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
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/29/2024 & 08/25/2025 are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 2-13 line 1 recite “a low-density parity-check code”, it should be “[[a]] the low-density parity-check code”.
Claim 8 line 7 recite “a row-column constraint”, it should be “[[a]] the row-column constraint”.
Any claim not specifically mentioned above, is objected due to its dependency on the objected claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1, recites “arranging t block matrices along a diagonal to form a local matrix……; interposing an all-zero matrix between each two adjacent columns of the block matrix to separate the neighboring n columns and form an expanded global matrix, wherein each all-zero matrix has a size of m×(t−1); permutating the expanded global matrix rightward circularly in sequence to generate t expanded global matrices and arranging the t expanded global matrices under the local matrix to form a basic parity-check matrix;” As is evident on present Specification [0033] “arrange t block matrices 20 along a diagonal to form a local matrix. As shown in FIG. 5, the upper half of the basic parity-check matrix is a local matrix 26, which is formed by t block matrices 20, t>1. The t block matrices 20 are identical and do not overlap.” [0034], “As shown in FIG. 4, an all-zero matrix 24 having a size of m×(t−1) is interposed into every two adjacent columns to make the size of each column increase from m to m×1. Suppose that 1-3. In Step S10, the block matrix 20 is tripled, and the block matrices 20 are arranged along the diagonal. In Step S12, each column is tripled; all the elements of the interposed two columns are filled with “0”.” [0035] “In Step S14, rightward permutation is circularly performed on the expanded global matrix to generate/expanded global matrices. Thus, each m×n block matrix becomes an m×nt expanded global matrix 22.”, [0039] (12:15-17) “The process of generating CPM includes a step: randomly generating a permutation coefficient, and performing a random column permutation or a random row permutation to form a circulant permutation matrix 21……”. These arranging, interposing and permutating steps under its broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic coding device, thus they fall within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites one additional element – using a coding device to perform arranging, interposing and permutating steps. The coding device in above steps is recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic coding component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a coding device to perform the three steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic coding component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic coding component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Claims 2-12 recite additional element that further details generating a low-density parity-check code, i.e. Mental Processes.
Claim 13 recites additional element of “dividing the basic parity-check matrix into a plurality of local codes…...”, “performing local decoding ……”, “performing global decoding ……”. As is evident on specification [0005]-[0006], these limitations describes a “mathematical relationship,” i.e., the claim recites an additional abstract idea.
Accordingly, none of the additional elements in claims above would integrate the abstract idea into a practical application under Step 2A Prong 2 because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The additional elements are either further details “mental process” abstract idea or add an additional “mathematical relationship” abstract idea. Thus, there are no elements recited in the claim language of claims 2-13 that would amount to significantly more in Step 2B.
Therefore claims 1-13 are not patent eligible in their current form.
Examiner’s Notes
There are no art rejection for Claims 1-13, however they are under 101 rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Liao et al., "A (21150, 19050) GC-LDPC Decoder for NAND Flash Applications", IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Regular Papers (Volume: 66, Issue: 3, 2019, Page(s): 1219-1230)
LI et al., "Globally coupled LDPC codes", Information Theory and Applications Workshop (ITA), IEEE, 2016, pp. 1-10
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RONG TANG whose telephone number is (469)295-9106. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30-5.
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 on (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.
/RONG TANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2111
/MARK D FEATHERSTONE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2111
Prosecution Insights