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 .
OFFICE ACTION
This is a response to the application filed on 4/19/2023.
Claims 16-30 are pending.
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.
Claims 25 is 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 25 is rejected because the first occurrence of "a second EDA template" lacks antecedent basis, for the following reason.
Claim 25 depend on independent claim 16 and claim 16 does not recite any first EDA template to provide antecedent basis for of "a second EDA template" in claim 25.
Claim 26 is rejected because it depends on claim 25.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 16-18, 20-25 and 27-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ginetti (US Patent 9,348,960) in view of Johannesson (US 2022/0215951) or Owens (US 2009/0125886).
Regarding claim 16 and similarly recited claim 27, the prior art discloses:
A computer-implemented method for EDA, in a multi-tool design environment, and for interactive use by multiple design tools of a design of an IC (see Ginetti abstract or summary ), wherein said method comprises the steps of:
at a first EDA tool (Ginetti: see first EDA tools in fig 2A-G), receiving a request (see request transmit/receive in fig 2A-G) generated from a second design session native to a second EDA tool (see second EDA tools in fig 2A-G and one of the first and second EDA tool sessions in fig 2A-G) to receive design data for said design from a first design session native to said first EDA tool supporting said design data (Ginetti: see another one of the first and second EDA tool sessions in fig 2A-G and invoking native EDA tools in fig 2A-D. Supporting design data in terms of one or more of:
native access/ accessible/ exporting/ importing / manipulating /edit design-data/fabrics/sessions (s) by EDA tool (s) in the multi-fabric/sessions electronic design; and compiling the first design data into a recognizable format, disclosed in fig 2A-G and related text)
wherein said request is implemented in a data exchange format (see Ginetti col 11-12, 18) and wherein said data exchange format is different from a second format native to said second EDA tool; (see one or more of the followings in Ginetti reference:
Col 4: data of various sources and formats across multiple fabrics at various granularities and also by communicating data back and forth for the design implementation tools (e.g., electronic design automation or EDA tools) in multiple design fabrics);
Col 6: various views at various granularity levels in different design fabrics may be tracked using one or more data structures that link…. These one or more data structures may be of the same format or of different formats.
Col 8: data in different design fabrics at various hierarchical levels;
Col 10-12: data exchange format may include, for example the Electronic Design Interchange Format (EDIF); and
compiling the first design data (of non-native/inaccessible format) into a recognizable format )
at said first design session, generating a response in said data exchange format to said request, (see Ginetti:
Abstract/summary: response to the request,
design tool session in response to the request (fig 2A-E, and correspond text disclosure)
wherein said response comprises said design data (Ginetti: design data/fabrics in multi-fabric electronic/multi hierarchical level electronic design in fig 2A-G); and at said first EDA tool, transmitting said response to said second EDA tool.
(Ginetti: fig 2A-E disclose response transmitted from one EDA tools of first and second EDA tools to another tool of the first and second EDA tools)
Thus, Ginetti discloses substantially all the elements in claims 16 and 27 except inter process communication (IPC) channel. However, IPC channel is disclosed by Johannesson in par 69; or Owens in par 5, 21, 43.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (in the instant application) to utilize IPC channel because:
Johannesson, par 69: inter process communication typically uses a message-based protocol. For example, inter-process communication use clients and servers, where the client requests data and servers respond to client's requests;
Or
Owens, par 5, 21, 43: Serialization facilitates inter-process communication;
inter-process communication of the response from designer can be accomplished through serialization of the response's content.
(Claim 17) wherein said data exchange format is a binary format (Ginetti
electronic design interchange format (EDIF) in col 10-12 exist in binary format)
(Claim 18) wherein said request and/or said response is implemented according to a serialization library and/or wherein said inter process communication channel supports a serialization library and a remote procedure call system (Owens, par 5, 21, 43: Serialization facilitates inter-process communication;
inter-process communication of the response from designer can be accomplished through serialization of the response's content.
(Claim 20) wherein said design data comprises design data for electronic components and/or for photonics components for said integrated circuit and/or for microelectromechanical systems (See Ginetti, one or more of fig 1-3).
(Claims 21-22) One or more of the elements in claims 21-22 is/are disclosed in one or more of Ginetti fig 1-3.
(Claim 23) at said first EDA tool, retrieving a first EDA template, wherein said first EDA template comprises one or more interpretation rules to interpret said data exchange format into a first format native to said first EDA tool (Ginetti col 3); and at said first design session, interpreting said request in said data exchange format, thereby identifying said design data requested by said second design session (Ginetti fig 1-3).
(Claim 24) wherein said method further comprises the steps of: at said first design session, generating a response to said request; and at said first EDA tool, retrieving said first EDA template, wherein said first EDA template comprises one or more interpretation rules (Ginetti col 3) to generate said response in said data exchange format.
(Claim 25) wherein said method further comprises the steps of: at said second EDA tool, receiving said response from said first EDA tool, wherein said response is implemented in said data exchange format; at said second EDA tool, retrieving a second EDA template, wherein said second EDA template comprises one or more conversion rules to convert said data exchange format into said second format; and at said second EDA tool, converting said response into said second format using said second EDA template; and at said second design session, interpreting said response in said second format, thereby identifying said design data (see Ginetti col 11-12, 18 and fig 2A-G)
(Claims 28-30) A first EDA tool comprising at least one processor and at least one memory including computer program code, the at least one memory and computer program code configured to, with the at least one processor, cause said first EDA tool to perform the method (Ginetti fig 1, 3B, 4);
A computer program product comprising computer-executable instructions for causing a first EDA tool to perform at least the method (Ginetti fig 1, 3B, 4);
A computer readable storage medium comprising computer-executable instructions for performing the method, when the program is run on a computer (Ginetti fig 1, 3B, 4).
Claims 16-18 and 20-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chawda (US 2019/0102489) in view of Johannesson (US 2022/0215951) or Owens (US 2009/0125886).
Regarding claim 16 and similarly recited claim 27, the prior art discloses:
A computer-implemented method for EDA, in a multi-tool design environment, and for interactive use by multiple design tools (Chawda: see different CAD/EDA tools/system in abstract/summary, fig 3, 6 that allow/support / import /export/ map/ set-up/ interoperability/ flexibility/ format switching/ transfer electronic circuit/ IC designs between different CAD/EDA tools/systems) of a design of an IC, wherein said method comprises the steps of:
at a first EDA tool, receiving a request generated from a second design session native to a second EDA tool (see Chawda request in par 3, 5, 22 and tool native in fig 6-7, second EDA tool is one of the tools in fig 3, 6, second design session is a design from one of the tools/facilities/entities in fig 1, 3, 6-7) to receive design data for said design from a first design session native to said first EDA tool supporting said design data (first design session is another one of design test/ simulations/ component data / symbols / from one of the tools/facilities/entities in Chawda fig 1, 3, 6-7, supporting in terms of one or more of:
assist in portability of designs, common file format (abstract);
native components, interoperability, component mapping/transforming, format converting, translating designs, common file format transfer mechanism, format compatibility, design encrypt/ design decrypt/ format switching, etc. (Chawda fig 1-3, 6-7));
wherein said request is implemented in a data exchange format and wherein said data exchange format is different from a second format native to said second EDA tool (see one or more of the following in Chawda reference:
par 2: Electronic Design Interchange Format (EDIF) was developed for exchange…no single format that is supported by most of the EDA tools…
no common format to export from an old CAD system into a current CAD system;
Summary: simulation exchange format (SEF) is also data exchange format;
fig 3, 6-7: shows different data exchange format is different between tools/design systems and design data structure is converted/ mapped / format switched /transformed/ translated / assisted to allow for design exchange/ interoperability/ import/ export/ portability/ common file format/ data transfer/ (between tools/ from one tool to another)) ;
at said first design session, generating a response in said data exchange format to said request (see Chawda:
Fig 1 discloses system/ server/device/computer/ data center/ network / resources/ party responding to the request;
Fig 3, 6-7 and related text show a first/design session form a tool responding to request by mapping/ translating/ transforming/ converting/ assisting/ supporting / format switching design/components for design exchange/ design interoperability/import/export/portability/ common file format/ data transfer (between tools/ from one tool to another)),
wherein said response comprises said design data; and at said first EDA tool, transmitting said response to said second EDA tool (Chawda fig 1, 3, 6-7).
Thus, Chawda discloses substantially all the elements in claims 16 and 27 except inter process communication (IPC) channel. However, IPC channel is disclosed by Johannesson in par 69; or Owens in par 5, 21, 43.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (in the instant application) to utilize IPC channel because:
Johannesson, par 69: inter process communication typically uses a message-based protocol. For example, inter-process communication use clients and servers, where the client requests data and servers respond to client's requests;
Or
Owens, par 5, 21, 43: Serialization facilitates inter-process communication;
inter-process communication of the response from designer can be accomplished through serialization of the response's content.
(Claim 17) wherein said data exchange format is a binary format (Chawda electronic design interchange format (EDIF) exist in binary; Chawda simulation exchange format (SEF) exist in both binary and non-binary)
(Claim 18) wherein said request and/or said response is implemented according to a serialization library and/or wherein said inter process communication channel supports a serialization library and a remote procedure call system (Chawda fig 1, 7; Owens, par 5, 21, 43: Serialization facilitates inter-process communication;
inter-process communication of the response from designer can be accomplished through serialization of the response's content.).
(Claim 20) wherein said design data comprises design data for electronic components and/or for photonics components for said integrated circuit and/or for microelectromechanical systems (Chawda fig 2-4, 6-7).
(Claims 21-22) One or more of the elements in claims 21-22 is/are disclosed in one or more of Chawda fig 2-4, 6-7.
(Claim 23) at said first EDA tool, retrieving a first EDA template, wherein said first EDA template comprises one or more interpretation rules to interpret said data exchange format into a first format native to said first EDA tool; and at said first design session, interpreting said request in said data exchange format, thereby identifying said design data requested by said second design session (see Chawda tile, fig 4-7 and related text).
(Claim 24) wherein said method further comprises the steps of: at said first design session, generating a response to said request; and at said first EDA tool, retrieving said first EDA template, wherein said first EDA template comprises one or more interpretation rules to generate said response in said data exchange format (see Chawda title, fig 4-7 and related text).
(Claim 25) at said second EDA tool, receiving said response from said first EDA tool, wherein said response is implemented in said data exchange format;
(see Chawda:
par 2: Electronic Design Interchange Format (EDIF) was developed for exchange…no single format that is supported by most of the EDA tools…
no common format to export from an old CAD system into a current CAD system;
fig 3, 6-7: shows different data exchange format is different between tools and design data is converted/mapped/transformed/ translated /assisted for design exchange/ interoperability/import/export/portability/ common file format/ data transfer/ format switching (between tools/ from one tool to another)
at said second EDA tool, retrieving a second EDA template, wherein said second EDA template comprises one or more conversion rules to convert said data exchange format into said second format; and at said second EDA tool, converting said response into said second format using said second EDA template; and at said second design session, interpreting said response in said second format, thereby identifying said design data (see Chawda fig 3-7 and related text).
(Claim 26) the step of, at said second EDA tool, converting said response in said second format, wherein said second format is Open-Access and/or is configured to be used by a data application programming interface suitable for IC design data (Chawda par 31, 34).
(Claims 28-30) A first EDA tool comprising at least one processor and at least one memory including computer program code, the at least one memory and computer program code configured to, with the at least one processor (Chawda summary, fig 1-3), cause said first EDA tool to perform the method;
A computer program product (summary, fig 1-3);comprising computer-executable instructions for causing a first EDA tool to perform at least the method;
A computer readable storage medium comprising computer-executable instructions for performing the method, when the program is run on a computer (Chawda summary, fig 1-3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 19 is 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.
Correspondence Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL DINH whose telephone number is 571-272-1890. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s Supervisor, Jack Chiang can be reached on 571-272-7483. The fax 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.
/PAUL DINH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2851