Ex Parte Tsern et alDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardMay 18, 201814855271 (P.T.A.B. May. 18, 2018) Copy Citation UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR 14/855,271 09/15/2015 Ely K. Tsern 78408 7590 05/18/2018 MARC P. SCHUYLER I Rambus P.O. BOX 2535 SARA TOGA, CA 95070 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www .uspto.gov ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 2015041 I RA413ClC2ClUS 1024 EXAMINER TORRES, JOSEPH D ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2112 MAILDATE DELIVERY MODE 05/18/2018 PAPER Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte ELY K. TSERN, MARK A. HOROWITZ, and FREDERICK A. WARE Appeal 2017-011238 1 Application 14/855,271 Technology Center 2100 Before JEAN R. HOMERE, AMBER L. HAGY, and SHARON PENICK, Administrative Patent Judges. HOMERE, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a Final Rejection of claims 1-3, 6, and 8-11. See Appeal Brief, 6; Claims App'x. Claims 12- 20 have been withdrawn from consideration. 2 Id. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ). We reverse. 1 Appellants identify the real party in interest as Rambus, Inc. App. Br. 1. 2 Claims 5 and 7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would otherwise be allowable if rewritten in independent form to include the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims (Examiner-Initiated Interview Summary mailed June 30, 2017). Claim 4 has been canceled (Amendment filed October 26, 2016). Appeal 2017-011238 Application 14/855,271 Introduction According to Appellants, the claimed subject matter is directed to a memory controller (110) for detecting and correcting errors in data sent to a memory device ( 102) coupled thereto. Spec. i-f 2, Fig. 1. In particular, the memory controller ( 110) includes a first transmitter ( 134-1) for transmitting commands and a first error detection code to the memory device (102), as well as for receiving from the memory device (102) an indication of a detected an error in previously transmitted data. Id. i-fi-131-34, Fig. 2A. Further, the memory controller (110) includes a plurality of second transmitters (134-2) for transmitting data and a second error detection code to the memory device (102). Id. Upon receiving the indication of the detected error, the memory controller (110) re-transmits the data to the memory device (102). Id. i-f 37. Representative Claim Independent claim 1 is representative, and reads as follows: 1. A memory controller, comprising: a first transmitter to transmit a write command and a first error detection code to a memory device; a plurality of second transmitters to transmit write data and a second error detection code to the memory device, the second error detection code encoded by the memory controller in connection with the write data, wherein the plurality of second transmitters are operable to transmit the write data in accordance with one of a plurality of modes, a first mode including data comprising symbols respectively transferred on rising and falling edges per clock cycle of a clock signal, and a second mode including data transferred with one symbol per clock cycle; and circuitry to re-transmit the write data to the memory device in the event that the memory device detects an error 2 Appeal 2017-011238 Application 14/855,271 condition dependent on at least one error in the write data as received by the memory device and to re-transmit the write command to the memory device in the event of error that the memory device detects error in the write command; wherein an indication of at least one of the error condition or error in the write command is to be received by the memory controller from the memory device via a link not used to transmit the write data to the memory device. (App. Br., Claims App'x, 19.) Sheth et al., hereinafter "Sheth" Duh et al., hereinafter "Duh" Nguyen et al., hereinafter "Nguy en" Metzner et al., hereinafter "Metzner" Kanamitsu et al., hereinafter "Kanamitsu" Boussina et al., hereinafter "Boussina" Hishiki et al., hereinafter "Hishiki" Kwon Tamura Prior Art Relied upon US 5,386,517 issued Jan. 31, 1995; US 2003/0112685 Al us 6,012,839 us 5,657,331 US 2002/0080660 Al US 6,269,464 Bl US 6,704,371 Bl US 6,345,370B1 us 4,561,024 3 published Jun. 19, 2003; issued Jan. 11, 2000; issued Aug. 12, 1997; published Jun. 27, 2002; issued Jul. 31, 2001; issued Mar. 9, 2004; issued Feb. 5, 2002; and issued Dec. 24, 1985 Appeal 2017-011238 Application 14/855,271 Rejections on Appeal3 Claims 1 and 9-11 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the combination Sheth, Duh, and Nguyen. Final Act. 5- 11. Claim 2 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the combination Sheth, Duh, Nguyen, and Metzner. Final Act. 11-12. Claim 3 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the combination Sheth, Duh, Nguyen, and Kanamitsu. Final Act. 12-13. Claim 6 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the combination Sheth, Duh, Nguyen, and Kwon. Final Act. 15-16. Claim 8 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the combination Sheth, Duh, Nguyen, and Tamura. Final Act. 16-17. ANALYSIS We consider Appellants' arguments as they are presented in the Appeal Brief, pages 6-18, and the Reply Brief, pages 2-16. 4 3 Because Appellants canceled claim 4 prior to the Final Action, the Examiner's subsequent rejection of claim 4 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over the combination Sheth, Duh, Nguyen, Kanamitsu, Boussina, and Hishiki is moot. Final Act. 13-14. 4 Rather than reiterate all the arguments of Appellants and all the Examiner's findings/conclusions, we refer to the Appeal Brief ("App. Br.," filed May 10, 2017), the Reply Brief ("Reply Br.," filed August 29, 2017); the Final Action from which the appeal is taken ("Final Act.," mailed November 25, 4 Appeal 2017-011238 Application 14/855,271 Appellants argue that Sheth does not teach or suggest a first transmitter, and a plurality of second transmitters, as recited in independent claim 1. App. Br. 8. In particular, Appellants argue that the Examiner's apparent reliance upon Sheth's disclosure of two internal buses (28/32) does not teach the requisite structure for the first transmitter and the second transmitters, as required by the claim. Id. This argument is persuasive. At the outset, we note the Examiner relies upon Sheth's disclosure of WC 42/42wcb to conclude that "a transmitter is inherent." Ans. 5 (citing Sheth, figs. IA, 2A). According to the Examiner, because the disclosed bus facilitates the transmission of data and command between the IOU/TCU and the PMIU, there must be a transmitter between them. Id. at 5---6 (citing Sheth, figs. 2A, 5A). We agree with Appellants that the Examiner's findings are insufficient to substantiate the obviousness rejection. App. Br. 8. In particular, the Examiner has not established how the cited single bus relied upon teaches the first transmitter, and the plurality of second transmitters, as required by the claim. That is, even assuming that Sheth' s single bus relied upon by the Examiner somehow includes a transmitter, it would not account for the plurality of transmitters required by the claim. Because Appellants have shown at least one reversible error in the Examiner's obviousness rejection, we need not reach Appellants' remaining arguments. Accordingly, we are persuaded of error in the Examiner's rejection of claim 1, as well as of claims 2, 3, 6, and 8-11, which recite commensurate limitations. 2016); and the Answer ("Ans.," mailed June 30, 2017) for the respective details. 5 Appeal 2017-011238 Application 14/855,271 DECISION For the above reasons, we reverse the Examiner's rejections of claims 1-3, 6, and 8-11. REVERSED 6 Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation