discloses the limitations of claim 1. Koudele does not disclose:
setting a number of error correcting code (ECC) parity bits for codewords associated with the victim page type to be greater than a number of ECC parity bits for codewords associated with the benefactor page type, wherein a codeword comprises user data and the ECC parity bits.
However, Sharon teaches:
setting a number of error correcting code (ECC) parity bits for codewords associated with the victim page type to be greater than a number of ECC parity bits for codewords associated with the benefactor page type, wherein a codeword comprises user data and the ECC parity bits (claim 7: the codeword for the top page of data is created by encoding the top page of data with more error correction code parity bits than the lower, middle, and upper pages of data. Examiner asserts that the top page of data is analogous to a victim page type and the other pages are analogous to the benefactor page type).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Sharon to Koudele wherein setting a number of error correcting code (ECC) parity bits for codewords associated with the victim page type to be greater than a number of ECC parity bits for codewords associated with the benefactor page type, wherein a codeword comprises user data and the ECC parity bits in order to improve the reliability of programming for quad level cells (Sharon, [0033]).
Regarding claim 5, Koudele and Sharon together disclose the limitations of claim 4. Koudele does not disclose:
wherein increasing the ECC parity bits for the codewords associated with the victim page type comprises:
reducing a number of codewords corresponding to the victim page type; and
allocating unassigned bits from the number of codewords to remaining codewords as additional ECC parity bits.
However, Sharon teaches:
wherein increasing the ECC parity bits for the codewords associated with the victim page type (claim 7) comprises:
reducing a number of codewords corresponding to the victim page type; and
allocating unassigned bits from the number of codewords to remaining codewords as additional ECC parity bits ([0044]: FIG. 6 is an illustration of the codewords generated by the method of this embodiment. As shown in FIG. 6, the top page has fewer codewords than the other three pages, and the extra space in the wordline is used for extra parity bits; [0045]: some of the top page may be allocated for extra lower, middle, and upper page parity…The extra parity bits of the lower, middle, and upper pages can be XOR'ed, and the result can be stored in the top page).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Sharon to modified Koudele wherein increasing the ECC parity bits for the codewords associated with the victim page type comprises: reducing a number of codewords corresponding to the victim page type; and allocating unassigned bits from the number of codewords to remaining codewords as additional ECC parity bits in order to improve the reliability of programming for quad level cells (Sharon, [0033]).
Regarding claim 6, Koudele and Sharon together disclose the limitations of claim 5. Koudele does not disclose:
wherein the number of codewords corresponding to the victim page type is decreased by one.
However, Sharon teaches:
wherein the number of codewords corresponding to the victim page type is decreased by one (per Fig. 6, the top page contains three codewords while the other pages contain four codewords).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the teachings of Sharon to modified Koudele wherein the number of codewords corresponding to the victim page type is decreased by one in order to improve the reliability of programming for quad level cells (Sharon, [0033]).
Regarding claims 13 and 20, Koudele discloses the limitations of claims 10 and 19, respectively. The limitations of claims 13 and 20 are the same as the limitations from claim 4, and are thus rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 14, Koudele and Sharon together disclose the limitations of claim 13. The limitations of claim 14 are the same as the limitations from claim 5, and are thus rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 15, Koudele and Sharon together disclose the limitations of claim 14. The limitations of claim 15 are the same as the limitations from claim 6, and are thus rejected for the same reasons.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Liikanen (US Pub. 20210043258 A1): paras. [0045], [0047], and [0090], and Fig. 4 are relevant to claims 1, 10, and 19.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH ROSE AGGER whose telephone number is (571)270-0250. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 8am-5pm.
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, Rich Elms can be reached at 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 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.
/Khamdan N. Alrobaie/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2824
/E.R.A./Examiner, Art Unit 2824
2/21/2026