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 .
1. Claims 1-20 are present for examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
2. Claims 6, 8, 14 & 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 6, line 2-3, the term “resultant data” lacks a clear antecedent basis for what it means or where it originally comes from. What is being claimed by “resultant”? Which operation/step actually produces this data?
Claim 8, line 5 conflicts with line 3, the phrase “word lines of the first sub-block that are programmed” on line 5 is not consistent with the phrase “the first sub-block is at least partially programmed” appeared on lines 2-3. For example, see claim 2, lines 3-5, where this term “at least partially programmed” has already been recited correctly for the first sub-block (on both lines 3 & 5) already. Thus, amendment to claim 8 language to be consistent with claim 2 is needed.
Claim 14 also includes similar error as claim 6.
Claim 16 also includes similar error as claim 8.
Allowable Subject Matter
3. Except the 112 issues identified above, the following claims contains allowable subject matter:
- Independent claims 1, 9 & 17 reciting a novel operation for determine whether a first sub-block is at least partially programmed in order to setting appropriate pass volage based on such determination (during erase-verify operation later).
- Additionally, the dependent claims 2-8, 10-16 & 18-20 also add other novel limitations to recited operation above, which are neither disclosed by the existing prior arts nor seen elsewhere at this time.
4. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIET Q NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1788. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-3PM 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 571-272-1852. 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.
/VIET Q NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2827
Prosecution Insights