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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claim(s) 2-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kankani 20160342344 herein Kankani.
Per claim 2, Kankani discloses: one or more memory devices comprising a plurality of logical units; and one or more controllers coupled with the one or more memory devices and configured to cause the memory system to: (fig. 1 comp 124 & 132, ¶0052; data storage system 100 includes a storage device 120 (also sometimes called an information storage device, or a data storage device, or a memory device), which includes a storage controller 124 and a storage medium 132, and is used in conjunction with or includes a computer system 110 (e.g., a host system or a host computer)) retrieve, at the memory system, a health status of one or more logical units of the plurality of logical units; (¶0065; In a storage device with a plurality of memory devices (e.g., a plurality of storage mediums 132), the trigger condition may be dependent on metrics obtained from a plurality of the memory devices) determine, at the memory system and after initiating a tracking mode for the one or more logical units based at least in part on the health status of the one or more logical units, whether one or more parameters of the memory system satisfies one or more thresholds, the one or more thresholds associated with one or more host entities; (¶0120; the trigger condition is detected when a first status metric for the first block satisfies a threshold. For example, trigger condition detection module 228 and/or metric maintaining module 224 determine that a BER for the first block is above a threshold BER value or an estimated number of remaining P/E cycles for the first block is below an endurance threshold (such as endurance threshold 506, FIGS. 5A-5B). The trigger condition, in some embodiments, is based on the current encoding format of the memory portion (e.g., the first block). The above discussion regarding FIGS. 3A-3C includes additional details concerning exemplary status metrics. The storage device then optionally conducts a first determination (604) as to whether a second status metric (distinct from the first status metric for the first block) for the first die (or the storage medium including the first die) satisfies end-of-life (EOL) criteria; the tracking mode is merely a label for a first threshold to monitor LU’s candidates close to read only status) and initiate a read-only mode for the one or more logical units based at least in part on determining that the one or more parameters satisfies the one or more thresholds (¶0120; In accordance with the first determination indicating that the second status metric satisfies (612-Yes) the EOL criteria, the storage device operates the first die (or the storage medium including the first die) in read-only mode).
Per claim 3, Kankani discloses: wherein the one or more thresholds is based at least in part on one or more priorities associated with the one or more host entities (¶0059-60; Status metrics of the storage device include metrics (e.g., wear metrics such as program-erase (P/E) cycle counts, write operation counts, and the like) of the non-volatile storage media (e.g., storage medium 132, FIG. 1) of the storage device, but are not necessarily limited to such metrics. For example, some metrics (e.g., some performance metrics, such as latency metrics, metrics that measure how long it takes or how many operations are required to complete a write or erase operation, etc.) of the storage device reflect both storage media performance as well as controller and/or other storage device component performance ¶0120; the trigger condition is detected when a first status metric for the first block satisfies a threshold. For example, trigger condition detection module 228 and/or metric maintaining module 224 determine that a BER for the first block is above a threshold BER value or an estimated number of remaining P/E cycles for the first block is below an endurance threshold (such as endurance threshold 506, FIGS. 5A-5B). The trigger condition, in some embodiments, is based on the current encoding format of the memory portion (e.g., the first block)).
Per claim 4, Kankani discloses: wherein the one or more controllers is further configured to cause the memory system to: monitor the health status of the one or more logical units during the tracking mode, wherein retrieving the health status of the one or more logical units is based at least in part on the monitoring (¶0120; The storage device then optionally conducts a first determination (604) as to whether a second status metric (distinct from the first status metric for the first block) for the first die (or the storage medium including the first die) satisfies end-of-life (EOL) criteria; the tracking mode is merely a label for a first threshold to monitor LU’s candidates close to read only status)).
Per claim 5, Kankani discloses: wherein the one or more controllers is further configured to cause the memory system to: perform one or more write operations for a first logical unit before initiating the read-only mode for the first logical unit, wherein performing the one or more write operations comprises storing data or information in the first logical unit, (¶0080; data write module 216 that is used for writing data to one or more codewords, pages, or blocks in a storage medium (e.g., storage medium 132, FIG. 1)) and wherein initiating the read- only mode for the one or more logical units comprises initiating the read-only mode for the first logical unit (¶0120; The storage device then optionally conducts a first determination (604) as to whether a second status metric (distinct from the first status metric for the first block) for the first die (or the storage medium including the first die) satisfies end-of-life (EOL) criteria; the tracking mode is merely a label for a first threshold to monitor LU’s candidates close to read only status)).
Per claim 6, Kankani discloses: wherein the one or more controllers is further configured to cause the memory system to: perform one or more read operations for a first logical unit after initiating the read-only mode for the first logical unit, (¶0079; data read module 214 that is used for reading data from one or more codewords, pages, or blocks in a storage medium (e.g., storage medium 132, FIG. 1)) wherein initiating the read-only mode for the one or more logical units comprises initiating the read-only mode for the first logical unit (¶0120; The storage device then optionally conducts a first determination (604) as to whether a second status metric (distinct from the first status metric for the first block) for the first die (or the storage medium including the first die) satisfies end-of-life (EOL) criteria; the tracking mode is merely a label for a first threshold to monitor LU’s candidates close to read only status)).
Per claim 7, Kankani discloses: wherein the one or more controllers is further configured to cause the memory system to: determine whether the one or more logical units is in the tracking mode based at least in part on the health status of the one or more logical units, wherein initiating the read-only mode for the one or more logical units is further based at least in part on determining that the one or more logical units is in the tracking mode (¶0120; the trigger condition is detected when a first status metric for the first block satisfies a threshold. For example, trigger condition detection module 228 and/or metric maintaining module 224 determine that a BER for the first block is above a threshold BER value or an estimated number of remaining P/E cycles for the first block is below an endurance threshold (such as endurance threshold 506, FIGS. 5A-5B). The trigger condition, in some embodiments, is based on the current encoding format of the memory portion (e.g., the first block). The above discussion regarding FIGS. 3A-3C includes additional details concerning exemplary status metrics. The storage device then optionally conducts a first determination (604) as to whether a second status metric (distinct from the first status metric for the first block) for the first die (or the storage medium including the first die) satisfies end-of-life (EOL) criteria; the tracking mode is merely a label for a first threshold to monitor LU’s candidates close to read only status).
Per claim 8, Kankani discloses: wherein the one or more controllers is further configured to cause the memory system to: determine whether the one or more logical units is in the tracking mode based at least in part on the health status of the one or more logical units, wherein initiating the read-only mode for the one or more logical units is further based at least in part on determining that the one or more logical units is in the tracking mode (¶0120; the trigger condition is detected when a first status metric for the first block satisfies a threshold. For example, trigger condition detection module 228 and/or metric maintaining module 224 determine that a BER for the first block is above a threshold BER value or an estimated number of remaining P/E cycles for the first block is below an endurance threshold (such as endurance threshold 506, FIGS. 5A-5B). The trigger condition, in some embodiments, is based on the current encoding format of the memory portion (e.g., the first block). The above discussion regarding FIGS. 3A-3C includes additional details concerning exemplary status metrics. The storage device then optionally conducts a first determination (604) as to whether a second status metric (distinct from the first status metric for the first block) for the first die (or the storage medium including the first die) satisfies end-of-life (EOL) criteria; the tracking mode is merely a label for a first threshold to monitor LU’s candidates close to read only status).
Per claim 8, Kankani discloses: wherein the one or more controllers is further configured to cause the memory system to: update a parameter of the one or more parameters of the memory system, wherein determining whether the one or more parameters satisfies the one or more thresholds is based at least in part on updating the parameter (¶0120; the trigger condition is detected when a first status metric for the first block satisfies a threshold. For example, trigger condition detection module 228 and/or metric maintaining module 224 determine that a BER for the first block is above a threshold BER value or an estimated number of remaining P/E cycles for the first block is below an endurance threshold (such as endurance threshold 506, FIGS. 5A-5B). ¶106; the combined status metric is associated with the output of a predefined algorithm (e.g., computed by metric maintaining module 224, FIG. 2) that takes into account one or more usage parameters associated with the respective portion of storage device 120. For example, the predefined algorithm incorporates one or more of: (a) a number of bytes written to the respective portion of storage device 120; (b) a number of P/E cycles performed on the respective portion of storage device 120; (c) a BER for codewords read from the respective portion of storage device 120; and (d) other usage information associated with the respective portion of storage device 120 (e.g., temperature, operating conditions, etc.).).
Per claim 9, Kankani discloses: wherein the one or more controllers is further configured to cause the memory system to: receive a command to initiate the tracking mode, wherein initiating the tracking mode is based at least in part on receiving the command (¶0120; the trigger condition is detected when a first status metric for the first block satisfies a threshold. For example, trigger condition detection module 228 and/or metric maintaining module 224 determine that a BER for the first block is above a threshold BER value or an estimated number of remaining P/E cycles for the first block is below an endurance threshold (such as endurance threshold 506, FIGS. 5A-5B). The trigger condition, in some embodiments, is based on the current encoding format of the memory portion (e.g., the first block). The above discussion regarding FIGS. 3A-3C includes additional details concerning exemplary status metrics.).
Per claim 10, Kankani discloses: the one or more parameters comprises an indicator of a total bytes written to the memory system, and determining whether the one or more parameters satisfies the one or more thresholds comprises determining whether the total bytes written exceeds a first threshold (¶106; the combined status metric is associated with the output of a predefined algorithm (e.g., computed by metric maintaining module 224, FIG. 2) that takes into account one or more usage parameters associated with the respective portion of storage device 120. For example, the predefined algorithm incorporates one or more of: (a) a number of bytes written to the respective portion of storage device 120; (b) a number of P/E cycles performed on the respective portion of storage device 120; (c) a BER for codewords read from the respective portion of storage device 120; and (d) other usage information associated with the respective portion of storage device 120 (e.g., temperature, operating conditions, etc.).).
Per claim 11, Kankani discloses: the one or more parameters comprises an estimated remaining lifetime of the memory system, and determining whether the one or more parameters satisfies the one or more thresholds comprises determining whether the estimated remaining lifetime is less than a first threshold (fig. 4, ¶0112; the estimated endurance for the NVM portion configured to operate in SLC mode is 75% and 15000 P/E cycles. Record 402-last indicates that when the NVM portion has a value of Metric-last for the status metric (e.g., metric-last is a value for the status metric that is determined to reflect end-of-life status for the NVM portion),).
Per claim 12, Kankani discloses: wherein the health status of the one or more logical units comprises an indication of whether the one or more logical units is in the read-only mode, an indication of whether the one or more logical units is being tracked, or both (fig. 4, ¶0112; records 402-1 through 402-last contain information corresponding to endurance estimates for a NVM portion based on the NVM portion having various values for a particular status metric. Stated another way, an endurance estimated for a particular NVM portion can be retrieved from the endurance estimation table by performing a lookup with a current value of the status metric for the NVM portion and the NVM portion's current encoding format. Record 402-1 indicates that when the NVM portion has a value of Metric-1 for the status metric, then: (i) the estimated endurance for the NVM portion configured to operate in TLC mode is 100% and 300 P/E cycles, (ii) the estimated endurance for the NVM portion configured to operate in MLC mode is 100% and 5000 P/E cycles, and (iii) the estimated endurance for the NVM portion configured to operate in SLC mode is 100% and 20000 P/E cycles. …… Record 402-last indicates that when the NVM portion has a value of Metric-last for the status metric (e.g., metric-last is a value for the status metric that is determined to reflect end-of-life status for the NVM portion), then: (i) the estimated endurance for the NVM portion configured to operate in TLC mode is 0% and 0 P/E cycles, (ii) the estimated endurance for the NVM portion configured to operate in MLC mode is 0% and 0 P/E cycles, and (iii) the estimated endurance for the NVM portion configured to operate in SLC mode is 0% and 0 P/E cycles).
Claims 13-15 are the system claims corresponding to the system claim 2-12 and are rejected under the same reasons set forth in connection with the rejection of claims 2-12. Fig. 1, ¶0052-0055 of Kankani disclose all structural components including but not limited to the controller, memory units, host and management modules/programs. ¶0063 discloses a human initiation of the trigger condition of a read only mode.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 16-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kankani 20160342344 herein Kankani in view of Peng et al. 20130159797 herein Peng.
Per claim 16, Kankani discloses: a host system, comprising: one or more first controllers; one or more host entities coupled with the one or more first controllers; and one or more programs; and a memory system coupled with the host system, (fig. 1 &2; ¶0052-0055) comprising: one or more memory devices comprising one or more logical units, wherein the one or more programs are configured to perform one or more operations associated with a health status of the one or more logical units, (fig. 1 comp 124 & 132, ¶0052; data storage system 100 includes a storage device 120 (also sometimes called an information storage device, or a data storage device, or a memory device), which includes a storage controller 124 and a storage medium 132, and is used in conjunction with or includes a computer system 110 (e.g., a host system or a host computer))and wherein the health status of the one or more logical units comprises (¶0065; In a storage device with a plurality of memory devices (e.g., a plurality of storage mediums 132), the trigger condition may be dependent on metrics obtained from a plurality of the memory devices) an indication of whether the one or more logical units is in a read-only mode, an indication of whether the one or more logical units is in a tracking mode, or both; (¶0120; the trigger condition is detected when a first status metric for the first block satisfies a threshold. For example, trigger condition detection module 228 and/or metric maintaining module 224 determine that a BER for the first block is above a threshold BER value or an estimated number of remaining P/E cycles for the first block is below an endurance threshold (such as endurance threshold 506, FIGS. 5A-5B). The trigger condition, in some embodiments, is based on the current encoding format of the memory portion (e.g., the first block). The above discussion regarding FIGS. 3A-3C includes additional details concerning exemplary status metrics. The storage device then optionally conducts a first determination (604) as to whether a second status metric (distinct from the first status metric for the first block) for the first die (or the storage medium including the first die) satisfies end-of-life (EOL) criteria; the tracking mode is merely a label for a first threshold to monitor LU’s candidates close to read only status)and one or more second controllers coupled with the one or more memory devices and configured to initiate one or more read-only modes for the one or more logical units based at least in part on one or more communications exchanged with the one or more programs(¶0120; In accordance with the first determination indicating that the second status metric satisfies (612-Yes) the EOL criteria, the storage device operates the first die (or the storage medium including the first die) in read-only mode).
Kankani discloses and indication of a tracking and read only mode but does not explicitly teach the indicator as argued. In the interest of compact prosecution, Peng is relied upon to teach: an indication of whether the one or more logical units is in a read-only mode, an indication of whether the one or more logical units is in a tracking mode, or both.
Peng discloses: an indication of whether the one or more logical units is in a read-only mode, an indication of whether the one or more logical units is in a tracking mode, or both (fig. 1 and 2, ¶0009; A hot count for performing an erase cycle on each memory cell block of the memory system is tracked to determine whether the hot count has reached one of a plurality of hot count thresholds. If the hot count reaches a first one of the hot count thresholds, a second externally visible or audible health indicator, which indicates that the memory system is about to be converted to a read only mode, is output from the memory system. If the hot count reaches a second one of the hot count thresholds, a third externally visible or audible health indicator, which indicates that the memory system is being immediately converted to a read only mode, is output from the memory system ¶0035; FIG. 2, As shown, three ranges correspond to three modes: a RW (read write) mode, a transition mode, and a RO (read only) mode. In this specific implementation, these three different modes result in different LED behavior. As shown, the RW mode results in the LED breathing slowly (fading on and off); the transition mode results in the LED blinking rapidly; and the RO mode results in the LED being solidly on).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Kankani and Peng’s health status indicator to track and notify a host of the health status of a memory device. Peng extends the like of the device (¶0047).
Per claim 17, Kankani discloses: wherein the memory system further comprises: one or more second programs, wherein the one or more second programs comprise a policy enforcer configured to monitor wear information, health information, or both, of the memory system (¶0009; A hot count for performing an erase cycle on each memory cell block of the memory system is tracked to determine whether the hot count has reached one of a plurality of hot count thresholds. ¶0035; FIG. 2, As shown, three ranges correspond to three modes: a RW (read write) mode, a transition mode, and a RO (read only) mode. In this specific implementation, these three different modes result in different LED behavior. As shown, the RW mode results in the LED breathing slowly (fading on and off); the transition mode results in the LED blinking rapidly; and the RO mode results in the LED being solidly on; the examiner notes that the policy enforcer is defined by the ability to monitor wear and health information).
Per claim 18, Peng discloses: wherein the one or more programs comprise a bootloader program, wherein the bootloader program is configured to determine whether each host entity of the one or more host entities is actively associated with at least one of the one or more logical units (fig. 2, ¶0030; The memory controller also includes a health monitor 112. The health monitor embodiments of the present invention may be integrated into any type of memory system architectures, such as the architectures described herein, including descriptions incorporated herein. Overall, a health monitor may be implemented by any suitable combination of hardware and/or software.; the examiner notes that the bootloader is interpreted as a part of the host management modules as defined by the applications specification ¶0054).
Per claim 19, Peng discloses: wherein the one or more programs comprise a health program, wherein the health program is configured to monitor wear information, health information, or both, of the memory system (¶0009; A hot count for performing an erase cycle on each memory cell block of the memory system is tracked to determine whether the hot count has reached one of a plurality of hot count thresholds. ¶0035; FIG. 2, As shown, three ranges correspond to three modes: a RW (read write) mode, a transition mode, and a RO (read only) mode. In this specific implementation, these three different modes result in different LED behavior. As shown, the RW mode results in the LED breathing slowly (fading on and off); the transition mode results in the LED blinking rapidly; and the RO mode results in the LED being solidly on; the examiner notes that the policy enforcer is defined by the ability to monitor wear and health information).
Per claim 20, Peng discloses: wherein a host entity of the one or more host entities is associated with multiple logical units (¶0032; Each block can also be divided into a number of pages. A page is the minimum unit of programming, and one or more sectors of user data are typically stored within each page. A sector is the smallest unit of logical data that the host will address or transfer to or from the non-volatile memory. In disk drive applications, a sector is typically 512 bytes.).
Per claim 21, Peng discloses: wherein the host system, the memory system, or both, are configured to communicate a command indicating one or more thresholds associated with initiating a read-only mode for the one or more logical units (¶0048; In one embodiment, the host is configured with software to provide a GUI (graphical user interface) when the memory device warns the user that the write limit is near or when the user is made aware that the device is converting to a RO mode (or already has converted to a RO mode). In another embodiment, a GUI may simply be provided so as to simply notify the user that the memory device has converted to RO mode.).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments regarding claims 1-15 filed 3/4/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues: Kankani adds that "[r]ecord 402-1 indicates that when the NVM portion has a value of Metric-1 for the status metric, then: (i) the estimated endurance for the NVM portion configured to operate in TLCmode is 100% and 300 P/E cycles," as well as "(ii) the estimated endurance for the NVM portion configured to operate in MLC mode is 100% and 5000 P/E cycles," and "(iii) the estimated endurance for the NVM portion configured to operate in SLC mode is 100% and 20000 P/E cycles." Kankani [0112] (emphasis added). Kankani further describes additional endurance related parameters with relation to Metric-2 and Metric-last. Id. However, status metrics corresponding to endurance estimates and estimated decreases in remaining P/E cycles are not the same as "a health status of one or more logical units" where "the health status of the one or more logical units comprises an indication of whether the one or more logical units is in the read-only mode, an indication of whether the one or morelogical units is being tracked, or both," as recited in amended independent claim 2. That is, the status metrics in Kankani indicate endurance information, but do not include "an indication of whether the one or more logical units is in the read-only mode," nor "an indication of whether the one or more logical units is in a tracking mode," as recited in amended independent claim. Therefore, for at least these reasons, amended independent claim 2 is allowable, including but not limited to over Kankani.
The examiner respectfully disagrees and asserts that Kankani discloses an indication of whether the one or more logical units is in the read-only mode," or "an indication of whether the one or more logical units is in a tracking mode," as recited in amended independent claim. The examiner notes that the claim merely requires an indication. Any means to indicate that the logical units are in a read only mode or a tracking mode meets the limitation. The tracking mode as interpreted supra is interpreted as a precursor mode to the read only mode. Kankani as taught in claim 1 and preciously reject claim 1 discloses a trigger condition of a memory portion determining a first and second status. The first status is when the P/E cycles is below and endurance threshold. The second status is to determine if the P/E cycle satisfies an end of like criteria. Further, Kankani discloses in ¶0120, that when the device reaches EOL it operates in read only mode. Therefore, it is clear that Kankani provides an indication of a tracking mode and read only mode.
The applicant argues: Applicant submits that the scope of claims 13-15 are different than the scope of claims 2-12. For example, independent claim 13 recites, in part, "[a] host system," including "one or more controllers associated with one or more memory devices of a memory system, the host system being external to the memory system," and additionally recites to "receive, at the host system and from the memory system, health information of the memory system" and "transmit, to the memory system and from the host system, one or more commands to initiate a read-only mode." Because the scope of claims 13- 15 are different, Applicant submits that the Office Action has not made a prima facie case that Kankani discloses all of the features of claims 13-15.
The examiner respectfully disagrees and asserts that the rejection to claim 13 specifically cites the host system, controllers, memory modules and management modules. Management modules 121-2 similar to 121-1 is shown in fig. 2 including a plurality of modules that transmit and receive information between the host to the memory system. Further ¶0063 discloses a human operator initiating the trigger condition. This communication aided my modules 121-1 and 121-2 as claimed is obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the read only mode can be and is initiated by the host system and module 121-2. Therefore, Kankani does disclose the additional limitation as claimed.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 16-20 have been considered but are moot because the new rejection to the new limitation does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. Peng discloses: FIG. 2, different ranges of the hot count values correspond to different health status, different actions, and different outputs to an external indicator (e.g., LED) of the memory device. These ranges are delimited by threshold values for either MLC (multi-level-cell) type devices or SLC (single-level cell) type devices. As shown, three ranges correspond to three modes: a RW (read write) mode, a transition mode, and a RO (read only) mode. In this specific implementation, these three different modes result in different LED behavior. As shown, the RW mode results in the LED breathing slowly (fading on and off); the transition mode results in the LED blinking rapidly; and the RO mode results in the LED being solidly on.
Remark
Examiner respectfully requests, in response to this Office action, support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line number(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist Examiner in prosecuting the application.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BABOUCARR FAAL whose telephone number is (571)270-5073. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:30 EST.
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, Tim VO can be reached at 5712723642. 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.
BABOUCARR . FAAL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2138
/BABOUCARR FAAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2138