CTFR 17/969,524 CTFR 95006 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 § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 21 , 23 - 26 , 28 - 31 , and 33 - 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rotem et al . (United States Patent Application Publication US 2006/0149975), hereinafter Rotem , in view of Ananthakrishnan et al . (United States Patent Application Publication US 2019/0041962), hereinafter Ananthakrishnan . Regarding claim 1 , Rotem teaches one or more non-transitory computer-readable media comprising instructions that, when executed, are to cause a power control unit (PCU) of an electronic device to: for a set of processor cores with a common operating frequency limit, identify, for a first core of the set, a first weight; identify, for a second core of the set, a second weight; identify, for a third core of the set, a third weight, wherein the first, second, and third core operating voltages may be different from one another ([0023] “The memory subsystems may also include a read only memory (ROM) 32 such as a compact disk ROM (CD-ROM), magnetic disk, flash memory, etc.” [0024] “The activity can be determined by monitoring a state signal 40 (40a-40n) of each of the plurality of processor cores 12' and identifying whether each state signal 40 indicates that the corresponding core is active.” [0026] “The state signals 40 can also include information regarding performance levels. For example, the state signals 40 may indicate the performance level of each active core. Such a signal could be provided by ACPI performance state (Px state) signals.” State signals for plurality of cores are identified. Furthermore, the state signals include information regarding performance levels, such as ACPI performance state. Rotem also suggests that the processor cores are at different P states of the ACPI performance state.) ; identify, based on the first weight, the second weight, and the third weight, a number of active processor cores of the multi-core processor ([0024] “The activity can be determined by monitoring a state signal 40 (40a-40n) of each of the plurality of processor cores 12' and identifying whether each state signal 40 indicates that the corresponding core is active.” Based on the state signals including performance levels of cores, active cores among the plurality of cores are identified.) ; and control the common operating frequency limit based on the identified number of active processor cores ([0015] “activity module 14 determines the number 18 of active cores in the plurality of processor cores 12 and selects a maximum operating point 17 for the active cores based on the number 18 of active cores.” Based on the number of active cores, a maximum operating point for the active cores are selected. Furthermore, as shown in TABLE I and [0016], the maximum operating point, which includes maximum operating frequency for the active cores, is identified for all the active cores, which is interpreted as the common operating frequency limit.) . However, Rotem does not explicitly teach a weight based on operating voltage; wherein the first, second, and third core operating voltages may be different from one another. Ananthakrishnan teaches a weight based on operating voltage. ([0023] “It is to be noted that some examples and embodiments discussed in this disclosure refers specifically to P-state, where a P-state may be in accordance with the ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface) standard. However, the scope of this disclosure is not limited by merely P-state determination in accordance with the ACPI standard. For example, the principles of this disclosure may generally be applied to determining operating voltage and/or operating frequency, which may, or may not, be in accordance with P-states.” [0090] “The power state, such as the P-state of the core in an example, is an ACPI state, which may specify a frequency, voltage, and/or other operating parameters for the core.” The ACPI state, which is power state, such as the P-states of the core, specifies an operating voltage.) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Rotem by incorporating the teaching of Ananthakrishnan of a weight based on operating voltage. They are all directed toward power management in a multi core processor. As recognized by Ananthakrishnan , the ACPI specifies power states, such as P-states, which determines operating voltage ([0023]) . Thus, it would be obvious to combine the two well-known teaching of Rotem and the teaching of Ananthakrishnan . Regarding claim 23 , Rotem in view of Ananthakrishnan teaches all the limitations of the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 21 , as discussed above. Ananthakrishnan further teaches wherein the first, second, and third weights are further based, respectively, on a first core operating frequency, a second core operating frequency, and a third core operating frequency ([0023] “It is to be noted that some examples and embodiments discussed in this disclosure refers specifically to P-state, where a P-state may be in accordance with the ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface) standard. However, the scope of this disclosure is not limited by merely P-state determination in accordance with the ACPI standard. For example, the principles of this disclosure may generally be applied to determining operating voltage and/or operating frequency, which may, or may not, be in accordance with P-states.”) . Regarding claim 25 , Rotem in view of Ananthakrishnan teaches all the limitations of the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 21 , as discussed above. Rotem , as modified above, further teaches wherein the first, second, and third weights are un-related to activity states of the processor cores ([0025] “processor power states are designated as CO, Cl, C2, C3,...Cn. The shallowest, CO, power state is an active power state where the CPU executes instructions. The Cl through Cn power states are processor sleeping states where the processor consumes less power and dissipates less heat than leaving the processor in the CO state. While in a sleeping state, the processor core does not execute any instructions.”) . Regarding claim 25 , Rotem in view of Ananthakrishnan teaches all the limitations of the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 21 , as discussed above. Rotem , as modified above, further teaches wherein the common operating frequency limit is based on correlation of the identified number of active cores with a plurality of pre-identified frequency limits and a plurality of pre-identified numbers of active processor cores, wherein respective frequency limits of the plurality of pre-identified frequency limits are related to a respective number of active processor cores of the plurality of pre-identified numbers of active processor cores ([0027] “The activity module 14' can then search the configuration table 36 for an entry containing the number of active cores. A similar search could be conducted with respect to performance levels. Upon finding the entry, the activity module 14' may retrieve a maximum operating point, via the configuration table input 38, from the entry, where the maximum operating point enables a parameter such as frequency or core voltage to be limited.” “TABLE I” “# Active” “Max Freq.” A configuration table includes information or setting to select the maximum operating frequency, which is pre-identified, according to the number of active cores. Thus, the entry of the configuration table is pre-identified.) . Regarding claim(s) 26 , 28 - 30 , the claim(s) 26 , 28 - 30 are the apparatus claims of the method claim(s) 21 , 23 - 25 . The claim(s) 26 , 28 - 30 do not further teach or define the limitation over the limitations recited in the rejected claims above. Therefore, Rotem in view of Ananthakrishnan teaches all the limitations of the claim(s) 26 , 28 - 30 . Rotem teaches an electronic device comprising: a multi-core processor that includes a plurality of processor cores; and a power control unit (PCU) coupled with the multi-core processor ([0021] “the processor 22 has an activity module 14', a plurality of processor cores 12' (12a'-12n') and a voltage and frequency controller 24.”) , wherein the PCU is configured to: for a set of processor cores with a common operating frequency limit, identify, for a first core of the set, a first weight based on a first core operating voltage; identify, for a second core of the set, a second weight based on a second core operating voltage; identify, for a third core of the set, a third weight based on a third core operating voltage, wherein the first, second, and third core operating voltages may be different from one another ([0023] “The memory subsystems may also include a read only memory (ROM) 32 such as a compact disk ROM (CD-ROM), magnetic disk, flash memory, etc.” [0024] “The activity can be determined by monitoring a state signal 40 (40a-40n) of each of the plurality of processor cores 12' and identifying whether each state signal 40 indicates that the corresponding core is active.” [0026] “The state signals 40 can also include information regarding performance levels. For example, the state signals 40 may indicate the performance level of each active core. Such a signal could be provided by ACPI performance state (Px state) signals.” State signals for plurality of cores are identified. Furthermore, the state signals include information regarding performance levels, such as ACPI performance state. Rotem also suggests that the processor cores are at different P states of the ACPI performance state.) ; identify, based on the first weight, the second weight, and the third weight, a number of active processor cores of the multi-core processor ([0024] “The activity can be determined by monitoring a state signal 40 (40a-40n) of each of the plurality of processor cores 12' and identifying whether each state signal 40 indicates that the corresponding core is active.” Based on the state signals including performance levels of cores, active cores among the plurality of cores are identified.) ; and control the common operating frequency limit based on the identified number of active processor cores ([0015] “activity module 14 determines the number 18 of active cores in the plurality of processor cores 12 and selects a maximum operating point 17 for the active cores based on the number 18 of active cores.” Based on the number of active cores, a maximum operating point for the active cores are selected. Furthermore, as shown in TABLE I and [0016], the maximum operating point, which includes maximum operating frequency for the active cores, is identified for all the active cores, which is interpreted as the common operating frequency limit.) . Ananthakrishnan teaches a weight based on operating voltage. ([0023] “It is to be noted that some examples and embodiments discussed in this disclosure refers specifically to P-state, where a P-state may be in accordance with the ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface) standard. However, the scope of this disclosure is not limited by merely P-state determination in accordance with the ACPI standard. For example, the principles of this disclosure may generally be applied to determining operating voltage and/or operating frequency, which may, or may not, be in accordance with P-states.” [0090] “The power state, such as the P-state of the core in an example, is an ACPI state, which may specify a frequency, voltage, and/or other operating parameters for the core.” The ACPI state, which is power state, such as the P-states of the core, specifies an operating voltage.) . Regarding claim 33 , Rotem in view of Ananthakrishnan teaches all the limitations of the PCU of claim 31 , as discussed above. Ananthakrishnan further teaches wherein the first, second, and third weights are further based, respectively, on a first core operating frequency, a second core operating frequency, and a third core operating frequency ([0023] “It is to be noted that some examples and embodiments discussed in this disclosure refers specifically to P-state, where a P-state may be in accordance with the ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface) standard. However, the scope of this disclosure is not limited by merely P-state determination in accordance with the ACPI standard. For example, the principles of this disclosure may generally be applied to determining operating voltage and/or operating frequency, which may, or may not, be in accordance with P-states.”) . Regarding claim 34 , Rotem in view of Ananthakrishnan teaches all the limitations of the PCU of claim 31 , as discussed above. Rotem , as modified above, further teaches wherein the first, second, and third weights are un-related to activity states of the processor cores ([0025] “processor power states are designated as CO, Cl, C2, C3,...Cn. The shallowest, CO, power state is an active power state where the CPU executes instructions. The Cl through Cn power states are processor sleeping states where the processor consumes less power and dissipates less heat than leaving the processor in the CO state. While in a sleeping state, the processor core does not execute any instructions.”) . Regarding claim 35 , Rotem in view of Ananthakrishnan teaches all the limitations of the PCU of claim 31 , as discussed above. Rotem , as modified above, further teaches wherein the common operating frequency limit is based on correlation of the identified number of active cores with a plurality of pre-identified frequency limits and a plurality of pre-identified numbers of active processor cores, wherein respective frequency limits of the plurality of pre-identified frequency limits are related to a respective number of active processor cores of the plurality of pre-identified numbers of active processor cores ([0027] “The activity module 14' can then search the configuration table 36 for an entry containing the number of active cores. A similar search could be conducted with respect to performance levels. Upon finding the entry, the activity module 14' may retrieve a maximum operating point, via the configuration table input 38, from the entry, where the maximum operating point enables a parameter such as frequency or core voltage to be limited.” “TABLE I” “# Active” “Max Freq.” A configuration table includes information or setting to select the maximum operating frequency, which is pre-identified, according to the number of active cores. Thus, the entry of the configuration table is pre-identified.) . Regarding claim 36 , Rotem in view of Ananthakrishnan teaches all the limitations of the PCU of claim 35 , as discussed above. Rotem , as modified above, further teaches wherein the identified frequency limit is based on identification that the identified number of active cores is between two of the plurality of pre-identified numbers of active processor cores ([0027] “The activity module 14' can then search the configuration table 36 for an entry containing the number of active cores. A similar search could be conducted with respect to performance levels. Upon finding the entry, the activity module 14' may retrieve a maximum operating point, via the configuration table input 38, from the entry, where the maximum operating point enables a parameter such as frequency or core voltage to be limited.” “TABLE I” “# Active” “Max Freq.” The determined number of active cores is a certain number between two of the plurality of pre-identified number of active cores.) . Regarding claim 37 , Rotem in view of Ananthakrishnan teaches all the limitations of the PCU of claim 36 , as discussed above. Rotem , as modified above, further teaches wherein the identified frequency limit is between two of the plurality of pre-identified frequency limits ([0027] “The activity module 14' can then search the configuration table 36 for an entry containing the number of active cores. A similar search could be conducted with respect to performance levels. Upon finding the entry, the activity module 14' may retrieve a maximum operating point, via the configuration table input 38, from the entry, where the maximum operating point enables a parameter such as frequency or core voltage to be limited.” “TABLE I” “# Active” “Max Freq.” When the determined number of active cores is a certain number between two of the plurality of pre-identified number of active cores, the corresponding maximum operating frequency is also between two maximum operating frequencies.) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 22 , 27 , and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rotem in view of Ananthakrishnan as applied to claim s 21 , 26 , and 31 above, and further in view of Gunther et al . (United States Patent Application Publication US 2009/0089543), hereinafter Gunther . Regarding claim 22 , Rotem in view of Ananthakrishnan teaches all the limitations of the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 21 , as discussed above. However, Rotem in view of Ananthakrishnan does not teach wherein the first, second, and third weights are further based, respectively, on a first core temperature, a second core temperature, and a third core temperature. Gunther teaches wherein the first, second, and third weights are further based, respectively, on a first core temperature, a second core temperature, and a third core temperature ([0016] “the current operating condition or behavior (e.g., current power usage, operating current (Ice), temperature, operating voltage, etc.) is monitored by a logic 126, e.g., provided in a corresponding processor (such as processor 102-1 shown in FIG. 1 or within a system such as system 100 of FIG. 1).”) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Rotem in view of Ananthakrishnan by incorporating the teaching of Gunther of a first core temperature, a second core temperature, and a third core temperature. As well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, as the temperature of the cores increases, performance of the cores can be decreased. Furthermore, a high heat can permanently damage the cores. It would be advantageous to incorporate the teaching of Gunther of a first core temperature, a second core temperature, and a third core temperature in order to improve performance and avoid damage . Response to Arguments 07-38-02 AIA Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks , filed 4/2/2026 , with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under “35 U.S.C. § 103” have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Rotem , Ananthakrishnan , and Gunther . Rotem teaches to generate a maximum operating point including a frequency, based on determined number of active cores. Ananthakrishnan teaches that a ACPI power states, such as P states, specify operating voltages of cores. Gunther teaches to monitor operating conditions, such as operating voltage, frequency, and temperature of cores. Conclusion 07-40 AIA Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL . See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 HYUN SOO KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1768. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 5:30 pm. 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, Jaweed Abbaszadeh can be reached at (571)270-1640. 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. /HYUN SOO KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 2176 Application/Control Number: 17/969,524 Page 2 Art Unit: 2176 Application/Control Number: 17/969,524 Page 3 Art Unit: 2176 Application/Control Number: 17/969,524 Page 4 Art Unit: 2176 Application/Control Number: 17/969,524 Page 5 Art Unit: 2176 Application/Control Number: 17/969,524 Page 6 Art Unit: 2176 Application/Control Number: 17/969,524 Page 7 Art Unit: 2176 Application/Control Number: 17/969,524 Page 8 Art Unit: 2176 Application/Control Number: 17/969,524 Page 9 Art Unit: 2176 Application/Control Number: 17/969,524 Page 10 Art Unit: 2176 Application/Control Number: 17/969,524 Page 11 Art Unit: 2176 Application/Control Number: 17/969,524 Page 12 Art Unit: 2176 Application/Control Number: 17/969,524 Page 13 Art Unit: 2176 Application/Control Number: 17/969,524 Page 14 Art Unit: 2176 Application/Control Number: 17/969,524 Page 15 Art Unit: 2176
Prosecution Insights