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 12-31 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 12, line 2, “transmission duration” should be -a transmission duration-.
In claim 15, line 13, “DID” should be –(DID).
In claim 17, line 5, “DID” should be –(DID).
In claim 20, line 3, “transmission duration” should be -a transmission duration-.
In claim 23, line 13, “DID” should be –(DID).
In claim 24, line 6, “transmission duration” should be -a transmission duration-.
In claim 27, line 13, “DID” should be –(DID).
In claim 29, line 5, “DID” should be –(DID).
Appropriate correction is required.
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 12-19 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.
Independent claim 12 contains method steps of “determining transmission duration required for transmitting data to be transmitted between a first processing unit and a second processing unit; starting timing when it is detected that the data to be transmitted is transmitted from the first processing unit; determining, based on timing duration and a transmission status of the data to be transmitted, a physical parameter of the first processing unit when transmitting the data to be transmitted; and transmitting the data to be transmitted to the second processing unit based on the physical parameter.”
However, the claim does not make it clear what is performing the steps of the method. Based on this, claim 12 is rejected as being indefinite.
Since dependent claims 13-19 do not appear to disclose limitations to remedy the indefiniteness of claim 12, they are rejected by the same reasoning accordingly.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Independent claim 20 discloses a “computer readable storage medium”; however, the specification appears to define a computer readable storage medium as something that “may include, for example, but is not limited to electricity, magnetism, light, electromagnetism, infrared ray, or a semiconductor system, an apparatus, or a device, or any combination of the above (paragraph 202)”.
This appears to be overly comprehensive both in the use of “not limited to”, which suggests an embodiment not explicitly disclosed in the specification, and the inclusion of what appear to be transitory media (e.g. “electricity, magnetism, light”) as part of the explicitly disclosed embodiment. Based on both of these issues, the definition appears to be drawn to both statutory and non-statutory embodiments, both by explicit disclosure and by open-ended language.
Therefore, independent claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 21-23 do not contain language which would overcome the issues with independent claim 20; therefore, they are rejected by the same reasoning accordingly.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-31 appear to contain allowable subject matter. However, claims 12-19 cannot be allowed because of a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), claims 20-23 cannot be allowed because of a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101, and claims 24-31 are currently objected to.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Referring to independent claim 12, the prior art of record does not appear to anticipate, explicitly teach, or fairly suggest determining, based on timing duration and a transmission status of the data to be transmitted, a physical parameter of the first processing unit when transmitting the data to be transmitted.
Further, it would not have been obvious to combine the above limitations with the remaining limitations of the claim.
Merlin et al. (US 10,142,972) discloses a station transmitting a packet based on specific transmission parameters set for each station. However, this reference does not appear to anticipate or explicitly teach the subject matter determined to be allowable.
Lin (CN-104883391-A) discloses when the state parameter of the internal network transmission comprises an average transmission delay of audio data, the state parameter of the detection internal network transmission, comprising: for each preset duration, recording the transmission delay value of audio data packets transmitted in the said pre-set time according to the transmission time delay value. However, this reference does not appear to anticipate or explicitly teach the subject matter determined to be allowable.
Raghava et al. (US 2019/0131975) discloses determining a transmission parameter, bonding one or more channels of an interconnect network based at least in part on the transmission parameter, and power-gating any unused channels after the bonding. However, this reference does not appear to anticipate or explicitly teach the subject matter determined to be allowable.
Xu et al. (CN-112152759-A) discloses according to the historical transmission parameter, using the weighted average smoothing formula, determining the current transmission parameter. However, this reference does not appear to anticipate or explicitly teach the subject matter determined to be allowable.
Note that independent claims 20 and 24 contain the corresponding limitations of claim 12 as shown above; therefore, they are held to contain allowable subject matter by the same reasoning accordingly.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Merlin et al. (US 10,142,972) discloses a station transmitting a packet based on specific transmission parameters set for each station.
Lin (CN-104883391-A) discloses when the state parameter of the internal network transmission comprises an average transmission delay of audio data, the state parameter of the detection internal network transmission, comprising: for each preset duration, recording the transmission delay value of audio data packets transmitted in the said pre-set time according to the transmission time delay value.
Raghava et al. (US 2019/0131975) discloses determining a transmission parameter, bonding one or more channels of an interconnect network based at least in part on the transmission parameter, and power-gating any unused channels after the bonding.
Xu et al. (CN-112152759-A) discloses according to the historical transmission parameter, using the weighted average smoothing formula, determining the current transmission parameter.
However, the above references do not appear to anticipate or explicitly teach the subject matter determined to be allowable.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN B ROCHE whose telephone number is (571)270-1721. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:30 - 7.
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, Henry Tsai can be reached at (571)272-4176. 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.
/J.B.R/Examiner, Art Unit 2184
/HENRY TSAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2184