DETAILED ACTION
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 arguments filed 2/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant’s arguments with regard to the independent claim 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) that the combination of the references does not teach/suggest the claimed feature “… host interface … remote interface …” because it is not clear how the same interface 112 in GUAN would or could be used to arrive at both of the claimed limitations and GUAN’s interface 124, not interface 122, are for accessing remote device; applicant's arguments have fully been considered, but are not found to be persuasive.
The examiner respectfully disagrees, and to further clarify, GUAN does teach/suggest the above claimed features as Figure 1 of GUAN teaches/suggests host interface (122) of element (120B) is coupled to host device (110B) and remote interface (122) of element (120A) is coupled to remote device (110A), wherein the remote device (110A) accesses host device (110B) via host interface (122) of element (120B) (Fig. 1-2; and [0019]-[0031]).
As applicant appears to be applying the above arguments for independent claim 1 towards independent claims 8 and 15, the examiner will also apply the above response for independent claim 1 towards independent claims 8 and 15.
In response to applicant’s arguments with regard to the independent claim 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) that the combination of the references does not teach/suggest the claimed feature “… without using CXL …” because YANG only contemplated an emulated device, not emulating CXL or PCIe; applicant's arguments have fully been considered, but are not found to be persuasive.
The examiner respectfully disagrees, and to further clarify, YANG does teach/suggest the above claimed features because YANG discloses “where network interface device and host can share memory space (e.g. through Compute Express Link (CXL) or other approaches) via an emulated device” appears to teach/suggest that host and network interface device are linked through CXL via the emulated device for sharing memory space (i.e. emulated device emulating CXL for linking the host and the network interface) ([0002]-[0004]; and [0014]-[0020]).
As applicant appears to be applying the above arguments for independent claim 1 towards independent claims 8 and 15, the examiner will also apply the above response for independent claim 1 towards independent claims 8 and 15.
In response to applicant’s arguments with regard to the dependent claim 6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) that the combination of the references does not teach/suggest the claimed feature “… a host interface … a remote interface … a memory host interface …” because Malladi, GUAN and YANG fail to contemplate having three interfaces; applicant's arguments have fully been considered, but are not found to be persuasive.
The examiner respectfully disagrees, in association with the above clarifications and to further clarify, GUAN does teach/suggest having three interfaces as Figure 1 of GUAN teaches/suggests host interface (122) of element (120B) is coupled to host device (110B), remote interface (122) of element (120A) is coupled to remote device (110A), and memory host interface (122) of element (120C) that is coupled accordingly (Fig. 1-2; and [0019]-[0031]).
I. REJECTIONS BASED ON PRIOR ART
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 1, 3-8, 10-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Malladi et al. (US Pub.: 2021/0311900) in view of GUAN et al. (US Pub.: 2024/0069755) and YANG (US Pub.: 2023/0023766).
As per claim 1, Malladi teaches/suggests a system comprising: configured to access one or more memories; and configured to provide, to one or more remote devices, a remote memory function, wherein the remote memory function provide access the one or more memories for the one or more remote devices (e.g. associated a server interact/access memory of another server: [0006]) ([0006]; and [0040]-[0051]).
Malladi does not teach the remote memory bridge comprising:
a host interface accessing, using a peripheral component interconnect express (PCIe) interface without using compute express link (CXL), module of a host device; and
a remote interface provide bridge function as a CXL device, wherein the bridge function provide, via the host interface, access of the host device.
GUAN teaches/suggests a remote memory bridge, comprising: a host interface accessing module of a host device (e.g. associated with interface (122) for accessing memory (114B) of host (110B) in Fig. 1) using a peripheral component interconnect express (PCIe) interface (e.g. associated with interface (112) being inserted in PCIe slot: [0021]); and a remote interface provide bridge function as a CXL device (e.g. associated with interface (122) being coupled to remote host (110A) in Fig. 1), wherein the bridge function provide, via the host interface, access of the host device (e.g. associate with remote host (110A) accessing memory (114B) in Fig. 1: [0022]) (Fig. 1-2; and [0019]-[0031]).
YANG teaches/suggests a system comprising: without using compute express link (CXL) (e.g. associated with emulating CXL over PCIe: [0015]) ([0002]-[0004]; and [0014]-[0020]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in this art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include GUAN’s interface module YANG’s emulating architecture into Malladi’s architecture for the benefit of increase utilization of memory resources while shortening the time for accessing remote memory (GUAN, [0008]) and lessening CPU utilization and host resource utilization (YANG, [0014]) to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
As per claim 3, Malladi, GUAN and YANG teach/suggest all the claimed features of claim 1 above, where Malladi, GUAN and YANG further teach/suggest the device comprising wherein the remote interface is configured to provide the remote memory bridge function as a compute express link (CXL) type 3 device (Malladi, [0041]-[0042]; and GUAN, [0027]) (Malladi, [0006]; [0040]-[0051]; GUAN, Fig. 1-2; [0019]-[0031]; and YANG, [0002]-[0004]; [0014]-[0020]), wherein it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art to try and implement CXL type 3 device for CXL.mem subprotocol when operating in accordance CXL protocol as CXL protocol only include type 1 to type 3 wherein type 3 includes CXL.mem.
As per claim 4, Malladi, GUAN and YANG teach/suggest all the claimed features of claim 1 above, where Malladi, GUAN and YANG further teach/suggest the device comprising wherein the remote interface is communicatively coupled with a remote memory host of the one or more remote devices using a peripheral component interconnect express (PCIe) interface (Malladi, [0041]; and GUAN, [0021]) (Malladi, [0006]; [0040]-[0051]; GUAN, Fig. 1-2; [0019]-[0031]; and Das Sharma, Fig. 6; Fig. 10; [0025]-[0026]; [0030]; [0033]; [0035]; [0050]-[0055]; [0059]-[0060]; [0064]-[0065]; [0068]-[0080]).
As per claim 5, Malladi, GUAN and YANG teach/suggest all the claimed features of claim 1 above, where Malladi, GUAN and YANG further teach/suggest the device comprising wherein the remote interface is communicatively coupled with a remote memory host of the one or more remote devices using a network switch (e.g. associated with Fig. 1A, ref. 110 of Malladi) (Malladi, [0006]; [0040]-[0051]; GUAN, Fig. 1-2; [0019]-[0031]; and YANG, [0002]-[0004]; [0014]-[0020]).
As per claim 6, Malladi, GUAN and YANG teach/suggest all the claimed features of claim 1 above, where Malladi, GUAN and YANG further teach/suggest the device further comprising a memory host interface configured as a remote memory host to access, on behalf of the host device and using CXL, one or more remote memory devices (Malladi, [0006]; [0040]-[0051]; GUAN, Fig. 1-2; [0019]-[0031]; and YANG, [0002]-[0004]; [0014]-[0020]).
As per claim 7, Malladi, GUAN and YANG teach/suggest all the claimed features of claim 6 above, where Malladi, GUAN and YANG further teach/suggest the device comprising wherein the memory host interface is configured to expose, to the host device, a base address register (BAR) space corresponding to the one or more remote memory devices, and wherein the memory host interface is configured to access the one or more remote memory devices based on load or store requests in the BAR space (Malladi, [0049]; GUAN, [0027]-[0030]; and YANG, [0015])) (Malladi, [0006]; [0040]-[0051]; GUAN, Fig. 1-2; [0019]-[0031]; and YANG, [0002]-[0004]; [0014]-[0020]), wherein it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled for further implement the above claimed features.
As per claim 8, claim 8 is rejected in accordance to the same rational and reasoning as the above rejection of claim 1, as claim 1 is directed to the bridge that carried out the method of claim 8, where Malladi, GUAN and YANG further teach/suggest the method comprising receiving a request from a remote device; and operating based on the request (Malladi, [0006]; [0040]-[0051]; GUAN, Fig. 1-2; [0019]-[0031]; and YANG, [0002]-[0004]; [0014]-[0020]).
As per claim 10, claims 10 is rejected in accordance to the same rational and reasoning as the above rejection of claim 3, as claim 3 is directed to the bridge that carried out the method of claim 10.
As per claim 11, Malladi, GUAN and YANG teach/suggest all the claimed features of claim 8 above, where Malladi, GUAN and YANG further teach/suggest the method comprising wherein the host interface accesses a remote memory host of one or more remote devices using a peripheral component interconnect express (PCIe) interface (Malladi, [0041]; GUAN, [0021]) (Malladi, [0006]; [0040]-[0051]; and GUAN, Fig. 1-2; [0019]-[0031]; and YANG, [0002]-[0004]; [0014]-[0020]).
As per claim 12, Malladi, GUAN and YANG teach/suggest all the claimed features of claim 8 above, where Malladi, GUAN and YANG further teach/suggest the method comprising wherein the host interface accesses a remote memory host of one or more remote devices using a network switch (e.g. associated with Fig. 1A, ref. 110 of Malladi) (Malladi, [0006]; [0040]-[0051]; GUAN, Fig. 1-2; [0019]-[0031]; and YANG, [0002]-[0004]; [0014]-[0020]).
As per claims 13-14, claims 13-14 are rejected in accordance to the same rational and reasoning as the above rejection of claims 6-7, as claims 13-14 are directed to the bridge that carried out the method of claims 6-7.
As per claim 15, claim 15 is rejected in accordance to the same rational and reasoning as the above rejection of claims 1 and 8.
As per claims 17-20, claims 17-20 are rejected in accordance to the same rational and reasoning as the above rejection of claims 10-13.
III. PERTINENT RELATED PRIOR ART
Das Sharma (US Pub.: 2021/0240655): discloses converting traffic from the PCIe device into CXL traffic destined to a CXL device.
III. CLOSING COMMENTS
CONCLUSION
STATUS OF CLAIMS IN THE APPLICATION
The following is a summary of the treatment and status of all claims in the application as recommended by M.P.E.P. 707.07(i):
CLAIMS REJECTED IN THE APPLICATION
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.
DIRECTION OF FUTURE CORRESPONDENCES
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUN KUAN LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-0671. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
IMPORTANT NOTE
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Idriss Alrobaye can be reached on (571) 270-1023. 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.
/CHUN KUAN LEE/Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2181 March 26, 2026