Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/892,276

REDUCING STARTUP TIME OF A TRELLIS-BASED MLSE DECODER

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Sep 20, 2024
Examiner
FAN, CHIEH M
Art Unit
2632
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Microchip Technology Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
11%
Grant Probability
At Risk
1-2
OA Rounds
1y 7m
To Grant
-2%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants only 11% of cases
11%
Career Allow Rate
2 granted / 18 resolved
-50.9% vs TC avg
Minimal -14% lift
Without
With
+-13.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
1y 7m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
36
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.5%
-33.5% vs TC avg
§103
44.6%
+4.6% vs TC avg
§102
26.6%
-13.4% vs TC avg
§112
14.4%
-25.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 18 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
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 . Claim Objections Claim 6 is objected to because of the following reason. Claim 6 recites the limitation “The method of claim 5, wherein reducing the subset of run-up symbols in the incoming data stream comprises deleting the subset of run-up symbols from the incoming data stream”. It is unclear on whether procedure “reducing the subset of run-up symbols in the incoming data stream comprises deleting the subset of run-up symbols from the incoming data stream” is comprised in the claim “method”. 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, 4-6, 8-11, 14-16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pope et al (7,277,506). -Regarding claim 1, Pope et al teaches a method comprising: procedure of at least partially initializing a trellis (“trellis processing , col. 3, line 27) of an MLSE engine (referred to “MLSE 1080”, col. 9, line 65) at least partially based on predetermined state information comprising channel values (“autocorrelation values of the impulse response of the channel”, col. 3, lines 24-25) about a communication channel (“channel”, col. 3, line 25) associated with an incoming data stream (“data burst 5”, col 3, line 9) being a digital signal (see col. 3, lines 8-27, col. 9, line 61 to col. 10, line 20), and procedure ((945, 965), figure 9) of processing, via the MLSE engine, the incoming data stream to further initialize (referred to “forward trace initialization”, col. 11, lines 61-62 and “backward trace initialization”, col. 11, line 62) the trellis and decode, via ((965), figure 9), the incoming data stream (see col. 9, line 51 to col. 10, line 26, col. 11, lines 60-63). -Regarding claim 4, Pope et al teaches that the predetermined state information comprises scores (being values (“autocorrelation values of the impulse response of the channel”, col. 3, lines 24-25)) that represent likelihoods of the trellis being in respective ones of possible states of the trellis, in a manner that the values are used to calculate likelihoods (being branch metrics) of the trellis being in respective ones of possible states of the trellis (see figure 5, col. 3, lines 20-27, col. 5, lines 35-54). -Regarding claim 5, Pope et al teaches that the method comprises: looking up/searching the scores at least partially based on a subset of run-up symbols in the incoming data, in a manner that the scores ((1110), figure 11) are stored and retrieved/looked up from a memory ((1135), figure 11) (see col. 11, lines 30-35), wherein before being stored, the scores are autocorrelation values of impulse response of the communication channel, which are obtained by being based on a subset of run-up symbols (“midamble 10”, col. 3, line 21) in the incoming data (see col. 3, lines 21-27). -Regarding claim 6, as for claim 5, Pope et al teaches the claimed method. Not that the recitation “reducing the subset of run-up symbols in the incoming data stream comprises deleting the subset of run-up symbols from the incoming data stream” is not given any patentable weight over Pope et al since it merely specifies how the subset of run-up symbols in the incoming data stream can be reduced, and not further limit the claimed method that anticipated by Pope et al, but able to stand alone. Even if assuming the recitation is taken into account, in comparison with the claim, in Pope et al, the subset of run-up symbols in the incoming data stream inherently can be reduced by deleting the subset of run-up symbols from the incoming data stream. -Regarding claim 8, Pope et al teaches that the scores are based on simulations/computations, wherein the simulations/computations consider specific channel characteristics (“complex channel impulse response h(t) 1040”, col. 9, line 65 to col. 10, line 1) (see col. 10, lines 8-12). -Regarding claim 9, Pope et al teaches that partially initializing the trellis of the MLSE engine at least partially based on predetermined state information about the communication channel associated with the incoming data stream comprises: directly utilizing at least one run-up symbol of the incoming data stream to initialize the trellis, in a manner that at least one run-up symbol (“midamble 10”, col. 3, line 21) of the incoming data stream are directedly used to obtain autocorrelation values (“autocorrelation values of the impulse response of the channel”, col. 3, lines 24-25) of impulse response of the communication channel for initializing the trellis (see col. 3, lines 20-27 and col. 10, lines 8-20). -Regarding claim 10, Pope et al teaches that processing the incoming data stream to further initialize the trellis and decode the incoming data stream comprises: processing, via a shift register (“shift register 250 of length L”, col. 3, line 38), a window (being a window of 4-bit length (“length L”, col. 3, line 38)) of the incoming data stream to further initialize/start the trellis (see col. 3, lines 32-55 and col. 4, lines 3-19), and decode via ((965), figure 9), the incoming data stream. -Regarding claim 11, Pope et al teaches an apparatus comprising: a LUT ((1135, figure 11) to store predetermined state information ((1110), figure 11) about a communication channel (“channel”, col. 3, line 25) associated with an incoming data stream (“data burst 5”, col 3, line 9) being a digital signal (see col. 3, lines 20-27, col. 11, lines 30-35); a startup engine including: ((1120) figures 11 and 12) to: at least partially initialize, via (1240), figure 12), branch metrics of a trellis (“trellis processing , col. 3, line 27) based on respective predetermined state information retrieved from the LUT (see col. 3, lines 23-27, col. 12, lines 14-35); and ((1180), figure 11) of further partially initializing path metrics (referred to “path metrics”, col. 11, line 29) of the trellis of an MLSE engine ((1080), figures 10 and 11) at least partially based on the predetermined state information (see figure11, col. 11, lines 28-39 and equation [4]); and an MLSE engine ((945, 965), figure 9) to process, via (945), the incoming data stream to further initialize the trellis (referred to “forward trace initialization”, col. 11, lines 61-62 and “backward trace initialization”, col. 11, line 62), and decode, via (965), the incoming data stream (see col. 9, line 51 to col. 10, line 26, col. 11, lines 60-63, col. 21, line 62 to col. 22, line 24). -Regarding claim 14, Pope et al teaches that the startup engine is to directly utilizing at least one run-up symbol (“midamble 10”, col. 3, line 21) of the incoming data stream to initialize the trellis, in a manner that the at least one run-up symbol are directedly used to obtain autocorrelation values (“autocorrelation values of the impulse response of the channel”, col. 3, lines 24-25) of impulse response of the communication channel for initializing the trellis (see col. 3, lines 20-27 and col. 10, lines 8-20). -Regarding claim 15, Pope et al teaches that the predetermined state information stored at the LUT includes scores (being values (“autocorrelation values of the impulse response of the channel”, col. 3, lines 24-25)) that represent likelihoods of the trellis being in respective ones of possible states of the trellis, in a manner that the values are used to calculate likelihoods (being branch metrics) of the trellis being in respective ones of possible states of the trellis (see figure 5, col. 3, lines 20-27, col. 5, lines 35-54). -Regarding claim 16, Pope et al teaches that the scores are based on simulations/computations, wherein the simulations/computations consider specific channel characteristics (“complex channel impulse response h(t) 1040”, col. 9, line 65 to col. 10, line 1) (see col. 10, lines 8-12). -Regarding claim 20, Pope et al teaches that the MLSE engine to process a window of the incoming data stream (being a window of 4-bit length (“length L”, col. 3, line 38)) of the incoming data stream) (see col. 3, lines 32-55 and col. 4, lines 3-19). 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 2, 3, 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pope et al in view of Tokuhiro (2018/0227162). -Regarding claim 2, Pope et al teaches that the trellis is a multi-state trellis (e.g., being a 4-state trellis having 4 states (00), (01), (10) and (11) (see figure 5 and col. 5, lines 35-37)) that can represent signal states of one modulation scheme among modulation schemes (referred to “linear modulation schemes”, col. 10, lines 23-24) applied to the incoming data stream. Pope et al does not teach whether the 4 signal states are indicated by corresponding signal levels of the modulations scheme, as claimed. In analogous art, Tokuhiro teaches that a Pulse Amplitude Modulation 4 (PAM4) (“PAM 4”, [0003]) can be applied to a digital signal for a high speed communication wherein the PAM4 has 4 signal levels indicating corresponding 4 signal states (00), (01), (10) and (11) of the digital signal, (see [0005]). For application, since Pope et al does not teach in detail on which modulation scheme is applied to the incoming data stream, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art, at the time the invention was made, to implement Pope et al, as taught by Tokuhiro, in such a way that the modulation scheme would be a Pulse Amplitude Modulation 4 (PAM4) , wherein the PAM4 has 4 signal levels indicating 4 corresponding signal states 00), (01), (10) and (11) of the PAM4 applied to the incoming data stream so that the method would be applicable for a high speed communication via the application of the PAM4 to the incoming data stream for the communication. -Regarding claim 3, as for claim 2, Pope et al in view of Tokuhiro teaches that the modulation scheme is PAM4. -Claim 12 is rejected with similar reasons set forth for claim 2, as being unpatentable over Pope et al in view of Tokuhiro. -Claim 13 is rejected with similar reasons set forth for claim 3, as being unpatentable over Pope et al in view of Tokuhiro. Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pope et al in view of Kang et al (2020/0366536). -Regarding claim 21, Pope et al teaches an apparatus (comprising ((945, 965), figure 9)), comprising: an input (being an input of ((1080), figure 10) to receive an incoming data stream (Zn) (see col. 10, lines 2-5), and a processor ((945, 965), figure 9) performing a method comprising: procedure of at least partially initializing a trellis (“trellis processing , col. 3, line 27) for MLSE (referred to “MLSE 1080”, col. 9, line 65) at least partially based on predetermined state information comprising channel values (“autocorrelation values of the impulse response of the channel”, col. 3, lines 24-25) about a communication channel (“channel”, col. 3, line 25) associated with an incoming data stream (“data burst 5”, col 3, line 9) being a digital signal, (see col. 3, lines 8-27, col. 9, line 61 to col. 10, line 20), and procedure ((945, 965), figure 9) of processing, via the MLSE, the incoming data stream to further initialize (referred to “forward trace initialization”, col. 11, lines 61-62 and “backward trace initialization”, col. 11, line 62) , via the MLSE engine, the trellis and decode, via ((965), figure 9), the incoming data stream (see col. 9, line 51 to col. 10, line 26, col. 11, lines 60-63). Pope et al does not teach whether the apparatus comprises a memory to store instructions that, responsive to execution by the processor, enable the processor to perform the method, as claimed. In analogous art, Kang et al teaches that a method can be implemented with a memory “recording medium” to store instructions “instructions” that, responsive to execution by a programmable processor “computer”, enable the processor to perform the method (see [0147). For application, it would have been obvious for one skilled in the art, at the time the invention was made, to implement Pope et al, as taught by Kang et al, in such a way that the processor would be programmable, wherein the apparatus would comprise a memory to store instructions that, responsive to execution by the processor, enable the processor to perform the method, so that the processors would be enhanced with programmable features in high speed fashion for performing the method. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 7 and 17-19 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. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHUONG M PHU whose telephone number is (571)272-3009. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-16:00. 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, Chieh Fan can be reached at 571-272-3042. 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. /PHUONG PHU/ Primary Examiner Art Unit 2632
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 20, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 27, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603806
COMMUNICATION CONTROL APPARATUS, COMMUNICATION SYSTEM, AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent null
METHOD, APPARATUS AND SYSTEM FOR HIGH-SPEED TRANSMISSION
Granted
Patent null
CONSTELLATION REARRANGEMENT FOR ARQ TRANSMIT DIVERSITY SCHEMES
Granted
Patent null
APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR ESTIMATING TIMING OFFSET IN A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
Granted
Patent null
BLOCK-CODED GROUP MODULATION METHOD AND TRANSMITTER/RECEIVER USING THE SAME
Granted
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
11%
Grant Probability
-2%
With Interview (-13.6%)
1y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 18 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