Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/800,406

MULTI-TILE GRAPHICS PROCESSOR RENDERING

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Aug 12, 2024
Examiner
DEMETER, HILINA K
Art Unit
2617
Tech Center
2600 — Communications
Assignee
Intel Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
91%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
472 granted / 659 resolved
+9.6% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
686
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
8.7%
-31.3% vs TC avg
§103
61.0%
+21.0% vs TC avg
§102
14.5%
-25.5% vs TC avg
§112
6.7%
-33.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 659 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Preliminary Amendment The preliminary amendment submitted on 10/28/2024. Claims 1-15 are cancelled. Claims 16-30 are pending. Priority This application is a continuation of U.S. Application No. 17/497,618, filed October 08, 2021, which claims a priority of U.S. Application No. 16/355,364, filed March 15, 2019. 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. Claim(s) 16-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danskin et al. (US Publication Number 2012/0026171 A1, hereinafter “Danskin”) in view of Nevraev et al. (US Publication Number 2018/0232912 A1, hereinafter “Nevraev”). (1) regarding claim 16: As shown in fig. 1, Danskin disclosed an apparatus (para. [0019], note that computer system 100 includes a central processing unit (CPU) 102 and a system memory 104 communicating via a bus path that includes a memory bridge 105) comprising: a memory for storage of data, the data including geometric data for graphics processing (para. [0020], note that graphics processing subsystem 112 includes a graphics processing unit (GPU) 122 and a graphics memory 124, which may be implemented, e.g., using one or more integrated circuit devices such as programmable processors, application specific integrated circuits (ASICs), and memory devices); one or more processors including a graphics processing unit (GPU) to process data (para. [0020], note that GPU 122 may be configured to perform various tasks related to generating pixel data from graphics data supplied by CPU 102 and/or system memory 104 via memory bridge 105 and bus 113, interacting with graphics memory 124 to store and update pixel data, and the like), wherein the GPU includes a plurality of GPU tiles on a substrate, each GPU tile being a separate chiplet, and each GPU tile having a respective tile-based storage (para. [0025], note that it is also to be understood that any number of GPUs may be included in a system, e.g., by including multiple GPUs on a single graphics card or by connecting multiple graphics cards to bus 113. Multiple GPUs may be operated in parallel to generate images for the same display device or for different display devices); and a shader to operate with the plurality of GPU tiles (para. [0034], note that geometry module 218 directs programmable processing engines in multithreaded core array 202 to execute vertex and/or geometry shader programs on the vertex data. Para. [0058], the image area can be divided into a number of tiles); wherein the shader is to process data from a GPU tile of the plurality of GPU tiles without transfer of data across GPU tiles of the plurality of GPU tiles (para. [0058], note that the image area can be divided into a number of tiles. Each tile is associated with one of the processing clusters 302 in such a way that the tiles associated with one cluster are scattered across the image area (i.e., at least some of the tiles associated with one processing cluster are not contiguous with one another)). Danskin disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above, such as shader programs, except for specifically teaching a mesh shader. However, Nevraev disclosed a mesh shader (para. [0018], note that the present disclosure may move or integrate various shader stages, such as the compute shader, vertex shader, and/or geometry shader, into a single shader stage called a mesh shader). At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach a mesh shader. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to provide an index compressor that speeds up one or more shader stages by removing processing of at least the primitive connectivity and primitive restart index in a shader stage, which may result in a more efficient per-vertex to per-triangle phase switch (para. [0016]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Danskin with Nevraev to obtain the invention as specified in claim 16. (2) regarding claim 17: Danskin further disclosed the apparatus of claim 16, wherein a GPU tile of the plurality of GPU tiles is to obtain geometry data for raster processing, and is to operate on the geometry data locally at the GPU tile (para. [0061], note that tiles may be assigned to any number of processing clusters, up to the total number that are present in a particular GPU. In some embodiments, tiles are assigned to fewer than all of the processing clusters. Thus, a GPU can render images using only some of its processing clusters to process pixel threads). (3) regarding claim 18: Danskin further disclosed the apparatus of claim 16, wherein the apparatus is to provide tile-based immediate mode rendering (TBIMR) with the mesh shader (para. [0042], note that as with vertex shader programs and geometry shader programs, rendering applications can specify the pixel shader program to be used for any given set of pixels. Pixel shader programs can be used to implement a variety of visual effects, including lighting and shading effects, reflections, texture blending, procedural texture generation, and so on). (4) regarding claim 19: Danskin disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching a stream out circuit, wherein the stream out circuit is to read out mesh data from the mesh shader and write the mesh data to the memory in a structure of arrays. However, Nevraev disclosed a stream out circuit, wherein the stream out circuit is to read out mesh data from the mesh shader and write the mesh data to the memory in a structure of arrays (para. [0019], note that the compressor may select one or more primitives (e.g., triangles) of at least a portion of a mesh formed by a total number of primitives for inclusion within a compressed index buffer block. The one or more primitives may each associated with a number of indices each corresponding to a vertex within the mesh. Also see para. [0047], note that a pre-cull stage such computer shader 92 may both read and write indices) At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach a stream out circuit, wherein the stream out circuit is to read out mesh data from the mesh shader and write the mesh data to the memory in a structure of arrays. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to provide an index compressor that speeds up one or more shader stages by removing processing of at least the primitive connectivity and primitive restart index in a shader stage, which may result in a more efficient per-vertex to per-triangle phase switch (para. [0016]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Danskin with Nevraev to obtain the invention as specified in claim 19. (5) regarding claim 20: Danskin disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching wherein the apparatus is to perform compression of the mesh data from the structure of arrays. However, Nervaev disclosed wherein the apparatus is to perform compression of the mesh data from the structure of arrays (para. [0045], note that compressor 120 may determine the minimum index of all indices of all primitives of the block. As such, compressor 120 may form the index buffer block 107 based on the determined information including the number of primitives in the index buffer block, the number of indices after reuse in the block, a minimum value of all indices, all indices after reuse biased to the minimum index and fitted into the compression scheme, and/or connectivity information as an array of a number of bytes per primitives). At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein the apparatus is to perform compression of the mesh data from the structure of arrays. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to provide an index compressor that speeds up one or more shader stages by removing processing of at least the primitive connectivity and primitive restart index in a shader stage, which may result in a more efficient per-vertex to per-triangle phase switch (para. [0016]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Danskin with Nevraev to obtain the invention as specified in claim 20. (6) regarding claim 26: As shown in fig. 2, Danskin disclosed a graphics processor (122, GPU, para. [0020]) comprising: a substrate (para. [0023], note that GPU is integrated on a single chip i.e. substrate with a bus bridge, such as memory bridge 105); a plurality of GPU tiles on the substrate, each GPU tile being a separate chiplet, and cach GPU tile having a respective tile-based storage (para. [0025], note that it is also to be understood that any number of GPUs may be included in a system, e.g., by including multiple GPUs on a single graphics card or by connecting multiple graphics cards to bus 113. Multiple GPUs may be operated in parallel to generate images for the same display device or for different display devices); and a shader to operate with the plurality of GPU tiles (para. [0034], note that geometry module 218 directs programmable processing engines in multithreaded core array 202 to execute vertex and/or geometry shader programs on the vertex data. Para. [0058], the image area can be divided into a number of tiles); wherein the shader is to process data from a GPU tile of the plurality of GPU tiles without transfer of data across GPU tiles of the plurality of GPU tiles (para. [0058], note that the image area can be divided into a number of tiles. Each tile is associated with one of the processing clusters 302 in such a way that the tiles associated with one cluster are scattered across the image area (i.e., at least some of the tiles associated with one processing cluster are not contiguous with one another). Danskin disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above, such as shader programs, except for specifically teaching a mesh shader. However, Nevraev disclosed a mesh shader (para. [0018], note that the present disclosure may move or integrate various shader stages, such as the compute shader, vertex shader, and/or geometry shader, into a single shader stage called a mesh shader). At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach a mesh shader. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to provide an index compressor that speeds up one or more shader stages by removing processing of at least the primitive connectivity and primitive restart index in a shader stage, which may result in a more efficient per-vertex to per-triangle phase switch (para. [0016]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Danskin with Nevraev to obtain the invention as specified in claim 26. (7) regarding claim 27: Danskin further disclosed the graphics processor of claim 26, wherein a GPU tile of the plurality of GPU tiles is to obtain geometry data for raster processing, and is to operate on the geometry data locally at the GPU tile (para. [0061], note that tiles may be assigned to any number of processing clusters, up to the total number that are present in a particular GPU. In some embodiments, tiles are assigned to fewer than all of the processing clusters. Thus, a GPU can render images using only some of its processing clusters to process pixel threads). (8) regarding claim 28: Danskin further disclosed the graphics processor of claim 26, wherein the graphics processor is to provide tile-based immediate mode rendering (TBIMR) with the mesh shader (para. [0042], note that as with vertex shader programs and geometry shader programs, rendering applications can specify the pixel shader program to be used for any given set of pixels. Pixel shader programs can be used to implement a variety of visual effects, including lighting and shading effects, reflections, texture blending, procedural texture generation, and so on). (9) regarding claim 29: Danskin disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching a stream out circuit, wherein the stream out circuit is to read out mesh data from the mesh shader and write the mesh data to the memory in a structure of arrays. However, Nevraev disclosed a stream out circuit, wherein the stream out circuit is to read out mesh data from the mesh shader and write the mesh data to the memory in a structure of arrays (para. [0019], note that the compressor may select one or more primitives (e.g., triangles) of at least a portion of a mesh formed by a total number of primitives for inclusion within a compressed index buffer block. The one or more primitives may each associated with a number of indices each corresponding to a vertex within the mesh. Also see para. [0047], note that a pre-cull stage such computer shader 92 may both read and write indices) At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach a stream out circuit, wherein the stream out circuit is to read out mesh data from the mesh shader and write the mesh data to the memory in a structure of arrays. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to provide an index compressor that speeds up one or more shader stages by removing processing of at least the primitive connectivity and primitive restart index in a shader stage, which may result in a more efficient per-vertex to per-triangle phase switch (para. [0016]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Danskin with Nevraev to obtain the invention as specified in claim 29. (10) regarding claim 30: Danskin disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching wherein the apparatus is to perform compression of the mesh data from the structure of arrays. However, Nervaev disclosed wherein the apparatus is to perform compression of the mesh data from the structure of arrays (para. [0045], note that compressor 120 may determine the minimum index of all indices of all primitives of the block. As such, compressor 120 may form the index buffer block 107 based on the determined information including the number of primitives in the index buffer block, the number of indices after reuse in the block, a minimum value of all indices, all indices after reuse biased to the minimum index and fitted into the compression scheme, and/or connectivity information as an array of a number of bytes per primitives). At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein the apparatus is to perform compression of the mesh data from the structure of arrays. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to provide an index compressor that speeds up one or more shader stages by removing processing of at least the primitive connectivity and primitive restart index in a shader stage, which may result in a more efficient per-vertex to per-triangle phase switch (para. [0016]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Danskin with Nevraev to obtain the invention as specified in claim 30. The proposed rejection of claims 16-20 render obvious the computer-readable storage medium claims 21-24 because these steps occur in the operation of the proposed rejection as discussed above. Thus, the arguments similar to that presented above for claims 16-20 are equally applicable to claims 21-24. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Stava et al. (US Publication Number 2018/0350138 A1) disclosed techniques of compressing triangular mesh data involve encoding a bitstream that defines a traversal order for vertices in a triangular mesh. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Hilina K Demeter whose telephone number is (571) 270-1676. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, King Y. Poon could be reached at (571) 270- 0728. 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 PAIR system, see http://pari-direct.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). 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. /HILINA K DEMETER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2617
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 12, 2024
Application Filed
Feb 04, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602864
EVENT ROUTING IN 3D GRAPHICAL ENVIRONMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12592042
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR MAINTAINING SECURITY OF VIRTUAL OBJECTS IN A DISTRIBUTED NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586297
INTERACTIVE IMAGE GENERATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12579724
EXPRESSION GENERATION METHOD AND APPARATUS, DEVICE, AND MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12561906
METHOD FOR GENERATING AT LEAST ONE GROUND TRUTH FROM A BIRD'S EYE VIEW
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
72%
Grant Probability
91%
With Interview (+19.4%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 659 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month