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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/26/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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.
Claims 1, 7, 8, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Biran et al. (Patent No.: US 7,523,228).
Regarding independent claims 1, 8 and 15, Biran discloses a initiator for a remote storage system, the initiator comprising:
a submission queue (SQ) (i.e., Fig.4: new read queue 402) for storing a read/write (R/W) request received from a host to be performed by a remote target (claim 13: placing a read transaction associated with a given read-write command in a new read queue within the bus engine);
a retry queue (i.e., Fig.4: old read queue 404) configured to store R/W requests corresponding to remote targets that is incapable handling more requests (claim 13: if the read transaction is retried, placing the read transaction in an old read queue);
a request tracker configured to update an index or a counter to track outstanding requests at the remote target (Fig.5 and col.14, lines 6-11: The bus engine assigns a tag to each request transaction. This tag may be the same as the transaction tag number that is used on the bus. The transaction is loaded into queue 510 at a location corresponding to the request tag. For example, a transaction with TAG=5 is loaded into location 5 in queue 510. The tag functions as an index identifying each outstanding request directed to a target device on the bus. Fig.7B and col.15, line 65 – col.16, line 9: If the transaction is a write in block 742, the BE determines whether the write results in a retry (block 752). If the write does not result in a retry, the BE deallocates the transaction tag (block 754), and operation returns to block 722 to determine whether a transaction exists in the new read queue. If the write does result in a retry in block 752, the BE sends the request tag, or transaction tag, back to the beginning of the write queue ordering FIFO to be retried (block 756). The tag remains allocated while the transaction is outstanding and is deallocated only after completion of the associated write operation. Thus, the system updates the status of the indexed transaction upon completion.); and
a packet creator comprising circuitry configured to: upon determining, based on the request tracker, that the remote target is incapable handling more R/W requests, move the R/W request from the SQ to the retry queue (Fig.4 and claim 13: receiving, at a direct memory access engine within the direct memory access device, a direct memory access block move request, wherein the direct memory access block move request indicates a source and a target; issuing one or more read-write commands for the direct memory access block move request from the direct memory access engine to a bus engine within the direct memory access device; performing, by the bus engine, a read operation to read data from the source and a write operation to write the data to the target for each of the one or more read-write commands to satisfy the direct memory access block move request).
Regarding claims 7 and 14, Biran teaches wherein the SQ and the retry queue have a same queue depth, wherein the host is configured to not send more R/W requests to the initiator than the queue depth (see Fig.4 and claim 15: wherein for a given read-write command the byte count corresponds to a buffer size of the bus engine).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6, 9-13 and 16-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Claims 2, 9 and 16 identify the distinct features “further comprising: a second request tracker configured to track outstanding requests at a second remote target, wherein the SQ is configured to store a second R/W request to be performed by the second remote target; the packet creator is further configured to, upon determining, based on the second request tracker, that the second remote target can handle more R/W requests: create a packet based on the second R/W request; and transmit the packet to the second remote target using a network", which are not taught or suggested by the prior art of records.
Claims 3-5, which respectively depend on objected-to claim 2, are allowable for at least the same reasons as claim 2.
Claims 10-12, which respectively depend on objected-to claim 9, are allowable for at least the same reasons as claim 9.
Claims 17-19, which respectively depend on objected-to claim 16, are allowable for at least the same reasons as claim 16.
Claims 6, 13 and 20 identify the distinct features “wherein the packet creator is further configured to, after determining that the remote target cannot handle more R/W requests: start a timer, continue processing other R/W requests in the SQ while the timer is running, and attempt to send the R/W request in the retry queue to the remote target after the timer has expired", which are not taught or suggested by the prior art of records.
Claims 2-6, 9-13 and 16-20 would be allowable over the prior art of record because the claimed features as mentioned above in combination with other claimed features are not recited or suggested by the prior art of records.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 03/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
1st Point of Argument
Regarding Applicant’s remarks, the applicants argue that Biran does not specifically teach the amended limitation of “a request tracker configured to update an index or a counter to track outstanding requests at the remote target”.
In response, Examiner disagrees.
Biran teaches a request tracker configured to update an index or a counter to track outstanding requests at the remote target (Fig.5 and col.14, lines 6-11: The bus engine assigns a tag to each request transaction. This tag may be the same as the transaction tag number that is used on the bus. The transaction is loaded into queue 510 at a location corresponding to the request tag. For example, a transaction with TAG=5 is loaded into location 5 in queue 510. The tag functions as an index identifying each outstanding request directed to a target device on the bus. Fig.7B and col.15, line 65 – col.16, line 9: If the transaction is a write in block 742, the BE determines whether the write results in a retry (block 752). If the write does not result in a retry, the BE deallocates the transaction tag (block 754), and operation returns to block 722 to determine whether a transaction exists in the new read queue. If the write does result in a retry in block 752, the BE sends the request tag, or transaction tag, back to the beginning of the write queue ordering FIFO to be retried (block 756). The tag remains allocated while the transaction is outstanding and is deallocated only after completion of the associated write operation. Thus, the system updates the status of the indexed transaction upon completion.);
The Applicant’s amendment appears to be supported by paragraphs [0025] and [0026] of the specification which describe a more specific mechanism for tracking outstanding requests at the remote target. Such details are not disclosed in Biran and would distinguish over the prior 102 rejection if properly recited in the claims.
However, as currently amended, the claim merely recites “update an index or a counter to track outstanding requests.” This optional and broad language permits the examiner to interpret “update an index” to encompass the transaction tag disclosed in Biran (see Fig.5 and Fig.7B), which is used to identify and track outstanding transactions. Accordingly, the 102 rejection over Biran is maintained.
If Applicant intends to rely on the more specific disclosure in paragraphs [0025] and [0026], the claims should be amended to recite that specific structure or operation. If so amended, the claims may be in condition for allowance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this comm1unication should be directed to Yong Choe at telephone number 571-270-1053 or email to yong.choe@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:30am to 6:00pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Rutz, Jared Ian can be reached on (571) 272-5535. Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application should be directed to the TC 2100 whose telephone number is (571) 272-2100.
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 PMR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-irect.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/YONG J CHOE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2135