CTNF 18/979,290 CTNF 84055 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Specification 07-29 AIA The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding [0035]: Change “spillover account” to “spillover count” to fix the error . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-01 AIA 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. 07-31-01 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. Regarding claim 1: The claim claims “a spillover counter indicating a possible number of access counts for a memory row address not represented in the plurality of estimated access counts” ; however, this limitation, namely the count being a possible number, was not described in the specification. Some citations of “spillover count” in the specification are listed below: Paragraph [0017] states “a spillover count indicating a count of accesses” but there is no mention that the count is a possible count. Paragraph [0030] states “The access count table may additionally include a spillover count.” but again there is no mention of the count being a possible count or number. Paragraph [0059] states “It will be noted that the spillover count may be considered as a metric for determining whether the counting method is becoming overwhelmed by a potential row hammer attack. In one or more embodiments, the spillover count being at or above a threshold count may not mean that a row hammer attack is necessarily happening, but that a row hammer attack may be happening (or is predicted to be happening) based on non-normal read or write behavior that the counting mode is not fully-equipped to handle.” but there is no mention that the count is a possible count. Hence, the limitation of the spillover counter being a possible count 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, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 2-12 depend on claim 1. Regarding claim 13: The claim claims “a spillover counter indicating a possible number of access counts for a memory row address not represented in the plurality of estimated access counts” ; however, this limitation, namely the count being a possible number, was not described in the specification. Some citations of “spillover count” in the specification are listed below: Paragraph [0017] states “a spillover count indicating a count of accesses” but there is no mention that the count is a possible count. Paragraph [0030] states “The access count table may additionally include a spillover count.” but again there is no mention of the count being a possible count or number. Paragraph [0059] states “It will be noted that the spillover count may be considered as a metric for determining whether the counting method is becoming overwhelmed by a potential row hammer attack. In one or more embodiments, the spillover count being at or above a threshold count may not mean that a row hammer attack is necessarily happening, but that a row hammer attack may be happening (or is predicted to be happening) based on non-normal read or write behavior that the counting mode is not fully-equipped to handle.” but there is no mention that the count is a possible count. Hence, the limitation of the spillover counter being a possible count 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, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 14-16 depend on claim 13. Regarding claim 17: The claim claims “a spillover counter indicating a possible number of access counts for a memory row address not represented in the plurality of estimated access counts” ; however, this limitation, namely the count being a possible number, was not described in the specification. Some citations of “spillover count” in the specification are listed below: Paragraph [0017] states “a spillover count indicating a count of accesses” but there is no mention that the count is a possible count. Paragraph [0030] states “The access count table may additionally include a spillover count.” but again there is no mention of the count being a possible count or number. Paragraph [0059] states “It will be noted that the spillover count may be considered as a metric for determining whether the counting method is becoming overwhelmed by a potential row hammer attack. In one or more embodiments, the spillover count being at or above a threshold count may not mean that a row hammer attack is necessarily happening, but that a row hammer attack may be happening (or is predicted to be happening) based on non-normal read or write behavior that the counting mode is not fully-equipped to handle.” but there is no mention that the count is a possible count. Hence, the limitation of the spillover counter being a possible count 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, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 18-20 depend on claim 17. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY W RADKE whose telephone number is (571)270-1622. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6 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, Amir Zarabian can be reached at 272-1852. 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. JAY W. RADKE Primary Examiner Art Unit 2827 /JAY W. RADKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2827 Application/Control Number: 18/979,290 Page 2 Art Unit: 2827 Application/Control Number: 18/979,290 Page 3 Art Unit: 2827 Application/Control Number: 18/979,290 Page 4 Art Unit: 2827 Application/Control Number: 18/979,290 Page 5 Art Unit: 2827 Application/Control Number: 18/979,290 Page 6 Art Unit: 2827 Application/Control Number: 18/979,290 Page 7 Art Unit: 2827
Prosecution Insights