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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks filed 23 September 2025 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Sundell does not teach “adding the filled data blocks to the list by adjusting pointer memories in the further fields of certain of the data blocks and adjusting the access data memory” “wherein an access data memory is provided for storing a start pointer to a first data block of the list and for storing an end pointer to a last data block of the list.” Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The dummy head and dummy tail of Sundell are not data blocks, as they do not store data. Rather, they are the claimed access data memory. The dummy head stores a pointer to the first data block, the block storing data v1, and the dummy tail stores a pointer to the last data block, the block storing data vn. If a filled data block is to be added to the list at the head of the doubly-linked list, the prev pointer in block v-1 is adjusted from the address of the dummy head to the filled data block being added, and the next pointer of the dummy head is adjusted from the address of block v1 to the filled data block being added, thereby resulting in the claimed invention.
Claim Interpretation
Read on its own, the specification only contains sufficient support for a “atomic compare exchange” atomic operator (equivalent, in the prior art, to a “compare-and-swap” operator). However, the prior art makes clear that possession of a doubly linked lockless list using a CAS operator is sufficient to show possession of the genus of atomic operators. Sundell et al., Lock-free deques and doubly linked lists, pg. 2 (“In this paper we use the Fetch-And-Add (FAA) and the Compare-And-Swap (CAS) atomic primitives; see Fig. 2 for a description. These read-modify-write style of operations are available on most common architectures or can be easily derived from other synchronization primitives.”). MPEP § 2163.
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.
Claim(s) 13-21 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sundell et al., Lock-free deques and doubly linked lists.
As per claims 13, 21 and 23, Sundell teaches:
wherein the structured data are structured as data blocks, Sundell pg. 4, where the values are stored in blocks, and the method uses a memory region for storing the structured data using the data-transmitting module and for reading the structured data using the data-receiving module to transmit data from the data-transmitting module to the data-receiving module, Sundell pp. 1-2, where the shared data objects are inherently used to transmit data, based on their shared nature, e.g., between Processor 1 and Processor 2, wherein the data blocks each include a first field with an address, and at least one further field for storing links to further data blocks, so that a list of interlinked data blocks can be formed, and wherein an access data memory is provided for storing a start pointer to a first data block of the list and for storing an end pointer to a last data block of the list, Sundell pg. 3, Fig. 3;
storing data using the data-transmitting module by first filling data blocks with the data independently of the list, Sundell pg. 3, where CreateNode fills a block with a value, and subsequently, after filling the data blocks, adding the filled data blocks to the list by adjusting pointer memories in the further fields of certain of the data blocks and adjusting the access data memory, wherein the access data memory is adjusted with an atomic operation, wherein an execution of the atomic operation cannot be interrupted by other operations, Sundell pg. 8, where inserts use CAS, which is an atomic operation.
As per claim 14, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated, and Sundell further teaches:
wherein, when the data are stored by the data-transmitting module, the filled data blocks are linked to one another, independently of the list, by pointers stored in the further fields of the filled data blocks, to form a new sublist before adding to the list takes place, Harris, pg. 8, where previous and next pointers are linked before the CAS call to add the new node to the list is invoked.
As per claim 15, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated, and Sundell further teaches:
wherein one or more data blocks are added to the list at a first data block of the list or a last data block of the list, Sundell pg. 8, where a node is added to the head or tail depending on the position of the cursor and the function called.
As per claim 16, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated, and Sundell further teaches:
removing certain of the data blocks from the list by adjusting the access data memory with an atomic operation, Sundell, pg. 9, where the delete method uses atomic CAS operation to remove the block from the list.
As per claim 17, the rejection of claim 16 is incorporated, and Sundell further teaches:
wherein the removal of the certain data blocks from the list takes place starting from a first data block or a last data block by adjusting the access data memory with an atomic operation, Sundell, pg. 9, where deleting a first or last key will remove starting from a first or last data block.
As per claim 18, the rejection of claim 16 is incorporated, and Sundell further teaches:
wherein the data-receiving module reads the data blocks of the list in blocks, wherein each of the data blocks of the list has a lock memory in which the data-receiving module sets a reservation as long as the data of the data block are being read, Sundell pg. 2, where reads are atomic, and therefore set a reservation under a broadest reasonable interpretation.
As per claim 19, the rejection of claim 18 is incorporated, and Sundell further teaches:
wherein those of the data blocks that are removed from the list initially continue to exist after removal from the list and are released in a subsequent step for deleting the those data blocks when no reservation is set in the lock memory of the those data blocks, Sundell pg. 9, where the CAS calls remove the node from the list, and the DeleteNode deletes the node in a separate and subsequent step.
As per claim 20, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated, and Sundell further teaches:
wherein each data block has a further second field and a further third field, wherein a pointer in the second field of the data block links to a data block arranged further toward a front of the the list, wherein a pointer in the third field of the data block links to a data block arranged further toward a rear of the list, Sundell pg. 4, where the second field stores the prev pointer and the third field stores the next pointer.
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) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sundell et al., Lock-free deques and doubly linked lists.
As per claim 22, the rejection of claim 21 is incorporated, but Sundell does not teach:
wherein the data processing system is part of a system for highly automated driving operation of a motor vehicle.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing, as an obvious design choice in designing a highly automated driving operation of a motor vehicle, to use the lockless doubly-linked lists of Sundell as part of a system for highly automated driving operation of a motor vehicle, as doing so would “ensure consistency of a shared data object in a concurrent environment” without “suffer[ing] from the problems that blocking could create.” Sundell pg. 1; MPEP § 2144.07.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 WILLIAM SPIELER whose telephone number is (571)270-3883. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 11-3.
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, Ann Lo can be reached on 571-272-9767. 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.
WILLIAM SPIELER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2159
/WILLIAM SPIELER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2159