Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/953,042

HBM RAS CACHE ARCHITECTURE

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Nov 19, 2024
Examiner
GUYTON, PHILIP A
Art Unit
2113
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
84%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 84% — above average
84%
Career Allow Rate
666 granted / 795 resolved
+28.8% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
822
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.8%
-29.2% vs TC avg
§103
39.7%
-0.3% vs TC avg
§102
29.9%
-10.1% vs TC avg
§112
11.4%
-28.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 795 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
NON-FINAL OFFICE 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 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 1-5, 7-13, and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 2014/0376320 to Loh et al. (hereinafter Loh). Loh discloses: 1. A memory, a processing unit of the memory being configured to: receive a memory address associated with an error in data stored at the memory (para. [0049] and Fig. 5, block 502); store the memory address in an entry of an index stored on the memory (paras. [0023], [0049] and Fig. 5, blocks 504-510); store a corrected version of the data in a portion of a spare memory of the memory (paras. [0026], [0044], [0045]); map the entry of the index to the portion of the spare memory holding the corrected version of the data (paras. [0023], [0026], [0041]); and use the portion of the spare memory to perform a memory access associated with the data (para. [0024], [0025], [0041], [0043]). 2. The memory of claim 1, wherein: the memory comprises an error correction code portion to protect against errors in the index, and the index comprises a valid indicator configured to indicate an active status of the memory address in the entry of the index (paras. [0020], [0023]). 3. The memory of claim 2, wherein the error correction code portion generates the corrected version of the data (paras. [0040]). 4. The memory of claim 1, wherein the processing unit is configured to: search the index based on the memory access comprising a write access (paras. [0024]); and write data of the write access to the portion of the spare memory based on a determination that the write access is associated with the memory address stored in the entry of the index (para. [0026]). 5. The memory of claim 1, wherein the processing unit is configured to: search the index based on the memory access comprising a read access (para. [0024]); and read data from the portion of the spare memory based on a determination that the read access is associated with the memory address stored in the entry of the index (para. [0025]). 7. The memory of claim 1, wherein the memory comprises memory dies stacked on a logic die (paras. [0018], [0051], [0052]). 8. The memory of claim 7, wherein the memory dies of the memory are interconnected by through-silicon vias (TSVs) (para. [0054]). Claims 9-13, 15, and 16 are a method including steps identical to the steps performed by the memory of claims 1-5, 7, and 8, and are rejected under the same rationale. Claims 17-20 are a non-transitory computer-readable medium for performing the identical steps as the memory of claims 1-5, and are rejected under the same rationale. 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. Claims 6 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Loh in view of U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2014/0189282 to Gu et al. (hereinafter Gu). Loh does not disclose expressly: 6. The memory of claim 1, wherein the processing unit is configured to: monitor a usage level of the spare memory; and provide an indicator of the usage level of the spare memory. Gu teaches a storage node configured to: monitor a usage level of the spare memory (paras. [0047], [0048], [0074] and Fig. 6, step 610); and provide an indicator of the usage level of the spare memory (paras. [0076], [0077] - spare memory space determining unit 130 provides determined sizes). Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Loh by monitoring a usage level and providing an indicator of the usage level, as taught by Gu. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to minimize wear rate and latency of the memory, as well as improving performance of the storage system, as discussed by Gu (paras. [0062], [0066]). In this manner, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Gu with Loh to achieve the claimed invention. Claim 14 is a method including steps identical to the steps performed by the memory of claim 6, and is rejected under the same rationale. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Philip Guyton whose telephone number is (571)272-3807. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:30. 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, Bryce Bonzo can be reached at (571)272-3655. 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. /PHILIP GUYTON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2113
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 19, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 20, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 20, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12596604
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DATA MANAGEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596600
VERIFYING PROCESSING LOGIC OF A GRAPHICS PROCESSING UNIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12579038
METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR BACKING UP GLOBAL MEMORY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12572404
DETECTING AND RECOVERING FROM TIMEOUTS IN SCALABLE MESH NETWORKS IN PROCESSOR-BASED DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12554571
ERROR CAUSE ESTIMATION DEVICE AND ESTIMATION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 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
92%
With Interview (+8.2%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 795 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