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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) Form PTO-1449. The information disclosed therein was considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The claims (1, 9, 15) direct (see last clause) that the base bitline voltage and the adjusted bitline voltage that is based on the voltage adjustment value are both used to perform the read operation.
However, the disclosure directs only that the read operation is performed using the adjusted bit line voltage (see paragraph 0041 for example). Remaining claims share this deficiency by virtue of their dependencies.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
As noted above, in view of the full disclosure, one of ordinary would be unaware of when they were infringing the claims.
Remaining claims share this deficiency by virtue of their dependencies.
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, 2, 4, 8-10, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Achtenburg (US 2017/0345510).
Regarding claims 1, 9, inasumach as understood Achtenburg discloses a method comprising: receiving, by a processing device (see Figure 1, controller), a read request (160) with respect to a set of memory cells of a memory device; identifying, using a voltage adjustment data structure, a voltage adjustment value based on operational characteristics of the memory device (see paragraph 0044); identifying a base bitline voltage (see pagraph 0060, “default value”) associated with the set of memory cells; and performing, using the base bitline voltage and an adjusted bitline voltage (total bit line voltage) based on the voltage adjustment value (offset), a read operation with respect to the set of memory cells.
Regarding claims 2, 10, Achtenburg discloses the method of claim 1, wherein operational characteristics comprise at least one of: a current operating temperature of the memory device, or a cross-temperature derived from the programming temperature and the current operating temperature (see paragraph 0134).
Regarding claim 4, Achtenburg discloses the method of claim 2, wherein the programing temperature is determined using a metadata record associated with the set of memory cells (see paragraph 0042).
Regarding claims 8, 14, Achtenburg discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the set of memory cells is provided by one of: a page or a block of the memory device (see paragraph 0037 for example).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 15, 16 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Achtenburg (US 2017/0345510).
Claim 15 recites the same features as claim 1 above but implemented as a CRM not taught by Achtenburg. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of filing to implement the features of claim 1 as a CRM in order to distribute the device for use, sale or manufacturing.
Claims 16 and 20 recite substantially the same features as claims 2 and 8 above and are rejected based on the same reasoning.
Claim(s) 3, 5-7, 11-13 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Achtenburg (US 2017/0345510 in view of Yun (US 2014/0321209).
Regarding claim 3, Achtenburg discloses the method of claim 2, but fails to teach the value is a of the media endurance metric. However, Yun teaches the modification of BL voltages based on a media endurance metric (P/E count, see Figure 10 s220 for example).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill at the time of filing provide for read voltage modification due at least in part due to an endurance metric to account for threshold shift due to increased P/E count.
Regarding claim 5, 11 and 17, Achtenburg discloses the method of claim 1, wherein each voltage adjustment value of voltage adjustment data structure is generated using a respective data set reflecting values of a media endurance metric of the set of memory cells and a cross-temperature of the set of memory cells (as combined, Yun teaches implementing the P/E as an adjustment basis and Achtenburg teaches the cross-temp aspect—it would have been obvious to include both these aspect to offset both the effect on read).
Regarding claim 6, 12 and 18, Achtenburg discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the adjusted bitline voltage is produced by applying the voltage adjustment value to a source-side voltage applied to a source-side of a bitline associated with the set of memory cells (see Figure 3 of Yun, either end of BL can be considered source side).
Regarding claim 7, 13 and 19, Achtenburg discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the adjusted bitline voltage is produced by applying the voltage adjustment value to a drain-side voltage applied to a drain-side of a bitline associated with the set of memory cells (see Figure 3 of Yun, either end of BL can be considered source side). .
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DOUGLAS KING whose telephone number is (571)272-2311. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:00AM-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, Richard Elms can be reached on 571-272-1869. 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.
/DOUGLAS KING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2824
Prosecution Insights