Prosecution Insights
Last updated: August 17, 2026
Application No. 18/950,911

CODING TO DECREASE ERROR RATE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN PAGES

Non-Final OA §DP
Filed
Nov 18, 2024
Priority
Aug 24, 2022 — continuation of 12/190,965
Examiner
ALROBAIE, KHAMDAN N
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Micron Technology Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
86%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
5m
Est. Remaining
89%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 86% — above average
86%
Career Allowance Rate
563 granted / 653 resolved
+26.2% vs TC avg
Minimal +2% lift
Without
With
+2.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
24 currently pending
Career history
680
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
4.2%
-35.8% vs TC avg
§103
38.2%
-1.8% vs TC avg
§102
27.9%
-12.1% vs TC avg
§112
18.5%
-21.5% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 653 resolved cases

Office Action

§DP
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 The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/18/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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 1-25 of U.S. Patent No. 12,190,965. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the current application recites similar limitations as the issued patent. In other words, the current application is broader than the issued patent. Allowable Subject Matter The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: After further search and consideration it is determined that the prior art of record neither anticipated nor renders obvious the claimed subject matter of the instant application as a whole either taken alone or in combination, in particular, prior art of record does not teach, the following limitation(s) in combination with the remaining claimed limitation: generate a first unit-distance code that indicates a respective first set of read voltages for each page of a memory device of the one or more memory devices; determine an average read voltage drift for each page based on performing one or more access operations on the memory device in accordance with the first unit-distance code; and generate a second unit-distance code that indicates a respective second set of read voltages for each page of the memory device based on a range of the average read voltage drifts. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHAMDAN N ALROBAIE whose telephone number is (571)270-7099. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday (8AM till 6PM). 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 at (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. /Khamdan N. Alrobaie/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2824
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 18, 2024
Application Filed
Jul 29, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12706128
Compute-in-Memory with Current Transition Detection
2y 7m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12706125
SEMICONDUCTOR DEVICE
2y 7m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12706127
MEMORY DEVICE HEATING IN COLD ENVIRONMENTS
2y 8m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12706159
NON -VOLATILE MEMORY DEVICE AND OPERATION METHOD THEREOF
2y 4m to grant Granted Aug 11, 2026
Patent 12694936
CURRENT BIAS CIRCUIT, MEMORY DEVICE AND MEMORY SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Jul 28, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
86%
Grant Probability
89%
With Interview (+2.5%)
2y 2m (~5m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 653 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance 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