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
Claims 1 – 20 are presented for examination.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and under 35 U.S.C. 120 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/08/2024 was received. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the language: "may generate’, “may be transmitted”, “may be performed”, and “may be configured” is speculative and fails to provide a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent.
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1 – 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1 – 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,099,406 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent.
The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter, as follows:
Claim 1 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1 – Patent 12,099,406
A method by a memory system, comprising:
A memory system, comprising:
one or more memory devices; and
one or more controllers coupled with the one or more memory devices and configured to cause the memory system to:
identifying respective quantities of first bits associated with respective portions of a signal modulated using a modulation scheme comprising four or more physical levels;
identify a quantity of first bits associated with a first portion of a signal modulated using a modulation scheme comprising four or more physical levels and a quantity of second bits associated with a second portion of the signal;
determining a quantity of second bits based at least in part on performing a half-rate calculation using the respective quantities of first bits; and
determine a quantity of third bits based at least in part on performing a half-rate calculation using the quantity of first bits and the quantity of second bits; and
transmitting the signal based at least in part on mapping respective bits of the quantity of second bits with respective physical levels of the four or more physical levels.
transmit the signal based at least in part on mapping a first bit of the quantity of third bits with a first physical level of the four or more physical levels and a second bit of the quantity of third bits with a second physical level of the four or more physical levels.
One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly recognize independent claim 1, of application 18/888109 is an obvious variation of the claimed subject matter of independent claim 1, of patent 12,099,406. Specifically, both claim 1, of the current application 18/888109, and claim 1, of patent 12,099,406 discloses: “identifying respective quantities of first bits associated with respective portions of a signal modulated using a modulation scheme comprising four or more physical levels”; “determining a quantity of second bits based at least in part on performing a half-rate calculation using the respective quantities of first bits”; and “transmitting the signal based at least in part on mapping respective bits of the quantity of second bits with respective physical levels of the four or more physical levels”.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the method disclosed by claim 1, of the current application 18/888109, as a broad recitation of the operations performed by the memory system disclosed in claim 1 of Patent 12,099,406. A method performing the operations of a disclosed memory system and a memory system capable of performing a disclosed method would be recognize by one of ordinary skill in the art as obvious variants of each other.
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the method claim 1, of the current application 18/888109, as performing the operations of the memory system of claim 1, of U.S. Patent 12,099,406, and as such are obvious variants of each other.
Claim 2 – Application 18/888109
Claim 2 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 3 – Application 18/888109
Claim 3 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 4 – Application 18/888109
Claim 4 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 5 – Application 18/888109
Claim 5 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 6 – Application 18/888109
Claim 6 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 7 – Application 18/888109
Claim 7 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 8 – Application 18/888109
Claim 8 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 9 – Application 18/888109
Claim 9 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 10 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 11 – Application 18/888109
Claim 2 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 12 – Application 18/888109
Claim 3 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 13 – Application 18/888109
Claim 4 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 14 – Application 18/888109
Claim 5 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 15 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 16 – Application 18/888109
Claim 2 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 17 – Application 18/888109
Claim 3 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 18 – Application 18/888109
Claim 4 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 19 – Application 18/888109
Claim 5 – Patent 12,099,406
Claim 20 – Application 18/888109
Claim 6 – Patent 12,099,406
Claims 1 — 3, 5, 7 —- 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double
patenting over claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 10-12, and 14 — 20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,726,865 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent.
The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter.
One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly recognize independent claim 1, of application 18/888109 is an obvious variation of the claimed subject matter of independent claim 1, of patent 11,726,865. Specifically, both claim 1, of the current application 18/888109, and claim 1, of patent 11,726,865 discloses: using a modulation scheme comprising four or more physical levels and determining a quantity of second bits based at least in part on performing a half-rate calculation.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the method disclosed by claim 1, of the current application 18/888109, as a broad recitation of the operations performed by the apparatus disclosed in claim 1 of Patent 11,726,865. A method capable of performing the operation of a disclosed apparatus would be recognize by one of ordinary skill in the art as obvious variants of each other.
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the apparatus claim 1, of the current application 18/888109, as capable of performing the operations of the apparatus of claim apparatus, of U.S. Patent 11,726,865, and as such are obvious variants of each other.
Claim 1 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 2 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1,2 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 3 – Application 18/888109
Claim 10 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 5 – Application 18/888109
Claim 5 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 7 – Application 18/888109
Claim 10 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 8 – Application 18/888109
Claim 6 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 9 – Application 18/888109
Claim 2 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 10 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 11 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1,2 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 12 – Application 18/888109
Claim 10 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 13 – Application 18/888109
Claim 5 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 14 – Application 18/888109
Claim 10 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 15 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 16 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1,2 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 17 – Application 18/888109
Claim 10 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 18 – Application 18/888109
Claim 5 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 19 – Application 18/888109
Claim 10 – Patent 11,726,865
Claim 20 – Application 18/888109
Claim 6 – Patent 11,726,865
Claims 1 – 3, 5 – 8, 10 – 12, 14 – 17, 19, and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1, 2, and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 11,327,832 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent.
The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter
One of ordinary skill in the art would clearly recognize independent claim 1, of application 18/888109 is an obvious variation of the claimed subject matter of independent claim 1, of patent 11,327,832. Specifically, both claim 1, of the current application 18/888109, and claim 1, of patent 11,327,832 discloses: an apparatus and method, comprising operations such as “determine, from a signal modulated using a modulation scheme that includes at least four physical levels, a first bit associated with a first portion of the signal and a second bit associated with a second portion of the signal based at least in part on a half-rate calculation”.
One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the method disclosed by claim 1, of the current application 18/888109, as a broader recitation of the operations performed by the method disclosed in claim 1 of Patent 11,327,832. A method performing the operations and a method capable of performing a disclosed operations would be recognize by one of ordinary skill in the art as obvious variants of each other.
Therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the apparatus claim 1, of the current application 18/888109, as performing the operations of the method of claim 1, of U.S. Patent 11,327,832, and as such are obvious variants of each other.
Claim 1 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1 – Patent 11,327,832
Claim 2 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1 – Patent 11,327,832
Claim 3 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1 – Patent 11,327,832
Claim 5 – Application 18/888109
Claim 2 – Patent 11,327,832
Claim 6 – Application 18/888109
Claim 2 – Patent 11,327,832
Claim 7 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1 – Patent 11,327,832
Claim 8 – Application 18/888109
Claim 6 – Patent 11,327,832
Claim 10 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1 – Patent 11,327,832
Claim 11 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1 – Patent 11,327,832
Claim 12 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1 – Patent 11,327,832
Claim 14 – Application 18/888109
Claim 2 – Patent 11,327,832
Claim 15 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1 – Patent 11,327,832
Claim 16 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1 – Patent 11,327,832
Claim 17 – Application 18/888109
Claim 1 – Patent 11,327,832
Claim 19 – Application 18/888109
Claim 2 – Patent 11,327,832
Claim 20 – Application 18/888109
Claim 2 – Patent 11,327,832
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL F MCMAHON whose telephone number is (571)270-3232. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9am - 5pm EST.
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, Mark Featherstone can be reached at (571)270-3750. 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.
/Daniel F. McMahon/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2111