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 Application filed January 16, 2025.
Claims 1-5 are pending. 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) filed on January 16, 2025. This IDS has been considered.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. See MPEP 606.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-5 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-6 of U.S. Patent No. 11,914,873. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because application claims 1-5 are anticipated by 11,914,873 claims 1-6.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 pre-AIA 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) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Warren et al. (U.S. 2011/0060886; hereinafter “Warren”).
Regarding independent claim 1, Warren discloses 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).
Regarding claim 2, Warren discloses 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 discloses 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 disclose 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).
Regarding claim 5, Warren discloses 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 logical address of the data (Fig. 1: 110, see also page 2, par. 0020 and page 6, par. 0032).
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
Prosecution Insights