CTFR 17/931,904 CTFR 82440 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 1-21 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 1 now recites the limitation: “select one or more memory pages to be moved between the first tier of memory and the second tier of memory by checking memory pages indicated by the first information against the second information ”. The scope of this amended limitation is unclear. It is unclear which memory pages are indicated by the first information since the first information is not claimed to indicated any particular pages. It is further unclear what checking memory pages against second information entails or how the checking is performed. It is unclear what correlation between the memory pages and second information is being checked for. The phrasal verb “checked against” usually refers to verifying or comparing something (memory pages) to a known standard to ensure a match or that it is correct and the claim language is not clear as to how second information is used as a known standard to verify a match or correctness or if this is what is actually going on in the claim. Is the second information in the memory pages to verify a match and if not, how is the second information being used in this context? Claims 21 and 22 has the same issues as claim 1 above. The remaining claims are rejected by virtue of them being dependent upon a rejected base claim. Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed 4/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The amendments have overcome the previous 112 rejections, however the new amendments have also introduce new 112 issues making the scope of the claims unclear for applying an art rejection. The arguments related to the prior art are moot at this time . Conclusion 07-39 AIA THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL ALSIP whose telephone number is (571)270-1182. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5. 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, Reginald G. Bragdon can be reached at (571)272-4204. 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. /MICHAEL ALSIP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2139 Application/Control Number: 17/931,904 Page 2 Art Unit: 2139 Application/Control Number: 17/931,904 Page 3 Art Unit: 2139
Prosecution Insights