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 Amendment
Amendment filed on 04/17/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Snowdon in view of Xue, and further in view of He et al. (US 2020/0259578 A1, hereinafter “He”).
Regarding claim 17:
Xue discloses a method of operating a network device, comprising: receiving data via a plurality of data lanes in accordance with a multilane communications protocol (e.g., 16 in Fig. 1, Column 3, Lines 29-40); conveying data through a clock domain boundary that separates different clock domains (e.g., 78 in Fig. 8 can be considered a clock domain boundary);
Xue is silent regarding prior to the data traversing the clock domain boundary, producing a plurality of timestamps on the data; and selecting a most recent timestamp from the plurality of timestamps and outputting the most recent timestamp to one or more downstream components in the network device.
He teaches prior to data traversing a clock domain boundary, producing a plurality of timestamps on the data; and selecting a most recent timestamp from the plurality of timestamps (e.g., [0068], “the first receipt timestamp is a receipt timestamp … corresponding to a head data block that is the last to arrive at the receiving apparatus in the plurality of head data blocks”) and outputting the most recent timestamp to one or more downstream components in the network device ([0068], “the receiving apparatus aligns the plurality of receipt timestamps using a first receipt timestamp as a reference”, [0080]-[0082], the first receipt timestamp must be output to a component of the receiving apparatus to align the receipt timestamps.)
It would have been obvious on having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Xue based on the teaching from He to include the features prior to the data traversing the clock domain boundary, producing a plurality of timestamps on the data, and selecting a most recent timestamp from the plurality of timestamps and outputting the most recent timestamp to one or more downstream components in the network device, in order to correct timing skew between data blocks.
Regarding claim 18:
Xue further wherein receiving the data comprises: with a plurality of deserializers, receiving serial data bits in the data and outputting a plurality of corresponding n-bit data words in parallel (e.g., 73 in Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 19:
Xue further discloses wherein conveying the data through the clock domain boundary comprises: with a plurality of deskew first in, first out (FIFO) buffers, latching the n-bit data words using a plurality of different recovered clock signals and outputting the n-bit data words using a common clock signal separate from the plurality of different recovered clock signals (e.g., 78 in Fig. 8, Column 4, Lines 21-65, Column 10, Lines 43-59).
Regarding claim 20:
Xue is silent regarding producing the plurality of timestamps on the data comprises timestamping an arrival of the data at a same point in each data lane in the plurality of data lanes.
He teaches producing the plurality of timestamps on the data comprises timestamping an arrival of the data at a same point in each data lane in the plurality of data lanes (e.g., [0067], [0071], [0073]).
It would have been obvious on having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Xue based on the teaching from He to include the features producing the plurality of timestamps on the data comprises timestamping an arrival of the data at a same point in each data lane in the plurality of data lanes, in order to correct timing skew between data blocks.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-16 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9-10 of Remarks, with respect to independent claims 1 and 11 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 1-16 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 11 of Remarks, with respect to independent claim 17 as amended have been considered but are moot in view of a new ground of rejection.
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 Alvin ZHU whose telephone number is (571)270-1086. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 6am-9am and 2pm-7pm.
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, Gary Mui can be reached at 571-270-1420. 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.
/BO HUI A ZHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2465
Prosecution Insights