DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action has been issued in response to amendments filed 27 May 2026.
Claims 1 – 18 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 – 17 are objected to because of the following informalities. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 should be amended to “wherein the page request issuing circuitry is configured to issue the page request, in [[in]] response to the translation circuitry identifying the page [[fault]] fault, without requiring that any further requests are received from the device”. This is so that it is clear what (page request issuance or page fault) corresponds to no further requests from device.
Claim 17 is the non-transitory computer-readable medium claim corresponding to MMU claim 1, and is objected on the same grounds as claim 1.
Claims, dependent upon above identified claims, are also objected on the same grounds as said above identified claims.
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.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 – 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains 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, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, “wherein the page request issuing circuitry is configured to issue the page request in response to the translation circuitry identifying the page fault without requiring that any further requests are received from the device” lacks written support and introduces new matter. While the instant specification discloses MMU generating page requests instead of requesting devices, there is no disclosure of other types of requests not being received from said requesting devices. In other words, it is page request (and not reads/writes/prefetch request) that is not received from said requesting devices. In addition, there is also no support for said MMU generating a single page request as replacement (or instead of) for plural page requests from said requesting devices. In other words, a MMU generates one page request instead of requesting device generating that same one page request. Therefore, the limitation in question lacks written support and introduces new matter.
Claim 17 is the non-transitory computer-readable medium claim corresponding to MMU claim 1, and is rejected on the same grounds as claim 1.
Regarding claim 18, “in response to identifying the page fault associated with the first address, without requiring that any further requests are received from the device, automatically issuing a page request requesting that the page table information corresponding to the first address is updated to correct the page fault” is not supported in the instant specification and introduces new matter. Similar to claim 1, the instant specification discloses MMU generating page requests instead of requesting devices but fails to disclosure other types of requests not being received from said requesting devices. In other words, it is page request (and not reads/writes/prefetch request) that is not received from said requesting devices. In addition, there is also no support for said MMU generating a single page request as replacement (or instead of) for plural page requests from said requesting devices. In other words, a MMU generates one page request instead of requesting device generating that same one page request. Therefore, the limitation in question lacks written support and introduces new matter.
Claims, dependent upon above identified claims, are also rejected on the same grounds as said above identified claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4 and 11 – 12 have been indicated as allowable over prior art in Office Action mailed 10 July 2025.
Response to Remarks
Applicant’s remarks, with respect to newly amended limitations, have been considered and are persuasive. Therefore, prior art rejection (as well as 112(a)/(b) rejections) is withdrawn. However, said amendments introduced new matter, resulting in new U.S.C. §112(a) written description rejection.
Additional Remarks
In the interest of compact prosecution, it is noted that Swaine further discloses that PRI (from endpoint) is expected but not required (see Swaine ¶[4]) which would result in SMMU issuing PRI event (page request) (see Swaine Fig. 4 and corresponding paragraphs) without said PRI from said endpoint. This would result in MMU itself issuing said PRI event directly responsive to said page fault.
Conclusion
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 CHIE YEW whose telephone number is (571)270-5282. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday and alternate Fridays.
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 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.
/CHIE YEW/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2139
Prosecution Insights