DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in reply to correspondence filed 21 July 2026 in regard to application no. 18/524,558. Claims 1-20 are pending and are considered below.
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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-12 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawaya et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2023/0186139) in view of Soeken et al. (U.S. Publication No. 2023/0401474, filed 14 June 2022).
In-line citations are to Sawaya.
With regard to Claim 1:
Sawaya teaches: A system, comprising:
a memory that stores computer executable components; [0041; a "system memory" may store instructions; 0039; a code fetch component may "steer classical instruction to host CPU"] and a processor that executes the computer executable components [0039; they may be executed by "a classical CPU [which] controls a quantum processing unit"] that:
identify a target partition definition for a quantum processor comprising a plurality of qubits; [0100; "partition generation logic 1550 identifies multiple partitions of qubits"] and
direct a controller of a quantum system, comprising the quantum processor, to apply the target partition definition to control electronics of the quantum system for execution of an operation at the quantum processor, [0092; the system may "implement fuse-and- decompose' operations in a quantum computing compiler"; 0019; such operations are performed on the "selected qubit partitions"]
wherein the target partition definition corresponds to a target partition specifying at least one quantum system… resource, of quantum system… resources… associated with a target qubit of the plurality of qubits. [0074; the control might be directed to a "target qubit"]
Sawaya does not explicitly teach that data correspond to a hardware resource of hardware resources of control electronics, but in addition to being very nearly inherent – it is difficult how data can be processed in any sort of computer without some correspondence to processing equipment – it is known in the art. Soeken teaches a control system for performing operations on qubits. [abstract] Qubits are partitioned, [0009] and are associated with a “quantum hardware accelerator that instantiates the quantum computing device”. [0206] Soeken and Sawaya are analogous art as each is directed to electronic means for using classical computers to control quantum resources.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art just prior to the filing of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Soeken with that of Sawaya in order to instantiate a quantum device, as taught by Soeken; further, it is simply a substitution of one known part for another with predictable results, simply using Soeken’s qubits in place of those of Sawaya; the substitution produces no new and unexpected result.
With regard to Claim 2:
The system of claim 1, wherein the computer executable instructions further:
direct the controller to send communications to the at least one quantum system hardware resource using a target communication link associated with the target partition. [Sheet 5, Fig. 2 showing the topology used to send data and commands; as the target position is within the quantum computer, any information sent to the quantum computer is "associated" therewith]
With regard to Claim 3:
The system of claim 2, wherein the computer executable instructions further:
direct the controller to use a target partition ID for the target partition when sending the communications to the at least one quantum system hardware resource. [0100; the target partitions are identified; 0151; this includes "identifying a sequence of consecutive gates]
With regard to Claim 4:
The system of claim 2, wherein the computer executable instructions further:
identify the target communication link corresponding to the target partition. [0039; a particular "code fetch data path" is used to direct communications]
With regard to Claim 5:
The system of claim 1, wherein the computer executable instructions further:
in response to the direction to the controller of the quantum system, direct the quantum system to execute a quantum circuit using the target qubit, by sending a first communication using a target communication link associated with the target partition. [Sawaya, as cited above in regard to claim 2]
With regard to Claim 7:
The system of claim 1, wherein the target partition definition comprises information defining a target partition ID for the target partition and defining a target communication link corresponding to the target partition. [Sawaya, as cited above in regard to claims 1-3; 0074; a qubit ID is determined as well]
This claim is not patentably distinct from claim 1, as it consists entirely of nonfunctional, descriptive language, disclosing at most human interpretation of data but which imparts neither structure nor functionality to the claimed system. Further, as the definition only "comprises" this data, it can include other information, and any further processing could be based entirely on the other information. The reference is provided for the purpose of compact prosecution.
With regard to Claim 8:
Sawaya teaches: A computer implemented method, comprising:
identifying, by a system operatively coupled to a processor, [0039; 0041; the system includes a processor and memory] a target partition definition for a quantum processor comprising a plurality of qubits; [0100; "partition generation logic 1550 identifies multiple partitions of qubits"] and
directing, by the system, a controller of a quantum system, comprising the quantum processor, to apply the target partition definition to control electronics of the quantum system for execution of an operation at the quantum processor, [0092; the system may "implement 'fuse-and-decompose' operations in a quantum computing compiler"; 0019; such operations are performed on the "selected qubit partitions"]
wherein the target partition definition corresponds to a target partition specifying at least one quantum system… resource, of quantum system… resources… associated with a target qubit of the plurality of qubits. [0074; the control might be directed to a "target qubit"]
Sawaya does not explicitly teach that data correspond to a hardware resource of hardware resources of control electronics, but in addition to being very nearly inherent – it is difficult how data can be processed in any sort of computer without some correspondence to processing equipment – it is known in the art. Soeken teaches a control system for performing operations on qubits. [abstract] Qubits are partitioned, [0009] and are associated with a “quantum hardware accelerator that instantiates the quantum computing device”. [0206] Soeken and Sawaya are analogous art as each is directed to electronic means for using classical computers to control quantum resources.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art just prior to the filing of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Soeken with that of Sawaya in order to instantiate a quantum device, as taught by Soeken; further, it is simply a substitution of one known part for another with predictable results, simply using Soeken’s qubits in place of those of Sawaya; the substitution produces no new and unexpected result.
With regard to Claim 9:
The computer-implemented method of claim 8, further comprising:
directing, by the system, the controller to send communications to the at least one quantum system hardware resource using a target communication link associated with the target partition. [Sheet 5, Fig. 2 showing the topology used to send data and commands; as the target position is within the quantum computer, any information sent to the quantum computer is "associated" therewith]
With regard to Claim 10:
The computer-implemented method of claim 9, further comprising:
directing, by the system, the controller to use a target partition ID for the target partition when sending the communications to the at least one quantum system hardware resource. [0100; the target partitions are identified; 0151; this includes "identifying a sequence of consecutive gates]
With regard to Claim 11:
The computer-implemented. method of claim 9, further comprising:
identifying, by the system, the target communication link corresponding to the target partition. [0039; a particular "code fetch data path" is used to direct communications]
With regard to Claim 12:
The computer-implemented method of claim 8, further comprising:
in response to the direction to the controller of the quantum system, directing, by the system, the quantum system to execute a quantum circuit using the target qubit, by sending a first communication using a target communication link associated with the target partition. [Sawaya, as cited above in regard to claim 9]
With regard to Claim 14:
The computer-implemented method of claim 8, wherein the target partition definition comprises information defining a target partition ID for the target partition and the target communication link corresponding to the target partition. [Sawaya, as cited above in regard to claims 8-10; 0074; a qubit ID is determined as well]
This claim is not patentably distinct from claim 8, as it consists entirely of nonfunctional, descriptive language, disclosing at most human interpretation of data but which imparts neither structure nor functionality to the claimed method. Further, as the definition only "comprises" this data, it can include other information, and any further processing could be based entirely on the other information. The reference is provided for the purpose of compact prosecution.
With regard to Claim 15:
The computer-implemented. method of claim 8, further comprising:
sending to the at least one quantum system hardware resource, by the controller, a communication directing execution at the target qubit of a waveform, associated with execution of a quantum circuit, using a target communication link associated with the target partition. [0030; e.g. "microwave signals" may be used for this purpose and they may alter the states of target qubits]
With regard to Claim 16:
The computer-implemented method of claim 15, wherein the communication comprises a target partition ID associated with the target partition and recognized by the at least one quantum system hardware resource as corresponding to the at least one quantum system hardware resource.
This claim is not patentably distinct from claim 15 as it consists entirely of nonfunctional, descriptive language, disclosing at most human interpretation of data but which imparts neither structure nor functionality to the claimed method.
With regard to Claim 17:
The computer-implemented. method of claim 15, further comprising:
executing, by the at least one quantum system hardware resource, the waveform at the target qubit, thereby altering a state of the target qubit. [0030 as cited above in regard to claim 15]
With regard to Claim 18:
The computer-implemented method of claim 8, further comprising:
identifying, by the controller, using a target communication link, target readout information defining a state of the target qubit. [0079; "reading qubit index values from registers identified by the uops"]
With regard to Claim 19:
Sawaya teaches: A computer program product facilitating a process to manage a set of partitions corresponding to a set of qubits of a quantum processor of a quantum system, the computer program product comprising a computer readable storage medium having program instructions embodied therewith, the program instructions executable by a processor [0041; a "system memory" may store instructions; 0039; a code fetch component may "steer classical instruction to host CPU" for execution] to cause the processor to:
identify, by the processor, a target partition definition for the quantum processor comprising the set of qubits; [0100; "partition generation logic 1550 identifies multiple partitions of qubits"] and
direct, by the processor, a controller of the quantum system, comprising the quantum processor, to apply the target partition definition to control electronics at the quantum system for execution of an operation at the quantum processor, [0092; the system may "implement 'fuse-and-decompose' operations in a quantum computing compiler"; 0019; such operations are performed on the "selected qubit partitions"]
wherein the target partition definition corresponds to a target partition specifying at least one quantum system… resource, of quantum system… resources… associated with a target qubit of the plurality of qubits. [0074; the control might be directed to a "target qubit"]
Sawaya does not explicitly teach that data correspond to a hardware resource of hardware resources of control electronics, but in addition to being very nearly inherent – it is difficult how data can be processed in any sort of computer without some correspondence to processing equipment – it is known in the art. Soeken teaches a control system for performing operations on qubits. [abstract] Qubits are partitioned, [0009] and are associated with a “quantum hardware accelerator that instantiates the quantum computing device”. [0206] Soeken and Sawaya are analogous art as each is directed to electronic means for using classical computers to control quantum resources.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art just prior to the filing of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Soeken with that of Sawaya in order to instantiate a quantum device, as taught by Soeken; further, it is simply a substitution of one known part for another with predictable results, simply using Soeken’s qubits in place of those of Sawaya; the substitution produces no new and unexpected result.
With regard to Claim 20:
The computer program product of claim 19, wherein the program instructions are further executable by the processor to cause the processor to:
direct, by the processor, based on the target partition definition, the controller to send a communication to the at least one quantum system hardware resource using a target communication link associated with the target partition and to send the communication using a target partition ID associated with the target partition. [Sawaya, as cited above in regard to claim 9]
Claim(s) 6 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sawaya et al. in view of Soeken et al. further in view of Allouche et al. (WIPO Publication No. 2018/172629).
These claims are similar so are analyzed together.
With regard to Claim 6:
The system of claim 1, wherein the computer executable components further:
direct the controller to clear the target partition definition.
With regard to Claim 13:
The computer-implemented method of claim 8, further comprising:
directing, by the system, the controller to clear the target partition definition and to stop use of a target communication link associated with the target partition.
Sawaya and Soeken teach the system of claim 1 and method of claim 8, but do not explicitly teach this clearing step, but it is known in the art. Allouche teaches a process for simulating a quantum circuit on a classical computer. [title] The disclosure includes that it was known in the time for information relating to "input qubits" to be "progressively erased" as partial results are achieved. [Pg. 4, para. 6 of the English translation provided] Allouche and Sawaya are analogous art as each is directed to means by which conventional computers interact with quantum computers or data.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art just prior to the filing of the claimed invention to combine the teaching of Allouche with that of Sawaya and Soeken in order to free up memory, as taught by Allouche; further, it is simply a combination of known parts with predictable results, simply performing Allouche's step after those of Sawaya. Each part works independently of the other, and each works in combination identically to how it works when not combined, with no new and unexpected result inherent or disclosed.
These claims are not patentably distinct from their respective parent claims as they consist entirely of nonfunctional printed matter, disclosing at most the content of information which is merely transmitted or displayed, but which bears no functional relation to the claimed substrate. Further in regard to claim 13, one of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time would know that any communication link is in use at most part of the time and therefore its use is regularly "stopped". The reference is provided for the purpose of compact prosecution.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1=20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. To the extent the arguments focus on language added by amendment, the teaching of Soeken has been incorporated herein to meet the additional limitations.
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 SCOTT C ANDERSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7442. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 to 5:30.
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, Bennett Sigmond can be reached at (303) 297-4411. 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.
/SCOTT C ANDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3694
