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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 4-17, 10-11 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 now recites the following claim limitations: “acquiring and storing, by a multi-path node, write request information, and sending the write request information to storage nodes, a number of the storage nodes being at least 2;”, “wherein the acquiring and storing, by a multi-path node, write request information comprises: acquiring, by the multi-path node, the write request information, and storing the write request information to a preset linked list;”, “determining, based on a data storage capacity of the preset linked list, whether a data volume of the write request information exceeds the data storage capacity of the preset linked list;”, and stopping, by the multi-path node, sending the write request information to the storage nodes in a case that the data volume of the write request information exceeds the data storage capacity of the preset linked list”.
These limitations state that the write request information is stored in the multi-path node and is also sent to the storage nodes. Further, the new determining limitation can only determine that the write request information does not exceed the capacity of the preset linked list because the claims already state that the write request information is stored in the multi-path node and thus fit in the preset linked list. Also, the new stopping limitation cannot be performed because the claim language already states that the write request information has already been sent to the storage nodes, therefore it can’t be stopped. The scope of the claim language is unclear.
Claims 19 and 20 have the same issues as claim 1 above. These claims further have an issue where it appears as though “the write request information” is acquired and stored to the multi-path node twice, once in an original claim limitation and again in a new limitation. It is unclear if this is intended, is there an antecedent basis issue or is there supposed to be a second write request information. Claim 1 doesn’t have this issue because the new limitation further limits the original “acquiring and storing” limitation.
The remaining claims are rejected by virtue of the dependence upon a rejected base claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 7/7/2026 have been fully considered. The amendments have overcome the previous 112 rejections, but have raised new 112 issues that need to be addressed. Due to the 112 issues, the arguments pertaining to the newly amended claims are moot until the scope of the claim language is clarified.
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 MICHAEL ALSIP whose telephone number is (571)270-1182. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Reginald G. Bragdon can be reached at (571)272-4204. 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.
/MICHAEL ALSIP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2139
Prosecution Insights