DETAILED ACTION
This communication is responsive to the application, filed June 1, 2026. Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA
The present application was filed on April 29, 2024, which is on or after March 16, 2013, and thus is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 11,971,789 B2 in view of Grosz et al. (US 2020/0004459 A1). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of present application are obvious under the claims of issued patent in view of Grosz. The issued US patent and the instant application are claiming common subject matter. The one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that they are obvious variants in view of Grosz.
Claims 1-10 are compared to claims 1, 5, and 6 of US patent US 11,971,789 B2 in view of Grosz in the following table:
Instant Application
US Patent No : US 11,971,789 B2
1. A method comprising:
detecting a crash of a storage device with a connection to a host;
suspending, based on detecting the crash of the storage device, processing commands, from the host through the connection;
recovering from the crash of the storage device, wherein recovering from the crash of the storage device comprises:
initiating a first restart operation of a processor of the storage device; and
resuming, based on reloading the portion of the firmware for the processor of the storage device, processing commands from the host through the connection.
preventing the host from detecting a timeout condition by notifying the host of detecting the crash of the storage device; and
1. A method of operating a storage device comprising:
detecting a crash of the storage device;
suspending, based on detecting the crash, processing commands, from the host through the connection;
recovering from the crash of the storage device, wherein recovering from the crash of the storage device includes:
masking an event of a first type;
initiating a first reset operation of the processor of the storage device;
resuming, based on recovering from the crash, processing commands from the host through the connection, including executing the masked event of a first type.
‘789 discloses detecting a crash of the storage device and notifying a host, but fails to disclose preventing host from detecting timeout condition. Grosz discloses [0009-0011] preventing the host from detecting a timeout condition.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein recovering from the crash of the storage device further comprises: initiating a second restart operation of the processor of the storage device.
1. initiating a second reset operation of the processor of the storage device;
3. The method of claim 2, wherein recovering from the crash of the storage device further comprises: transferring, by the processor of the storage device, data from a first medium of the storage device to a second medium of the storage device.
1. transferring, by the processor of the storage device, data from a first medium of the storage device to a second medium of the storage device; and
4. The method of claim 1, wherein recovering from the crash of the storage device further comprises: masking an event of a first type.
1. recovering from the crash of the storage device, wherein recovering from the crash of the storage device includes:
masking an event of a first type;
5. The method of claim 4, wherein resuming processing commands from the host through the connection, further comprises: executing the masked event of a first type.
1. resuming, based on recovering from the crash, processing commands from the host through the connection, including executing the masked event of a first type.
6. The method of claim 4, wherein recovering from the crash of the storage device further includes processing an event of a second type at a storage interface.
1. recovering from the crash of the storage device, wherein recovering from the crash of the storage device includes: initiating a second reset operation of the processor of the storage device; and
7. The method of claim 6, wherein the event of the second type is one of a port-level reset, a function-level reset, a control transaction, or a memory transaction.
1. recovering from the crash of the storage device, wherein recovering from the crash of the storage device includes: initiating a second reset operation of the processor of the storage device; and
(It is clear that the reset operation is a function-level reset of the processor of the storage device)
8. The method of claim 1, wherein suspending further comprises: suspending, based on detecting the crash, processing commands, via the processor of the storage device, from the host through the connection.
1. suspending, based on detecting the crash, processing commands, via a processor of the storage device, from the host through the connection;
9. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a reset operation from the host; and resetting a storage interface based on receiving the reset operation from the host.
5. The method of claim 2, further comprising:
receiving a third reset operation from the host; and resetting a storage interface based on receiving the third reset operation from the host.
10. The method of claim 9, wherein: the reset operation comprises a controller reset; and resetting the storage interface comprises resetting a controller in the storage interface.
6. The method of claim 5, wherein:
the third reset operation comprises a controller reset; and resetting the storage interface comprises resetting a controller in the storage interface.
Claims 11-18 of the instant application recite a storage device claim and are obvious variants of the method claims 1-10, which are compared in the table above. Furthermore, claims 19 and 20 of the instant application recite a computer-readable storage medium claim and are obvious variants of the method claims 1 and 2, which are compared in the table above. Therefore, claims 11-20 of the instant application are also rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 11,971,789 B2 in view of Grosz.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claim(s) 1, 11, and 19 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claims 1, 11, and 19, and claims depending therefrom, has been withdrawn. Therefore, claims 1-20 would be allowable if they overcome the Double Patenting rejection above.
Conclusion
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is cited to establish the level of skill in the applicant’s art and those arts considered reasonably pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. See MPEP 707.05(c).
· US 2020/0110555 B1 – Hsiao discloses performing read/write operations in a storage memory device until at least one timeout avoidance condition is satisfied.
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 JIGAR P PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-5067. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday 10AM-6PM.
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, Ashish Thomas, can be reached on 571-272-0631. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JIGAR P PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2114
Prosecution Insights