Detailed Action
The instant application having Application No. 18/824,586 has a total of 20 claims pending in the application; there are 3 independent claims and 17 dependent claims, all of which are ready for examination by the examiner. This Office action is in response to the claims filed 3/27/26 Claims 1-18 and 20-21 are pending.
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 .
REJECTIONS BASED ON PRIOR ART
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) 1-3, 5-6, 8, 11-14, 16-18 and 20-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0397563), herein referred to as Chen.
Referring to claim 1, Chen discloses as claimed, a method of operating a memory system, comprising: sending a logical-to-physical (L2P) mapping table in a first operation mode or a second operation mode (see fig. 1 showing a memory device with a controller and para. 36, where a portion or portions of a L2P mapping table are read depending on designated sub-regions and then sent as HPB entries via a UPIU packet to a host system), wherein the first operation mode comprises: sending first recommendation information, wherein the first recommendation information comprises at least one L2P mapping table (see para. 36-40, where in response to an HPB command, mapping information corresponding to a designated sub-region is sent via UPIU packets. There may be one designated sub-region or multiple sub-regions. In the case of one sub-region, the HPB entries corresponding to that sub-region’s mapping would be sent, which would constitute a mapping table); and the second operation mode comprises: sending a data input universal flash storage protocol information unit (UPIU) in response to a host performance booster (HPB) read buffer command, wherein the data input UPIU comprises at least two L2P mapping tables (see para. 36-40, where in response to an HPB command, mapping information corresponding to designated sub-regions are sent via UPIU packets. In the case of multiple sub-region, the HPB entries corresponding to multiple sub-region’s mappings would be sent. Each sub-region’s mapping would constitute a mapping table).
Claim 16 recites similar limitations to claim 1 and would be rejected using the same rationale.
As to claim 2, Chen also discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first recommendation information comprises data information of at least one HPB region, and each HPB region corresponds to one L2P mapping table (see para. 36-40, where the information of an HPB entry would carry the mapping information as well as a physical address of where the global or local L2P mapping table is stored).
Claim 17 recites similar limitations to claim 2 and would be rejected using the same rationale.
As to claim 3, Chen also discloses the method of claim 2, wherein the first recommendation information comprises an extended data segment and a first particular data segment, the extended data segment is configured to store the at least one L2P mapping table, and the first particular data segment is configured to store the data information of the at least one HPB region (see para. 36-40, where the information of an HPB entry would carry the mapping information, which would be an extended data segment as well as a physical address of where the global or local L2P mapping table is stored, which would be the first particular data segment).
Claim 18 recites similar limitations to claim 3 and would be rejected using the same rationale.
As to claim 5, Chen also discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the data input UPIU comprises data information of at least two HPB regions, and each HPB region corresponds to one L2P mapping table (see para. 36-40, where in response to an HPB command, mapping information corresponding to designated sub-regions are sent via UPIU packets. In the case of multiple sub-region, the HPB entries corresponding to multiple sub-region’s mappings would be sent. Each sub-region’s mapping would constitute a mapping table).
Claim 20 recites similar limitations to claim 5 and would be rejected using the same rationale.
As to claim 6, Chen also discloses the method of claim 5, wherein the data input UPIU comprises extended data segment information and second particular data segment information; the second particular data segment information is configured to store data information of the first one among the at least two HPB regions (see para. 39-40, where HPB entries related to sub-regions are sent via UPIU and therefore each sub-region would have HPB entries related to that sub-region. A second particular data segment would be the HPB entries related to the first HPB region); and the extended data segment information is configured to store data information of one or more other HPB regions different than a first HPB region (see para. 39-40, where HPB entries related to sub-regions are sent via UPIU and therefore each sub-region would have HPB entries related to that sub-region. An extended data segment would be the HPB entries related to the other HPB regions).
As to claim 8, Chen also discloses the method of claim 1, wherein before the sending the data input UPIU in response to the HPB read buffer command, the method further comprises: sending at least one piece of second recommendation information, wherein each piece of second recommendation information comprises data information of at least one HPB region (see fig. 3, where in C4 and C5, an HPB read buffer command is given and mapping tables are sent via UPIU HPB entries. However, in step C2 , recommendations for updating sub region HPB entries are sent. Also see fig. 4).
Referring to claim 11, Chen discloses as claimed, a method of operating a host, comprising: receiving at least one piece of first recommendation information or second recommendation information; when receiving the first recommendation information, decoding the first recommendation information to obtain at least one L2P mapping table (see para. 36-40, where in response to an HPB command, mapping information corresponding to a designated sub-region is sent via UPIU packets to be decoded. There may be one designated sub-region or multiple sub-regions. In the case of one sub-region, the HPB entries corresponding to that sub-region’s mapping would be sent, which would constitute a mapping table); and when receiving the second recommendation information, sending an HPB read buffer command, wherein the HPB read buffer command comprises data information of at least two HPB regions (see fig. 3 and 4, showing an HPB read buffer command sent requesting HPB entries of sub-regions after receiving recommendations for activating sub-regions).
As to claim 12, Chen also discloses the method of claim 11, wherein after the sending the HPB read buffer command, the method further comprises: receiving a data input UPIU sent by a target device in response to the HPB read buffer command; and decoding the data input UPIU to obtain at least two L2P mapping tables, wherein each L2P mapping table corresponds to one HPB region (see para. 36-40, where in response to an HPB command, mapping information corresponding to designated sub-regions are sent via UPIU packets. In the case of multiple sub-region, the HPB entries corresponding to multiple sub-region’s mappings would be sent. Each sub-region’s mapping would constitute a mapping table).
As to claim 13, Chen also discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the HPB read buffer command comprises extended data segment information and second particular data segment information; the second particular data segment information is configured to store data information of the first one among the at least two HPB regions (see fig. 3-4 and para. 39-40, where an HPB read buffer command requests HPB entries of sub-regions to be activated. Then HPB entries related to sub-regions are sent via UPIU and therefore each sub-region would have HPB entries related to that sub-region. A second particular data segment would be part of the HPB read buffer command relating to HPB entries of the first HPB region); and the extended data segment information is configured to store data information of the HPB regions other than a first HPB region (see fig. 3-4 and para. 39-40, where an HPB read buffer command requests HPB entries of sub-regions to be activated. Then, HPB entries related to sub-regions are sent via UPIU and therefore each sub-region would have HPB entries related to that sub-region. An extended data segment would be part of the HPB read buffer command related to the HPB entries of the other HPB regions).
As to claim 14, Chen also discloses the method of claim 13, wherein the extended data segment information comprises an allocation length, and the allocation length is related to a number of the HPB regions (see fig. 3-4 and para. 36, where an HPB read buffer command is issued. The HPB read buffer command is a specialized command with an allocation length field. The length would be related to the number of HPB regions as more HPB regions would result in a greater length).
As to claim 21, Chen also discloses the method of claim 2, wherein each L2P mapping table comprises a plurality of HPB entries corresponding to a respective HPB region (see para. 36-40, where each HPB entry comprises elements for two different tables, and multiple HPB entries are sent at once for sub regions or multiple sub-regions).
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.
Claims 9-10 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, in view of Hornung et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0066869), herein referred to as Hornung et al.
As to claim 9, Chen discloses the claimed invention except for the method of claim 1, wherein the sending the L2P mapping table in the first operation mode or the second operation mode comprises: acquiring an internal storage situation of a target device; and determining to send the at least one L2P mapping table in the first operation mode or the at least two L2P mapping tables the second operation mode according to the internal storage situation of the target device.
However, Hornung et al. disclose wherein the sending the L2P mapping table in the first operation mode or the second operation mode comprises: acquiring an internal storage situation of a target device; and determining to send the at least one L2P mapping table in the first operation mode or the at least two L2P mapping tables the second operation mode according to the internal storage situation of the target device (see para. 19-20, where the recipient communicates the available buffer space to the sender. The sender utilizes credits to send packets to the recipient and stops sending when there is not available space. Therefore using this method when combined with Chen, a single mapping table would be transmitted if there was only space for one mapping table, and multiple would be transmitted if there was space for more).
Chen and Hornung et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of memory devices (see Chen, abstract, and Hornung et al., abstract, regarding memory devices).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen to comprise wherein the sending the L2P mapping table in the first operation mode or the second operation mode comprises: acquiring an internal storage situation of a target device; and determining to send the at least one L2P mapping table in the first operation mode or the at least two L2P mapping tables the second operation mode according to the internal storage situation of the target device, as taught by Hornung et al., in order to have available space to store the transaction (see Hornung et al., para. 19). In addition, checking for available space and avoiding sending more data than a recipient can handle is well known in the art and would be obvious to utilize with Chen.
As to claim 10, Chen and Hornung also disclose the method of claim 9, wherein the determining to send the L2P mapping table in the first operation mode or the second operation mode according to the acquired internal storage situation of the target device comprises: when an internal storage usage of the target device is greater than a first threshold, sending the L2P mapping table in the first operation mode; and when the internal storage usage of the target device is less than or equal to the first threshold, sending the L2P mapping table in the second operation mode (see Hornung et al., para. 19-20, where the sender is aware of the buffer space of the recipient and only sends packets until the buffer or space is full. Therefore, when combined with Chen, this would allow for sending one L2P mapping table when the space is available for only one and if the storage usage is less, then sending two or more L2P mapping tables).
As to claim 15, Chen discloses the claimed invention except for the method of claim 11, wherein before receiving at least one piece of the first recommendation information or the second recommendation information, the method further comprises: sending an internal storage situation to a target device.
However, Hornung et al. disclose , wherein before receiving at least one piece of the first recommendation information or the second recommendation information, the method further comprises: sending an internal storage situation to a target device (see para. 19-20, where the recipient communicates the available buffer space to the sender. The sender utilizes credits to send packets to the recipient and stops sending when there is not available space. Therefore using this method when combined with Chen, a single mapping table would be transmitted if there was only space for one mapping table, and multiple would be transmitted if there was space for more).
Chen and Hornung et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of memory devices (see Chen, abstract, and Hornung et al., abstract, regarding memory devices).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen to comprise wherein before receiving at least one piece of the first recommendation information or the second recommendation information, the method further comprises: sending an internal storage situation to a target device, as taught by Hornung et al., in order to have available space to store the transaction (see Hornung et al., para. 19). In addition, checking for available space and avoiding sending more data than a recipient can handle is well known in the art and would be obvious to utilize with Chen.
Claims 4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen, in view of Jung et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2025/0265018), herein referred to as Jung et al.
As to claim 4, Chen discloses the claimed invention except for the method of claim 3, wherein the extended data segment comprises an allocation length, the first recommendation information further comprises a total extended data segment length, the allocation length is related to the total extended data segment length, and the total extended data segment length is related to a number of the HPB regions.
However, Jung et al. disclose wherein the extended data segment comprises an allocation length (see para. 200, where the DATA-IN UPIU includes a data segment length), the first recommendation information further comprises a total extended data segment length (see para. 205, where the length hints for each stream may be combined and sent at once, representing a total length), the allocation length is related to the total extended data segment length, and the total extended data segment length is related to a number of the HPB regions (see para. 196-200, where there are length hints for each stream to the host. Therefore when applied to Chen, which teaches sending multiple HPB region table entries, this would allow for sending lengths for each HPB region, and the total length would be dependent on the number of regions).
Chen and Jung et al. are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of memory devices (see Chen, abstract, and Jung et al., abstract, regarding memory devices).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Chen to comprise wherein the extended data segment comprises an allocation length, the first recommendation information further comprises a total extended data segment length, the allocation length is related to the total extended data segment length, and the total extended data segment length is related to a number of the HPB regions, as taught by Jung et al., in order to allow for the appropriate amount of space to be allocated, so as to not overfill a storage space and to have room to receive the appropriate amount of data.
Claim 7 recites similar limitations to claim 4 and would be rejected using the same rationale.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/27/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
1) Applicant argues that the L2P mapping tables are structured data constructs and not individual entries. Applicant argues that a single HPB entry in Chen conveys only a portion of mapping information associated with a sub-region and therefore does not represent a collection of mappings. Firstly, there is not reason a mapping table could not only contain one entry. Secondly, para. 36 of Chen was cited which stipulates that at LEAST a portion of the mapping table is read and the HPB ENTRIES in that mapping table are provided. Chen’s language stipulates that at least a portion of the mapping table is read and sending multiple HPB entries at once. Multiple entries of a mapping table still constitute a mapping table that is being sent. Also see fig. 4, discussing sending and storing HPB entries of a sub-region, which would again constitute a mapping table.
2) Applicant argues that Chen’s HPB entries convey only portions of mapping information and not mapping tables. Again, the HPB entries are grouped together to form tables and regions of HPB entries which constitute tables. See para. 49-50, where each logical unit is divided into HPB regions and HPB sub-regions, both of which contain HPB entries. A portion of a mapping table is still a mapping table. It is still a structure that is used to map logical to physical address information. In addition, para. 33 describes the process of retrieving information from a mapping table and then reading the loaded mapping table, which consists of the loaded HPB entries. Applicant argues that there needs to be functional completeness to form a mapping table, otherwise it wouldn’t be able to perform the translations correctly. However, there is no basis that a portion of a mapping table would not still constitute a mapping table. Chen, para. 33 uses the loaded HPB entries for translation in order to improve read performance.
3) Applicant argues that Chen does not disclose grouping HPB entries into an L2P mapping table. Applicant provides no basis for this statement. Chen, para. 36 recites providing HPB entries based on the mapping information and reading entries corresponding to sub regions. Therefore ,the entries are already grouped when sending them. In addition, para. Fig.4 discusses storing HPB entries together of the HPB sub-region. Applicant argues that the grouped entries of a sub-region to not constitute a complete L2P mapping structure. Again, there is no reason a portion of a table cannot act as a table, and Chen clearly uses the portion as a L2P mapping structure. Applicant argues that there is no table-level organization and interpretation. However, a L2P mapping table is simply a number of L2P entries used for address translation. Chen accomplishes that task with its HPB entries corresponding to sub-regions.
4) Applicant argues that Chen does not disclose one L2P mapping table per sub-region. Applicant again argues that a sub-regions mapping does not constitute a complete mapping table. It is unclear in the claims where applicant has defined a complete mapping table and why a partial mapping table would not read on “a logical-to physical (L2P) mapping table.” Applicant argues that an HPB entry merely contributes a fragment of mapping information and cannot perform that function independently. However, there is no reason why a fragment or partial mapping information cannot perform mapping functions or still contribute to an increased performance. Memory systems cache a portion of information frequently. Whatever portion they cache still allows the system to read that data faster. The entire memory or storage does not need to be in the cache for there to be a positive effect.
5) Applicant argues that Chen does not disclose transmitting multiple L2P mapping tables in a single UPIU. Applicant argues that Chen discusses HPB entries corresponding to sub-regions, but does not describe a payload structure that 1) aggregates HPB entries across multiple sub-regions, organizes those entries into multiple L2P mapping tables or packages multiple mapping tables together within a single data input UPIU. Applicant argues that Chen discloses no table boundaries, allocation lengths, or any structural indicators that would identify multiple L2P mapping tables within a single UPIU. However, Table boundaries, allocation lengths or structural indicators are not recited in the claims. Chen, para. 38 states “the UFS device may transmit a response UPIU packet to the host system for recommendation on updating Sub-Regions HPB entries. para. 39 states “the UFS device may identify the new Sub-Regions to be activated. Regions is plural. “the host system may issue an HPB read buffer command to the UFS device to request the HPB entries of the new Sub-Regions to be activated. In addition, Para. 40 describes sending multiple mapping Tables at once, as the first 4 bytes of each entry are for a T1 table and the second 4 bytes are for a T2 Table.
6) Applicant argues that Chen does not disclose operation-mode-dependent transmission of mapping tables. Applicant argues that the two operation modes are selective. However, there is no information in the claims as to how these operation modes are selected, or if one of the operation modes ever is selected. The claim language as written states that the table may be sent in a first operation mode OR a second operation mode. However, as stated above, Chen can send HPB entries corresponding to one sub-region or multiple sub-regions, which would constitute two different operation modes. Applicant argues that there is a mode-dependent selection, but none of that is in the claim language. The word “selection” is not used and there is no reason that an operation mode cannot simply be sending different types or amount of items.
7) Applicant argues that anticipation cannot be based on recharacterization or reconstruction. These elements have already been addressed previously.
CLOSING COMMENTS
Conclusion
a. STATUS OF CLAIMS IN THE APPLICATION
The following is a summary of the treatment and status of all claims in the application as recommended by M.P.E.P. 707.07(i):
a(1) CLAIMS REJECTED IN THE APPLICATION
Per the instant office action, claims 1-18 and 20-21 stand rejected.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
b. DIRECTION OF FUTURE CORRESPONDENCES
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALAN OTTO whose telephone number is (571)270-1626. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Hosain Alam can be reached at 571-272-3978. 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.
/A.O/Examiner, Art Unit 2132
/HOSAIN T ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2132
Prosecution Insights