Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/915,022

EFFICIENT SOFT DECODING OF ERROR CORRECTION CODE VIA EXTRINSIC BIT INFORMATION

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Oct 14, 2024
Examiner
CHAUDRY, MUJTABA M
Art Unit
2112
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Kioxia Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
88%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
694 granted / 824 resolved
+29.2% vs TC avg
Minimal +4% lift
Without
With
+3.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
849
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.1%
-31.9% vs TC avg
§103
24.7%
-15.3% vs TC avg
§102
4.5%
-35.5% vs TC avg
§112
40.1%
+0.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 824 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
DETAILED ACTION Application filed 10/14/2024 has been examined. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claims 1-20 are pending. The current application is a continuation of application 18185198 (USPN 12119075). Specification and drawings are accepted. IDS has been considered. PTO-1449 is attached. Application is pending. 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 conflicting claims 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); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) 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 www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,119,075. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. For example, claim 1 of the present application teaches managing a memory device, comprising: identifying a target page for a read operation and an extrinsic page adjacent to the target page; identifying a hard decoding threshold for the target page; modifying, based on read information for one or both of the target page and the extrinsic page, a plurality of thresholds corresponding to the hard decoding threshold, the plurality of thresholds defining a plurality of respective voltage ranges; allocating respective log-likelihood ratios (LLRs) to the plurality of voltage ranges; and decoding, based on the LLRs, the target page. Whereas claim 1 of U.S. patent ‘075 teaches soft correction in a memory device, the computer-implemented method comprising: selecting a plurality of memory locations at a memory device, the memory locations corresponding to a first page including a first plurality of bits and a second page including a second plurality of bits; modifying, based on the first plurality of bits and the second plurality of bits, a first voltage threshold corresponding to an estimated read voltage for the first plurality of bits; allocating, to a voltage range bounded by the first voltage threshold, a log-likelihood ratio (LLR); and decoding, based on the LLR corresponding to the voltage range, the first plurality of bits. The Examiner would like to point out that the claims are obvious variations of each other and not patentably distinct. In both claim sets a first page (or a target page) and a second page (or extrinsic page) are identified (or selected). Based on the read information the voltage thresholds are modified to define a voltage range. Then respective LLRs are allocated to the voltage ranges and decoding is performed accordingly. Therefore the claims are obvious embodiments of each other and not patentably distinct. A terminal disclaimer would obviate the rejection. Conclusion The following are suggested formats for either a Certificate of Mailing or Certificate of Transmission under 37 CFR 1.8(a). The certification may be included with all correspondence concerning this application or proceeding to establish a date of mailing or transmission under 37 CFR 1.8(a). Proper use of this procedure will result in such communication being considered as timely if the established date is within the required period for reply. The Certificate should be signed by the individual actually depositing or transmitting the correspondence or by an individual who, upon information and belief, expects the correspondence to be mailed or transmitted in the normal course of business by another no later than the date indicated. Certificate of Mailing I hereby certify that this correspondence is being deposited with the United States Postal Service with sufficient postage as first class mail in an envelope addressed to: Commissioner for Patents P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, VA 22313-1450 on __________. (Date) Typed or printed name of person signing this certificate: ________________________________________________________ Signature: ______________________________________ Certificate of Transmission by Facsimile I hereby certify that this correspondence is being facsimile transmitted to the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Fax No. (___)_____ -_________ on _____________. (Date) Typed or printed name of person signing this certificate: _________________________________________ Signature: ________________________________________ Certificate of Transmission via USPTO Patent Electronic Filing System I hereby certify that this correspondence is being transmitted via the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) patent electronic filing system to the USPTO on _____________. (Date) Typed or printed name of person signing this certificate: _________________________________________ Signature: ________________________________________ Please refer to 37 CFR 1.6(a)(4), 1.6(d) and 1.8(a)(2) for filing limitations concerning transmissions via the USPTO patent electronic filing system, facsimile transmissions and mailing, respectively. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUJTABA M CHAUDRY whose telephone number is (571)272-3817. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5:30pm. 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, Albert DeCady can be reached at 571-272-3819. 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. MUJTABA M. CHAUDRY Primary Examiner Art Unit 2112 /MUJTABA M CHAUDRY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2112
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Oct 14, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §DP
Mar 26, 2026
Interview Requested
Apr 03, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 03, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603802
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR IDENTIFICATION VIA CHANNELS AND COMPUTER PROGRAM PRODUCT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596946
QUANTUM METADATA LINEAGE TRACING USING QUANTUM MULTIPART ENTANGLED TWIN TECHNOLOGY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12587213
METHOD AND SYSTEM OF ERROR INJECTION FOR LOW-DENSITY PARITY-CHECK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587315
METHODS FOR ADAPTIVE ERROR AVOIDANCE TO INCREASE RE-TRANSMISSION RELIABILITY IN TIME-SLOTTED COMMUNICATION LINKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585974
QUANTUM CIRCUITS FOR MOVING A SURFACE CODE PATCH
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
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
84%
Grant Probability
88%
With Interview (+3.5%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 824 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