Prosecution Insights
Last updated: October 25, 2026
Application No. 19/023,324

FLASH MEMORY CONTROLLER

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Jan 16, 2025
Priority
Aug 19, 2011 — TW 100129676 +11 more
Examiner
BERMUDEZ LOZADA, ALFREDO
Art Unit
2825
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Silicon Motion Inc.
OA Round
2 (Non-Final)
90%
Grant Probability
Favorable
2-3
OA Rounds
4m
Est. Remaining
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 90% — above average
90%
Career Allowance Rate
490 granted / 547 resolved
+21.6% vs TC avg
Minimal +2% lift
Without
With
+2.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Fast prosecutor
2y 1m
Avg Prosecution
23 currently pending
Career history
588
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
2.0%
-38.0% vs TC avg
§103
43.9%
+3.9% vs TC avg
§102
39.5%
-0.5% vs TC avg
§112
9.2%
-30.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 547 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA Status The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. This action is responsive to the following communications: the Amendment filed July 30, 2026. Claims 1-4 are pending. Claim 1 is amended. Claim 5 is canceled. Claim 1 is independent. Priority Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 13/491,377, filed on June 13, 2012. 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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: (a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1-4 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Warren et al. (U.S. 2011/0060886; hereinafter “Warren”) in view of Oh et al. (U.S. 2016/0231941; hereinafter “Oh”). Regarding independent claim 1, Warren teaches a memory device (Fig. 1), comprising: a flash memory module comprising a plurality of data blocks (Fig. 1: 140); and a flash memory controller (Fig. 1: 120), configured to access the flash memory module (Fig. 1: 140); wherein the flash memory controller is configured to receive data from a host device (Fig. 1: Data 105), and to determine if the data received from the host device is cold data or hot data (“characteristic of the received data set…For example where the data type is a document, it may be considered to be more likely to be frequently accessed than if it was a very large document,” see pages 6-7, par. 0036); and if the data is determined as the cold data, the flash memory controller uses a two-bit-per-cell mode or a three-bit-per-cell mode to write the data into one of the plurality of data blocks (“less frequently accessed may be written as three bits per cell” see pages 6-7, par. 0036); and if the data is determined as the hot data, the flash memory controller uses a one-bit-per-cell mode to write the data into another one of the plurality of data blocks (“frequently accessed data may be written as one bit per cell,” see pages 6-7, par. 0036). However, Warren is silent with respect to the flash memory controller determines if the data received from the host device is the cold data or the hot data according to a logical address of the data. Oh teaches a flash memory controller determines if the data received from the host device is the cold data or the hot data according to a logical address of the data (see page 3, par. 0049). Since Oh and Warren are from the same field of endeavor, the teachings described by Oh would have been recognized in the pertinent art of Warren. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the teachings of Oh with the teachings of Warren for the purpose of cost savings and increase the overall storage capacity, see Oh’s page 3, par. 0040. Regarding claim 2, Warren in combination with Oh teaches the limitations with respect to claim 1. Furthermore, Warren teaches wherein the plurality of data blocks are realized by triple-level cells (TLCs) (see page 2, par. 0020), and the blocks supports eight plurality of program threshold voltage intervals (see page 2, par. 0020). Regarding claim 3, Warren in combination with Oh teaches the limitations with respect to claim 1. Furthermore, Warren teaches wherein the flash memory controller determined if the data received from the host device is the cold data or the hot data according to a file type (see pages 7-8, par. 0040-0041). Regarding claim 4, Warren in combination with Oh teaches the limitations with respect to claim 1. Furthermore, Warren teaches wherein the flash memory controller determines if the data received from the host device is the cold data or the hot data according to a file extension (see pages 6-7, par. 0036). Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-6, filed July 30, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-4 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Warren in view of Oh. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALFREDO BERMUDEZ LOZADA whose telephone number is (571)272-0877. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00AM-3:30PM 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, Alexander G Sofocleous can be reached at 571-272-0635. 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. /Alfredo Bermudez Lozada/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2825
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 16, 2025
Application Filed
Jun 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103
Jul 30, 2026
Response Filed
Oct 01, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12770697
OPERATION METHOD FOR MEMORY, MEMORY, MEMORY SYSTEM AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEM
2y 10m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12770675
MEMORIES AND MEMORY COMPONENTS WITH INTERCONNECTED AND REDUNDANT DATA INTERFACES
2y 8m to grant Granted Oct 20, 2026
Patent 12763156
NON-VOLATILE MEMORY WITH PROGRAM-VERIFY AT COMMON VOLTAGE
2y 7m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12763149
LOGICAL BLOCK CONSTRUCTION FOR PHYSICAL BLOCKS COMPRISING MULTIPLE ERASE BLOCKS COUPLED TO A SAME STRING
2y 2m to grant Granted Oct 13, 2026
Patent 12755796
ERASE METHOD FOR MEMORY DEVICE AND MEMORY DEVICE
2y 3m to grant Granted Oct 06, 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

2-3
Expected OA Rounds
90%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+2.0%)
2y 1m (~4m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 547 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