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 Objections
Claims 1-7, 9-11 and 15-21 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites the abbreviations, “QDMA” and “CPU” in lines 6-7 for Queue Direct Memory Access and Central Processing Unit. These abbreviations must be defined where they are mentioned for the first time.
The claim further recites, “… so as to allocate the data to a QDMA” in line 6. Managing and controlling the data in the frame according to the mode does not always result to allocate the data to a QDMA. That is, the limitation tends to indicate that the result is a sudden, unpredicted or random because the managing and controlling the data in the data frame according to the mode can also cause to result other different processes, outcomes, and so on.
Regarding claims, 2, 4-6, 9-10, 18, and 20-21, the claims recite either “so as to” or “so that”. The claims are objected for the same reason as claim 1.
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites the abbreviation, “RSS” in lines 6 and 12 for Receive Side Scaling in addition to the QDMA and CPU. This abbreviation must also be defined where it is mentioned for the first time.
Regarding claims 3-10 and 15-21, the same objection is applied.
Regarding claim 11, the claim recites the abbreviation, “C2H” in line 3 for Card to Host. This abbreviation must also be defined where it is mentioned for the first time.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 (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 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, and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Arroyo (US 2010/0274868 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Arroyo discloses a method for traffic management and control, comprising: acquiring a data frame sent from a heterogeneous accelerator (104) (figs. 1-3; paragraph [0037]-[0040]; [0045]-[0047]; [0052]-[0055]; [0088]; and so on, illustrating communicating data with accelerators); selecting a target traffic management and control mode corresponding to data in the data frame from a plurality of preset traffic management and control modes (paragraph [0035]; [0037]; [0046]; [0053]-[0055]; [0083]; [0088]; and so on, explaining the selection of mode from plurality of modes); and managing and controlling the data in the data frame according to the target traffic management and control mode, so as to allocate the data to a QDMA queue, and send the data by the QDMA queue (paragraph [0038]-[0041]; [0045]; and so on, describing allocating data at queue DMA based on the selection), and process the data by a corresponding CPU core (paragraph [0039]-[0043]; [0054]; [0086]-[0088]; and etc., processing the data at processor to transmit to the accelerator).
Regarding claim 7, Arroyo further discloses comprising: recording a queue number of the QDMA queue to which the data is allocated and a virtual source port included in the data frame, so as to obtain record information (figs. 1-3; paragraph [0038]; [0044]; [0053]; and [0066]); and when the CPU sends a data stream to the heterogeneous accelerator, sending the data in the data stream to a corresponding heterogeneous accelerator kernel according to the record information (e.g. figs. 1-4; paragraph [0039]-[0043]; [0054]; [0086]-[088]).
Regarding claim 9-10, the claims include features identical to the subject matter mentioned in the rejection to claim 1. The claims are mere reformulation of claim 1 in order to define the corresponding device and non-transitory readable storage medium, and the rejection to claim 1 is applied hereto.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arroyo in view of Nand et al. (US 11,539,770 B1).
Regarding claim 11, as applied above, Arroyo discloses wherein acquiring the data frame sent from a heterogeneous accelerator. However, Arroyo does not disclose comprising: acquiring the data frame in a C2H direction sent from a kernel of the heterogeneous accelerator.
Nand teaches comprising: acquiring the data frame in a C2H direction sent from a kernel of the heterogeneous accelerator (col. 6, line 35-col. 7, line 56; col. 8, line 63-col. 9, line 60; and so on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use comprising: acquiring the data frame in a C2H direction sent from a kernel of the heterogeneous accelerator as taught by Nand in order to improve quality and rate of communication.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arroyo in view of Singh (US 2022/0353339 A1).
Regarding claim 12, as applied above, Arroyo discloses data frame. However, Arroyo does not disclose wherein the data frame may further carry information about a virtual destination port and a virtual source port.
Singh teaches wherein the data frame may further carry information about a virtual destination port and a virtual source port (paragraph [0032]; and so on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use wherein the data frame may further carry information about a virtual destination port and a virtual source port as taught by Singh into Arroyo in order to minimize const and complexity.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arroyo in view of Cote (US 2007/0030898 A1).
Regarding claim 13, as applied above, Arroyo discloses selecting the target traffic management and control mode. However, Arroyo does not explicitly disclose wherein selecting the target traffic management and control mode, comprising: selecting the target management and control mode corresponding to the data in the data frame from a plurality of preset traffic management and control modes according to a bandwidth or a delay of the data in the data frame; or receiving the target traffic management and control mode selection instruction, and selecting the target traffic management and control mode corresponding to data in the data frame from a plurality of preset traffic management and control modes according to the target traffic management and control mode selection instruction.
Cote teaches wherein selecting the target traffic management and control mode, comprising: selecting the target management and control mode corresponding to the data in the data frame from a plurality of preset traffic management and control modes according to a bandwidth or a delay of the data in the data frame; or receiving the target traffic management and control mode selection instruction, and selecting the target traffic management and control mode corresponding to data in the data frame from a plurality of preset traffic management and control modes according to the target traffic management and control mode selection instruction (e.g. paragraph [0020]; [0023]; and so on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use wherein selecting the target traffic management and control mode, comprising: selecting the target management and control mode corresponding to the data in the data frame from a plurality of preset traffic management and control modes according to a bandwidth or a delay of the data in the data frame; or receiving the target traffic management and control mode selection instruction, and selecting the target traffic management and control mode corresponding to data in the data frame from a plurality of preset traffic management and control modes according to the target traffic management and control mode selection instruction as taught by Cote into Arroyo in order to improve resource utilization.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Arroyo in view of Weksler et al. (US 2021/0312917 A1).
Regarding claim 14, as applied above, Arroyo discloses selecting the target traffic management and control mode. Arroyo does not explicitly disclose wherein selecting the target traffic management and control mode, comprising: recommending, by a system, according to the bandwidth and the delay of data in the data frame, the traffic management and control mode which is most adapted to the data in the data frame from the plurality of preset traffic management and control modes.
Weksler teaches wherein selecting the target traffic management and control mode, comprising: recommending, by a system, according to the bandwidth and the delay of data in the data frame, the traffic management and control mode which is most adapted to the data in the data frame from the plurality of preset traffic management and control modes (paragraph [0076]; and so on).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use wherein selecting the target traffic management and control mode, comprising: recommending, by a system, according to the bandwidth and the delay of data in the data frame, the traffic management and control mode which is most adapted to the data in the data frame from the plurality of preset traffic management and control modes as taught by Weksler into Arroyo in order to reduce wasting resource and improve rate of communication.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-6, and 15-21 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIBROM T HAILU whose telephone number is (571)270-1209. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM to 5:30 PM.
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, HUY D VU can be reached at (571)272-3155. 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.
/KIBROM T HAILU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2461
Prosecution Insights