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 .
Response to Amendment
This non-final Office action is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed 8/14/25 which canceled claim 1 and added new claims 2-21. Claims 2-21 are pending.
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 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over the claims of U.S. Patent No. 11,842,761. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the differences are not material to patentability. The instant claims are a subset of the patented claims and are therefore anticipated by the patented claims. For example, instant claim 2 contains the language of patented claim 1 in addition to mode language which adds a mode where only a single row is open at a time. Otherwise the claims are essentially identical.
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 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.
Claims 2, 5-7, 9, 12-14, 16, and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication 2006/0133186 to HUMMLER et al.
Regarding claims 2, 9, and 16, HUMMLER shows the claimed memory component as memory 210 in Figs. 2, 4, and 6. He shows the claimed circuitry to receive commands for row access as row decoding circuitry 412 in Fig. 4 and row decoding circuitry 612 in Fig. 6. He shows the claimed circuitry to receive a column access command as column decoding circuitry 414 in Fig. 4 and column decoding circuitry 614 in Fig. 6.
HUMMLER discloses plural modes at paragraph 0063 where he teaches that in one mode, multiple memory cell rows are activated and in another mode, only one memory cell row is activated. He teaches that memory controller 204 (shown in Figs. 2, 4, and 6) and control circuitry 402 (shown in Fig. 4) cooperate to control which mode is used by setting various values in the mode registers of control circuitry 402 (see 0033, 0052, and 0054).
As clearly taught by HUMMLER at 0033, “Control circuitry 402 for one or more embodiments may identify to row decoding circuitry 412 a page length or a burst length for the memory access initiated for block 302 to help identify the number of rows to be activated for the memory access” (emphasis added).
Paragraphs such as 0028 and 0069 clearly teach that HUMMLER’s device simultaneously opens plural rows in a single bank. This is also shown in block 304 in Fig. 3 and block 504 in Fig. 5.
Regarding claims 5, 12, and 19, HUMMLER’s device uses a different number of command/address signals in each mode as claimed.
Regarding claims 6, 13, and 20, HUMMLER’s device operates as claimed, since fewer cycles are required when only a single row is open.
Regarding claims 7, 14, and 21, HUMMLER discloses the claimed mode register as mentioned above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, 8, 10, 11, 15, 17, and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Note
It is noted that any citations to specific pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP § 2123.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this Office action should be directed to the Examiner by phone at (571) 272-4214.
Any response to this Office action should be labeled appropriately (including serial number, Art Unit 2132, and type of response) and mailed to Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450; hand-carried or delivered to the Customer Service Window at the Knox Building, 501 Dulany Street, Alexandria, VA 22314; faxed to (571) 273-8300; or filed electronically using the Patent Center.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from the 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 the Patent Center and visit 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.
/Kevin Verbrugge/
Kevin Verbrugge
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2132
Prosecution Insights