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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular paragraphs and/or columns and lines in the references as applied to Applicant’s claims for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the Applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. The prompt development of a clear issue requires that the replies of the Applicant meet the objections to and rejections of the claims. Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP § 2163.06.
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 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.
Request for Continued Examination
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/18/2026 has been entered.
Applicant’s Reply Not Fully Responsive
The reply filed on 02/18/2026 is not fully responsive to the prior Office action because of the following omission(s) or matter(s): Applicant failed to interact with or address any of the examiner’s limitation-by-limitation analysis of the claims (especially the dependent claims) provided in the rejection above. Even if an independent claim is deemed eligible then it does not necessarily mean that all of the dependent claims are also eligible. See 37 CFR 1.111. The response appears to be bona fide, but through an apparent oversight or inadvertence, consideration of some matter or compliance with some requirement has been omitted. Applicant is required to supply the omission or correction to thereby provide a full response to the prior Office action.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable over the prior art of record if rewritten to overcome the applicable rejections set forth in this Office action because the examiner found neither prior art cited in its entirety, nor based on the prior art, found any motivation to combine any of the said prior art.
The primary reason for allowance for independent claims 1, 8, and 11 is determining, by the IDC engine, responsive to the detecting the stage transition, that a first processing unit, among the plurality of processing units, can process stage data having a second SDF; determining, by the IDC engine, responsive to the IDC engine determining that the first processing unit can process stage data having the second SDF, a first data conversion to convert the data among the first stage data having the first SDF to have the second SDF; determining, by the IDC engine, a second processing unit, among the plurality of processing units, to perform the first data conversion; and, dispatching, by the IDC engine, the second processing unit to perform the first data conversion during continued runtime execution of the dataflow application on the dataflow computing system, wherein the dispatching causes the second processing unit to execute the first data conversion without requiring a halt or restart of the dataflow application in conjunction with the rest of the limitations set forth in the claim.
The remaining claims, not specifically mentioned, are allowed because they are dependent upon one of the independent claims mentioned above.
Response to Amendment and Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The amendment filed 02/18/2026 introduces new matter into the claims. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: “during continued runtime execution of the dataflow application on the dataflow computing system, wherein the dispatching causes the second processing unit to execute the first data conversion without requiring a halt or restart of the dataflow application”. Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1: The claim is a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter: Claim 1. A method, the method comprising.
Step 2A Prong One: The claim recites an abstract idea because it includes limitations that can be considered mental processes (concepts performed in the human mind including an observation, evaluation, judgment, and/or opinion). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the human mind or via pen and paper, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea:
detecting, by an Intelligent Data Conversion Engine (IDC engine), a stage transition of a dataflow application executing on a dataflow computing system, the dataflow application comprising a plurality of application stages, the IDC engine included in the dataflow computing system, the dataflow computing system comprising a plurality of processing units (abstract idea mental process i.e., [00110] of the instant specification states that detecting a stage transition can include detecting initiating execution of the dataflow application, an operation of the dataflow application, and/or a change in an execution state of the application which can all be performed mentally);
the stage transition detected by the IDC engine based on monitoring, by the IDC engine, an execution state of the dataflow computing system during runtime execution of the dataflow application on the plurality of processing units (abstract idea mental process);
determining, by the IDC engine, responsive to the detecting the stage transition, that data among first stage data has a first Stage Data Format (SDF), the first stage data comprising data associated with a first stage among the plurality of application stages (abstract idea mental process);
determining, by the IDC engine, responsive to the detecting the stage transition, that a first processing unit, among the plurality of processing units, can process stage data having a second SDF (abstract idea mental process);
determining, by the IDC engine, responsive to the IDC engine determining that the first processing unit can process stage data having the second SDF, a first data conversion to convert the data among the first stage data having the first SDF to have the second SDF (abstract idea mental process);
determining, by the IDC engine, a second processing unit, among the plurality of processing units, to perform the first data conversion (abstract idea mental process); and,
dispatching, by the IDC engine, the second processing unit to perform the first data conversion during continued runtime execution of the dataflow application on the dataflow computing system, wherein the dispatching causes the second processing unit to execute the first data conversion without requiring a halt or restart of the dataflow application.
Step 2A Prong Two: The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application because the abstract idea is recited but for generically recited additional computer elements (i.e. data storage, processor, memory, computer readable medium, etc.) which do not add meaningful limitations to the abstract idea amounting to simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer using generic computing hardware and/or software (e.g. generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (see MPEP 2106.05(h)). Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The generic computing components are recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using the recited generic computer components. Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea:
detecting, by an Intelligent Data Conversion Engine (IDC engine) (generic computing components), a stage transition of a dataflow application executing on a dataflow computing system, the dataflow application comprising a plurality of application stages, the IDC engine included in the dataflow computing system, the dataflow computing system comprising a plurality of processing units (generic computing components);
the stage transition detected by the IDC engine based on monitoring, by the IDC engine, an execution state of the dataflow computing system during runtime execution of the dataflow application on the plurality of processing units;
determining, by the IDC engine, responsive to the detecting the stage transition, that data among first stage data has a first Stage Data Format (SDF), the first stage data comprising data associated with a first stage among the plurality of application stages;
determining, by the IDC engine, responsive to the detecting the stage transition, that a first processing unit, among the plurality of processing units, can process stage data having a second SDF;
determining, by the IDC engine, responsive to the IDC engine determining that the first processing unit can process stage data having the second SDF, a first data conversion to convert the data among the first stage data having the first SDF to have the second SDF;
determining, by the IDC engine, a second processing unit, among the plurality of processing units, to perform the first data conversion; and,
dispatching, by the IDC engine, the second processing unit to perform the first data conversion during continued runtime execution of the dataflow application on the dataflow computing system, wherein the dispatching causes the second processing unit to execute the first data conversion without requiring a halt or restart of the dataflow application (generic computing components performing extra-solution activity of merely reciting the words "apply it" or an equivalent with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using the computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea).
Step 2B: The claim includes limitations which can be considered extra-solution activity (see MPEP 2106.05(g)) insufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea because the additional limitations only perform at least one of collecting, gathering, displaying, generating, modifying, updating, storing, retrieving, sending, and receiving data/information data which are well-understood, routine, conventional computer functions as recognized by the court decisions listed in MPEP § 2106.05(d)II. The claim further includes limitations that do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because they merely recite the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, as discussed in MPEP § 2106.05(f). Therefore, the claim, and its limitations when considered separately and in combination, is directed to patent ineligible subject matter:
detecting, by an Intelligent Data Conversion Engine (IDC engine), a stage transition of a dataflow application executing on a dataflow computing system, the dataflow application comprising a plurality of application stages, the IDC engine included in the dataflow computing system, the dataflow computing system comprising a plurality of processing units;
the stage transition detected by the IDC engine based on monitoring, by the IDC engine, an execution state of the dataflow computing system during runtime execution of the dataflow application on the plurality of processing units;
determining, by the IDC engine, responsive to the detecting the stage transition, that data among first stage data has a first Stage Data Format (SDF), the first stage data comprising data associated with a first stage among the plurality of application stages;
determining, by the IDC engine, responsive to the detecting the stage transition, that a first processing unit, among the plurality of processing units, can process stage data having a second SDF;
determining, by the IDC engine, responsive to the IDC engine determining that the first processing unit can process stage data having the second SDF, a first data conversion to convert the data among the first stage data having the first SDF to have the second SDF;
determining, by the IDC engine, a second processing unit, among the plurality of processing units, to perform the first data conversion; and,
dispatching, by the IDC engine, the second processing unit to perform the first data conversion during continued runtime execution of the dataflow application on the dataflow computing system, wherein the dispatching causes the second processing unit to execute the first data conversion without requiring a halt or restart of the dataflow application (extra-solution activity of merely reciting the words "apply it" or an equivalent with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using the computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea).
Claim 2. The method of claim 1, the method further comprising:
determining, by the IDC engine, responsive to the detecting the stage transition, that the first processing unit can process stage data having a third SDF (abstract idea mental process);
determining, by the IDC engine, responsive to the IDC engine determining that the first processing unit can process stage data having the third SDF, a second data conversion to convert the data among the first stage data having the first SDF to have the third SDF (abstract idea mental process);
determining, by the IDC engine, a third processing unit, among the plurality of processing units, to convert the data among the first stage data having the first SDF to have the third SDF (abstract idea mental process); and,
comparing, by the IDC engine, a first conversion optimization metric, associated with the second processing unit performing the first data conversion, and a second conversion optimization metric, associated with the third processing unit performing the second data conversion (abstract idea mental process); and,
wherein the method of the IDC engine dispatching the second processing unit to perform the first data conversion comprises the IDC engine dispatching the second processing unit to perform the first data conversion based on the comparing the first conversion optimization metric and the second conversion optimization metric (merely reciting the words "apply it" or an equivalent with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using the computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea).
Claim 3. The method of claim 1, the method further comprising:
determining, by the IDC engine, that the first data conversion comprises a sequence of intermediate data conversions (abstract idea mental process);
determining, by the IDC engine, a third processing unit, among the plurality of processing units, to perform a first intermediate data conversion included in the sequence of intermediate data conversions (abstract idea mental process);
determining, by the IDC engine, a fourth processing unit, among the plurality of processing units, to perform a second intermediate data conversion included in the sequence of intermediate data conversions (abstract idea mental process);
determining, by the IDC engine, a conversion order, the conversion order comprising an order, within the sequence of intermediate data conversions, for the third processing unit to perform the first intermediate data conversion and the fourth processing unit to perform the second intermediate data conversion; and (abstract idea mental process),
dispatching, by the IDC engine, the third processing unit to perform the first intermediate data conversion and the fourth processing unit to perform the second intermediate data conversion according to the conversion order (merely reciting the words "apply it" or an equivalent with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using the computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea).
Claim 4. The method of claim 3, wherein the IDC engine determining the conversion order comprises the IDC engine applying a conversion cost model to determine the third processing unit, the fourth processing unit, and the conversion order (abstract idea mental process).
Claim 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the stage transition is selected from a group consisting of: a transfer of data included among the first stage data; input of the first stage data for processing by the first processing unit; initiating execution of the first stage; initiating execution of a second stage of the dataflow application; initiating execution of the dataflow application by the first processing unit; and, initiating execution of the dataflow application by a second processing unit included in the dataflow computing system (abstract idea mental process).
Claim 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of processing units comprises heterogeneous processing units (generic computing components); and, wherein the second SDF is based on a type of the first processing unit (generic computing components).
Claim 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the IDC engine determining the first data conversion comprises the IDC engine determining the first data conversion based on a conversion optimization metric (abstract idea mental process).
As per claim 8, it has similar limitations as claim 1 and is therefore rejected using the same rationale.
As per claim 9, it has similar limitations as claim 2 and is therefore rejected using the same rationale.
As per claim 10, it has similar limitations as claim 3 and is therefore rejected using the same rationale.
As per claim 11, it has similar limitations as claim 1 and is therefore rejected using the same rationale.
As per claim 12, it has similar limitations as claim 2 and is therefore rejected using the same rationale.
As per claim 13, it has similar limitations as claim 3 and is therefore rejected using the same rationale.
As per claim 14, it has similar limitations as claim 4 and is therefore rejected using the same rationale.
As per claim 15, it has similar limitations as claim 5 and is therefore rejected using the same rationale.
As per claim 16, it has similar limitations as claim 6 and is therefore rejected using the same rationale.
As per claim 17, it has similar limitations as claim 7 and is therefore rejected using the same rationale.
Claim 18. The computing system of claim 11, wherein the first processing unit is selected from a group consisting of: a general purpose central processing unit (CPU); a graphic processing unit (GPU); and, a coarse grain reconfigurable processor (CGRP) (generic computing components).
Claim 19. The computing system of claim 11, the computing system further comprising a runtime processor configured to execute the dataflow application on the computing system (generic computing components); wherein the IDC engine is communicatively coupled to the runtime processor (generic computing components); and, wherein the IDC engine is further configured to interact with the runtime processor perform at least one of the detecting the stage transition (abstract idea mental process) and the dispatching the second processing unit to perform the first data conversion (merely reciting the words "apply it" or an equivalent with the judicial exception, or merely including instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely using the computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea).
Claim 20. The computing system of claim 19, wherein the IDC engine is included in the runtime processor (generic computing components).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The examiner fully responded to all of Applicant’s arguments in the Advisory Action dated 03/04/2026 and will not repeat the same herein for the sake of brevity. The examiner encourages Applicant to review the examiner’s rebuttals to Applicant’s arguments in said Advisory Action. For at least the reasons provided in the Advisory Action, Applicant’s arguments are unpersuasive and the rejections are sustained.
Citation of Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure:
Santan et al. (US 11,163,605) disclose a soft kernel to perform preprocessing on data to convert it into a format that is compatible with later stages of a pipeline flow.
Barrett et al. (US 9,817,866) disclose detection of a transition to a particular stage of a workflow.
Lin et al. (US 5,600,815) disclose that if data in a first or third memory stage is in parallel format, conversion to serial format is needed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Adam Lee whose telephone number is (571) 270-3369. The examiner can normally be reached on M-TH 8AM-5PM.
If attempts to reach the above noted Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Pierre Vital, can be reached at the following telephone number: (571) 272-4215. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated-interview-request-air-form.
/Adam Lee/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2198 March 23, 2026