DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3-8, 12-16 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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)(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, 9-11, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hwang (PGPUB 20230386601), hereinafter as Hwang.
Regarding claim 1, Hwang teaches a method for reading a memory cell, the method comprising: receiving a cell current of a memory cell (Fig 1A, Iread_1); receiving a first reference current, a second reference current, and a third reference current (Fig 1A, Iref_1…); generating a first comparison output signal based on comparing the cell current to the first reference current; generating a second comparison output signal based on a comparing the cell current to the second reference current; generating a third comparison output signal based on comparing the cell current to the third reference current (Fig 5, and at least [0099]); and
determining a granular state of the memory cell based at least in part on one or more of the comparison of the cell current to the first reference current, the comparison of the cell current to the second reference current, or comparison of the cell current to the third reference current (Fig 5).
Regarding claim 9, Hwang teaches generating a final output signal corresponding to a primary state of the memory cell based on one or more of the first comparison output signal, the second comparison output signal, or the third comparison output signal (Fig 7, DS_1).
Regarding claim 10, Hwang teaches outputting one or more of the first comparison output signal, the second comparison output signal, the third comparison output signal, or the final output signal (Fig 7, DS_1).
Regarding claim 11, Hwang teaches a robust read circuitry for reading a memory cell, the robust read circuitry comprising: a sense amplifier comprising:
one or more current generators configured to generate a plurality of reference currents (Fig 1A, Iref_1…); a comparator (Fig 7, ADC) coupled to the one or more current generators, wherein the comparator is configured to: receive a cell current of a memory cell; receive the plurality of reference currents (Fig 7, ADC); and
determine a granular state of the memory cell based on comparing the cell current to at least two of the plurality of reference currents ([0099]).
Regarding claim 17, Hwang teaches to output a primary state of the memory cell (Fig 7).
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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang, in view of Tanzawa (PGPUB 20040062072), hereinafter as Tanzawa.
Regarding claim 2, Hwang teaches a method as in rejection of claim 1,
But not expressly the first reference current corresponds to a minimum erased cell current based on a voltage threshold distribution associated with the memory cell.
Tanzawa teaches to use a minimum erased cell current based on a voltage threshold distribution associated with the memory cell (Fig 6, and [0102]).
Since Hwang and Tanzawa are both from the same field of semiconductor memory device, the purpose disclosed by Tanzawa would have been recognized in the pertinent art of Hwang.
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use a reference current value as in Tanzawa into the device of Hwang for the purpose of read stored bit information from a memory cell.
Claim(s) 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang.
Regarding claim 18, the examiner is taking note that it is well known in the field that a single ended sense amplifier is used in a memory device.
Regarding claim 19, the examiner is taking note that it is well known in the field that a memory cell is a two-level memory cell that is electrically programmable and erasable, is used in a memory device.
Regarding claim 20, the examiner is taking note that it is well known in the field that a biasing circuit configured to bias a bit line associated with a memory cell is used in a memory device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MIN HUANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5798. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6.
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, Amir Zarabian can be reached at (571)272-1852. 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.
/MIN HUANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2827
Prosecution Insights