DETAILED ACTION
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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a second storage to store...” recited in claim 1; and “A method, comprising...at an accelerator” recited in claims 9 and 16.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. See the brief description of figure 3, figure 3, and paragraph of the specification associated with figure 3, disclosing that the accelerator is a machine and the second storage is a register or memory.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 2, and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Gopal et al. (US Pub. 20190034493).
Referring to claim 1, Gopal discloses An accelerator [fig. 1; pars. 21 and 24; a computer system includes a hardware accelerator], comprising:
a connection to a first storage to store a database [par. 24; the computer system is connected to a relational database], the database including a first column, a second column, a third column, and a fourth column [par. 24; note that relational databases comprise a plurality of columns];
a second storage to store a first information about the first column of the database, a second information about the second column of the database, a third information about the third column of the database, and a fourth information about the fourth column of the database [pars. 5, 27, and 31; the relational database is column-oriented, and data elements included in each of the columns (including first-fourth columns) are represented as an array of bits]; and
a circuit to process the first information, the second information, the third information, the fourth information, and a query to generate a skip information [pars. 5, 6, 31, 32, and 35; a CPU module processes a SQL SELECT statement (i.e., query) specifying one or more select operations with filter conditions (e.g., predicates); each select operation processes data elements in a column (e.g., the first-fourth columns) and retrieves a subset of the data elements in the column based on the filter conditions using a bit vector (i.e., skip information)].
Referring to claim 2, Gopal discloses The accelerator according to claim 1, further comprising a second circuit to process the query using the database and the skip information [par. 35; a data element filter logic performs the select operation].
Referring to claim 7, Gopal discloses The accelerator according to claim 1, wherein the circuit is configured to generate skip information based at least in part on the third column and the fourth column being fixed width columns [pars. 5, 31, and 32; note the fixed-size bit vectors].
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.
Claims 3-6 and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gopal in view of Grinstein et al. (US Pub. 20020188424).
Referring to claim 3, Gopal does not appear to explicitly disclose The accelerator according to claim 2, wherein the second circuit includes a column filter to identify columns in the database based at least in part on the skip information.
However, Grinstein discloses The accelerator according to claim 2, wherein the second circuit includes a column filter to identify columns in the database based at least in part on the skip information [par. 135; an optimization for overwriting is skipping, where instead of rendering all the columns and records to the display, only those values that will actually be displayed are selected; an operator defines the number of columns and records to be skipped, along with a starting position for the first column and record].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the data retrieval taught by Gopal so that column skipping is implemented using data encoding when performing the select operations as taught by Grinstein, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to further reduce the amount of data retrieved by including column skipping in the data encoding techniques performed during the select operations [Gopal, pars. 20 and 21; Grinstein, pars. 134 and 135].
Referring to claim 4, Gopal and Grinstein disclose The accelerator according to claim 1, wherein: the query includes a first identifier of the first column as a select column of the query and a second identifier of the second column as a pick column of the query [Gopal: pars. 5, 6, 31, 32, and 35 – note the select operations and the filter conditions specifying the columns to be processed and the data elements to be retrieved (from identified columns)]; and the skip information includes a start column, a number of columns to skip [Grinstein: par. 135 – the operator defines the number of columns and records to be skipped, along with the starting position for the first column and record], and a data width [Gopal: pars. 5, 6, 31, 32, and 35 – the bit vector specifies a data width via the length of the bit vector].
Referring to claim 5, Gopal and Grinstein disclose The accelerator according to claim 4, wherein: the start column includes a third identifier of the third column [Grinstein: par. 135 – note the starting position for the first column]. the data width is generated based at least in part on a first width of the third column and a second width of the fourth column [Gopal: par. 38 – data elements in a data path input to a preprocessing logic are shifted and merged at the end of a cycle based on the number of bits consumed in the previous cycle; the number of bits shifted at the end of the cycle is a fixed number based on the number of bits in each data element (data element width) in the data path (e.g., 32 bit width + 32 bit width = 64 bit width); Grinstein: par. 135 – note the column skipping using data encoding].
Referring to claim 6, Gopal and Grinstein disclose The accelerator according to claim 5, wherein the data width is generated based at least in part on the first width of the third column, the second width of the fourth column, and a data alignment of the database [Gopal: par. 38 – shifted and merged data is input to an align logic that converts shifted and merged data that has a data width twice the width of a data to conditioned data that is the same data width as the data path; Grinstein: par. 135 – note the column skipping using data encoding].
Referring to claim 9, Gopal discloses A method, comprising:
receiving a query [fig. 1; pars. 5, 6, 31, 32, and 35; a computer system receives a SQL SELECT statement (i.e., query)] of a database at an accelerator [fig. 1; pars. 21 and 24; the computer system includes a hardware accelerator and is connected to a relational database];
identifying a first column of the database and a second column of the database based at least in part on the query [pars. 5, 6, 31, 32, and 35; the SQL SELECT statement specifies one or more select operations with filter conditions (e.g., predicates); each select operation processes data elements in a column (e.g., the first and second columns)];
...generating a skip information by the accelerator... [pars. 5, 6, 31, 32, and 35; each select operation retrieves a subset of the data elements in the column based on the filter conditions using a bit vector (i.e., skip information)].
Gopal does not appear to explicitly disclose identifying a third column of the database and a fourth column of the database based at least in part on the first column and the second column; and that the skip information is generated based at least in part on the third column and the fourth column.
However, Grinstein discloses identifying a third column of the database and a fourth column of the database based at least in part on the first column and the second column; and that the skip information is generated based at least in part on the third column and the fourth column [par. 135; an optimization for overwriting is skipping, where instead of rendering all the columns and records to the display (i.e., the first and second columns), only those values that will actually be displayed are selected; an operator defines the number of columns and records to be skipped (i.e., the third and fourth columns), along with a starting position for the first column and record].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the data retrieval taught by Gopal so that column skipping is implemented using data encoding when performing the select operations as taught by Grinstein, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to further reduce the amount of data retrieved by including column skipping in the data encoding techniques performed during the select operations [Gopal, pars. 20 and 21; Grinstein, pars. 134 and 135].
Referring to claim 10, Gopal discloses The method according to claim 9, further comprising processing the query based at least in part on the database and the skip information [pars. 5, 6, 31, 32, and 35; note the retrieving of the subset of the data elements in the column based on the filter conditions using a bit vector (i.e., skip information)].
Referring to claim 11, Gopal discloses The method according to claim 9, wherein identifying the first column of the database and the second column of the database based at least in part on the query includes: identifying the first column as a select column of the query; and identifying the second column as a pick column of the query [pars. 5, 6, 31, 32, and 35; note the select operations with the filter conditions (specifying data to process and subset of data to retrieve)].
Referring to claim 12, Gopal and Grinstein disclose The method according to claim 9, wherein generating the skip information by the accelerator based at least in part on the third column and the fourth column includes generating the skip information by a circuit of the accelerator based at least in part on the third column and the fourth column [Gopal: par. 35 – a data element filter logic performs the select operation; Grinstein: par. 135 – note the column skipping using data encoding].
Referring to claim 13, Gopal and Grinstein disclose The method according to claim 9, wherein generating the skip information by the accelerator based at least in part on the third column and the fourth column includes generating a start column, a number of columns to skip [Grinstein: par. 135 – the operator defines the number of columns and records to be skipped, along with the starting position for the first column and record], and a data width [Gopal: pars. 5, 6, 31, 32, and 35 – the bit vector specifies a data width via the length of the bit vector] based at least in part on the third column and the fourth column [Gopal: par. 38 – data elements in a data path input to a preprocessing logic are shifted and merged at the end of a cycle based on the number of bits consumed in the previous cycle; the number of bits shifted at the end of the cycle is a fixed number based on the number of bits in each data element (data element width) in the data path (e.g., 32 bit width + 32 bit width = 64 bit width); Grinstein: par. 135 – note the column skipping using data encoding].
Referring to claim 14, Gopal and Grinstein disclose The method according to claim 13, wherein generating the start column, the number of columns to skip, and the data width based at least in part on the third column and the fourth column includes: identifying the third column as the start column [Grinstein: par. 135 – the operator defines the number of columns and records to be skipped, along with the starting position for the first column and record]; and generating the data width based at least in part on a first width of the third column and a second width of the fourth column [Gopal: par. 38 – data elements in a data path input to a preprocessing logic are shifted and merged at the end of a cycle based on the number of bits consumed in the previous cycle; the number of bits shifted at the end of the cycle is a fixed number based on the number of bits in each data element (data element width) in the data path (e.g., 32 bit width + 32 bit width = 64 bit width); Grinstein: par. 135 – note the column skipping using data encoding].
Referring to claim 15, Gopal and Grinstein disclose The method according to claim 14, wherein generating the data width based at least in part on the first width of the third column and the second width of the fourth column includes generating the data width based at least in part on the first width of the third column, the second width of the fourth column, and a data alignment of the database [Gopal: par. 38 – shifted and merged data is input to an align logic that converts shifted and merged data that has a data width twice the width of a data to conditioned data that is the same data width as the data path; Grinstein: par. 135 – note the column skipping using data encoding].
Referring to claim 16, Gopal discloses A method, comprising:
receiving a query [fig. 1; pars. 5, 6, 31, 32, and 35; a computer system receives a SQL SELECT statement (i.e., query)] of a database at an accelerator [fig. 1; pars. 21 and 24; the computer system includes a hardware accelerator and is connected to a relational database];
filtering...in a database using a...filter based at least in part on a skip information [pars. 5, 6, 31, 32, and 35; a CPU module of the computer system processes a SQL SELECT statement (i.e., query) specifying one or more select operations with filter conditions (e.g., predicates); each select operation processes data elements in a column (e.g., the first-fourth columns) and retrieves a subset of the data elements in the column based on the filter conditions using a bit vector (i.e., skip information)]; and
processing the query based at least in part on the query, the database, and the...filter [pars. 5, 6, 31, 32, and 35; note the retrieval of the subset of the data elements based on the select operations, the filter conditions, and the bit vector].
Gopal does not appear to explicitly disclose filtering of columns.
However, Grinstein discloses filtering of columns [par. 135; an optimization for overwriting is skipping, where instead of rendering all the columns and records to the display, only those values that will actually be displayed are selected; an operator defines the number of columns and records to be skipped, along with a starting position for the first column and record].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the data retrieval taught by Gopal so that column skipping is implemented using data encoding when performing the select operations as taught by Grinstein, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to further reduce the amount of data retrieved by including column skipping in the data encoding techniques performed during the select operations [Gopal, pars. 20 and 21; Grinstein, pars. 134 and 135].
Referring to claim 17, Gopal and Grinstein disclose The method according to claim 16, wherein filtering the columns in the database based at least in part on the skip information using the column filter includes loading the skip information from a storage [Gopal: pars. 5, 6, 31, 32, and 35 – note the bit vector; Grinstein: par. 135 – note the column skipping using data encoding].
Referring to claim 18, Grinstein discloses The method according to claim 16, wherein: the skip information includes a start column and a number of columns to skip; and filtering the columns in the database using the column filter based at least in part on the skip information includes filtering the columns in the database using the column filter based at least in part on the start column and the number of columns [par. 135; note the operator defines the number of columns and records to be skipped, along with the starting position for the first column and record].
Referring to claim 19, Gopal and Grinstein disclose The method according to claim 18, wherein the skip information is based at least in part on the start column and the number of columns being fixed width columns [Gopal: pars. 5, 31, and 32 – note the fixed-size bit vectors; Grinstein: par. 135 – note the column skipping using data encoding].
Referring to claim 20, Gopal discloses The method according to claim 16, wherein: the skip information includes a start column [Grinstein: par. 135 – the operator defines the number of columns and records to be skipped, along with the starting position for the first column and record] and a data width [Gopal: pars. 5, 6, 31, 32, and 35 – the bit vector specifies a data width via the length of the bit vector]; and filtering the columns in the database using the column filter based at least in part on the skip information includes filtering the columns in the database using the column filter based at least in part on the start column and the data width [Gopal: par. 38 – data elements in a data path input to a preprocessing logic are shifted and merged at the end of a cycle based on the number of bits consumed in the previous cycle; the number of bits shifted at the end of the cycle is a fixed number based on the number of bits in each data element (data element width) in the data path (e.g., 32 bit width + 32 bit width = 64 bit width); Grinstein: par. 135 – note the column skipping using data encoding].
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gopal in view of Baptist et al. (CN110291509A, translation provided).
Referring to claim 8, Gopal does not appear to explicitly disclose The accelerator according to claim 1, wherein the first information includes a flag indicating whether the first column is of fixed or variable width or a width of the first column.
However, Baptist discloses The accelerator according to claim 1, wherein the first information includes a flag indicating whether the first column is of fixed or variable width or a width of the first column [pg. 5, second half; encoding parameters may include a protocol of a data segment (e.g., size, fixed, variable, etc.)].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the data retrieval taught by Gopal so that the bit vector representation (i.e., encoding) of a column includes encoding parameters indicating whether the column is fixed or variable as taught by Baptist, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would have been to facilitate efficient processing of select operations across the entire range of widths [Gopal, pars. 20 and 21].
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GRACE PARK whose telephone number is (571)270-7727. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8AM-5PM.
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, TAMARA KYLE can be reached at (571)272-4241. 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.
/Grace Park/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2144