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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 4, 11, and 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 1 already recites “determining an optimization priority selected by a user.” Selection performed by a user necessarily requires some means through which the user makes that selection. A user cannot select a priority without some form of user interface (whether graphical, textual, voice, or otherwise) through which the selection is input to the system. Claim 4 recites “wherein the optimization priority is selected via a user interface.” Which restates, rather than narrows, what claim 1 already requires: that selection be made by a user. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 6-8, 10, 13-14, 16, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over. KHOSROWPOUR (US PUBLICATION 20180314617) in view of HE (US PUBLICATION 20200225732)
In regards to claim 1, KHOSROWPOUR discloses a base device that teaches A method comprising: (Abstract) “A system, method, and computer-readable medium are disclosed for optimizing performance of an information handling system” determining, by a processor, a workload class currently running in a foreground of an information handling system; (P.0005) “the performance optimization operation characterizes workloads in operation at runtime” (P.0022) “each workload has a corresponding label. For example a workload that is processor intensive and low on memory use and storage use may be labelled a High CPU workload.” (P.0027) “the user executes a workload analysis feature via the performance optimization system 205.” determining a configuration setting based on the workload class currently running in the foreground of the information handling system and device settings selected by the user; (P.0039-0042) “the workload classification operation 400 identifies the proximity of new unknown workload to a known cluster. More specifically, when a new workload needs a profile, the user executes a workload analysis operation via the performance optimizer. This workload analysis operation tracks the same instrumentation that was used for characterizing the workloads during step 420… Using the data obtained when executing the workload analysis operation (which are over time), features are extracted to using the previously defined dataset. The workload classification operation 400 measures the nearest cluster to this data-point using a distance or similarity (e.g., Cosine similarity) measure… More specifically, for a new workload W, the minimum distance of W from K centroids is calculated as:
D.sub.wk=Min(√{square root over (Σ.sub.i−l.sup.K(w.sub.1i−c.sub.1i).sup.2)})…
For example, if the cluster with the minimum distance to W is k2. Then, the cluster k2 is most similar to the new unknown workload. The performance optimization operation then applies the optimal settings for cluster k2 to the workload W.” and applying the configuration setting to the information handling system. (P.0029) “the performance optimization system 205 automatically applies the settings to the information handling system”
However the base device taught by KHOSROWPOUR doesn’t teach determining an optimization priority selected by a user;
HE discloses a comparable device that teaches determining an optimization priority selected by a user; (P.0030) “The list of items may include options such as “High Performance,” “Balanced,” and “Power Saver,”” (P.0031) “The user selected value of setting 204 may correspond to at least a sustained power setting. The BIOS may transmit instructions to a processor and/or other hardware components to control power consumption based on the setting 204. An example method for performing power management in an information handling system is shown in FIG. 3. FIG. 3 is a flow chart illustrating power management from a BIOS according to some embodiments of the disclosure. First in method 300, the block 302 may begin with receiving user input to a BIOS specifying a power setting for the IHS.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date working from Khosrowpour’s base device and seeking the improvement already known from He’s comparable device, could have applied He’s known user priority selection technique to Khosrowpours device in the same way it is applied in He, by incorporating a user selected priority as an additional input to the configuration setting lookup, alongside the workload class input Khosrowpour already supplies. (MPEP 2143(C))
Because Khosrowpour’s base device already requires the user to actively engage with the system at the very point when settings are determined, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that this same user interaction point could readily accommodate an additional user input specifically, a selected priority of the kind taught by He.
In regards to claim 3, KHOSROWPOUR teaches wherein the configuration setting is based on metrics associated with a simulated workload class. (P.0026) “The experimental operation 310 starts at step 320 by a test system 212 executing experiments on certain selected configurations and system settings in a laboratory setting.” (P.0031) “FIG. 5 shows an example association of performance benchmarks with particular types of loads.” (P.0039-0042) “the workload classification operation 400 identifies the proximity of new unknown workload to a known cluster. More specifically, when a new workload needs a profile, the user executes a workload analysis operation via the performance optimizer. This workload analysis operation tracks the same instrumentation that was used for characterizing the workloads during step 420… Using the data obtained when executing the workload analysis operation (which are over time), features are extracted to using the previously defined dataset. The workload classification operation 400 measures the nearest cluster to this data-point using a distance or similarity (e.g., Cosine similarity) measure… More specifically, for a new workload W, the minimum distance of W from K centroids is calculated as:
D.sub.wk=Min(√{square root over (Σ.sub.i−l.sup.K(w.sub.1i−c.sub.1i).sup.2)})…
For example, if the cluster with the minimum distance to W is k2. Then, the cluster k2 is most similar to the new unknown workload. The performance optimization operation then applies the optimal settings for cluster k2 to the workload W.”
In regards to claim 6, KHOSROWPOUR teaches further comprising determining another configuration setting in response to a different workload class running in the foreground. (P.0039) “the workload classification operation 400 identifies the proximity of new unknown workload to a known cluster… when a new workload needs a profile, the user executes a workload analysis operation via the performance optimizer.” (P.0042) “The performance optimization operation then applies the optimal settings for cluster k2 to the workload W.”
In regards to claim 7, HE teaches further comprising determining another configuration setting in response to a change in the optimization priority selected by the user. (P.0033) “the BIOS checks a user-selectable power table (USPT) option setting to determine a sustained power setting for the CPU and/or other power and thermal management settings for the information handling system. The USPT option setting may be selected by a user in the BIOS screen.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that the comparable device disclosed by HE, upon detecting a change in the users USPT selection at a subsequent boot cycle would determine another configuration setting corresponding to the new selection since HE’s comparable device already re checks the current user selected priority at each boot and maps it to a configuration setting.
Claim 8 corresponds to claim 1 in system format and is rejected for the same reasons stated above.
Claim 14 corresponds to claim 1 in system format and is rejected for the same reasons stated above.
Claim 10 corresponds to claim 3 in system format and is rejected for the same reasons stated above.
Claim 13 corresponds to claim 6 in a system format and is rejected for the same reasons stated above.
Claim 16 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium and corresponds to claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons stated above.
Claim 19 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium and corresponds to claim 6 and is rejected for the same reasons stated above.
Claim 20 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium and corresponds to claim 7 and is rejected for the same reasons stated above.
Claim(s) 2, 5, 9, 12, 15, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over. KHOSROWPOUR (US PUBLICATION 20180314617) in view of HE (US PUBLICATION 20200225732) and in further view of NICHOLSON (US PUBLICATION 20150121098)
In regards to claim 2, KHOSROWPOUR and HE teach the claims substantially but don’t teach further comprising determining a power source of the information handling system.
NICHOLSON teaches further comprising determining a power source of the information handling system. (Claim 1) “detect that the connection to the external power supply is providing an input of power; ascertain via the connection to the external power supply that the input of power is derived from a source having a predetermined characteristic; and automatically adjust a power consumption setting of the information handling device based on the predetermined characteristic.” (P.0034) “an example method for device power management based on detected power source is illustrated. As an AC output waveform is detected, e.g., in a circuit provided in an AC/DC power converter of a device, a low pass filter may be utilized to remove high frequency content of the AC output waveform at 410. Again, other methods for analyzing the AC output waveform may be utilized in addition to or in lieu of the example illustrated in FIG. 4. In any event, the analysis of the AC output waveform allows an embodiment to make a determination at 420 if the AC output waveform is commercially supplied. If so, e.g., the AC/DC converter is receiving AC from a wall outlet, an indication may be provided that the AC is derived from a commercial power source.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate Nicholsons disclosed technique into Khosrowpour’s base device, since Nicholsons own disclosed embodiment demonstrates this power source determination and configuration technique as a known, functioning mechanism for information handling devices.
In regards to claim 5, KHOSROWPOUR and HE teach the claims substantially but don’t teach wherein the determining of the configuration setting is based on a power source of the information handling system.
NICHOLSON teaches wherein the determining of the configuration setting is based on a power source of the information handling system. (P.0035) “In any event, the analysis of the AC output waveform allows an embodiment to make a determination at 420 if the AC output waveform is commercially supplied. If so, e.g., the AC/DC converter is receiving AC from a wall outlet, an indication may be provided that the AC is derived from a commercial power source. This indicator may be provided to the device connected to or containing the AC/DC converter such that the device may implement appropriate power management settings given that the device is connected to a commercial power supply.” (P.0035) “lternatively, if it is determined that the power supply is not derived from a commercial power supply, e.g., the AC output waveform is non-sinusoidal and thus can be categorized as being derived or originating from a UPS or generator DC source, an indicator of non-commercially supplied AC may be provided at 430. Again, such an indication may be utilized by a device to automatically adjust power management setting(s) at 440 given that the AC power source is not being derived from a commercial power supply. For example, at 440 the device may adjust downward certain power management settings, e.g., screen brightness, in order to conserve power, even though there is an AC power supply input.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate Nicholsons disclosed technique into Khosrowpour’s base device, since Nicholsons own disclosed embodiment demonstrates the power source determination and configuration technique as a known functioning mechanism for information handling device power management.
Claim 9 corresponds to claim 2 in system format and is rejected for the same reasons stated above.
Claim 12 corresponds to claim 5 in system format and is rejected for the same reasons stated above.
Claim 15 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium and corresponds to claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons stated above.
Claim 18 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium and corresponds to claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons stated above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SELMAN MOHAMED ABDULLAHI whose telephone number is (571)272-8556. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5:00 (Fri alternating).
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, LEWIS BULLOCK can be reached at (571) 272-3759. 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.
/SELMAN MOHAMED ABDULLAHI/Examiner, Art Unit 2199
/LEWIS A BULLOCK JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2199
Prosecution Insights