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 .
Election/Restrictions
In response to Restriction Requirement filed 12/15/2025:
Applicant responded (on 03/09/2026) by electing Group I; i.e., Claims 24-41.
Claims 42-46 (Group II) are Withdrawn from consideration.
Claims 24-41 are pending, and examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 24-25 and 33-34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over “Favor” et al. (US 6453278 B1) in view of “Fitton” et al. (US 2004/0153679 A1).
Favor discloses claim 24. A power supply for a computer system, comprising: a RAM controller [Favor discloses Memory Controller, see 124, FIG.1]. Favor does not expressly disclose; however, Fitton, analogues art, disclose (or a power supply controller) to provide operational control of the power supply [Fitton discloses, “controlling power supply voltage” (Abstract) with FIG.4 (par.0069)] ;
Therefore, it whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Favor with the power supply control of Fitton for controlling power supply voltage and clock frequency in a receiver to reduce power consumption.
Favor in view of Fitton further disclose,
and a random-access memory (“RAM”) area to store a run-time control code for the RAM controller, wherein the RAM controller has access to the RAM area to obtain the run-time control code [Favor discloses “SMM handler code” (Abstract); and operation codes (FIG.4 with col.11, line 52 to col.12, line 16)], and
wherein upon initialization of the power supply, prior to providing an operational power to the computer system, the RAM area receives the run-time control code from an interface controller of the computer system [Favor discloses “BIOS includes programmed support for SMRAM initialization at boot time” (see FIG.9 with col.33, lines 21-59)].
Claim 33 is rejected for the same rational applied in rejecting Claim 24.
Favor further discloses claim 25/34. The power supply of claim 24, wherein the RAM controller executes the run-time control code exclusively from the RAM area [Favor discloses code running in RAM area (for example, FIGS.8-9)].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 26-32 and 35-41 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 a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claims 26/35. Favor/Fitton fail to disclose The power supply of claim 24/33, wherein the run-time control code is validated by the interface controller of the computer system, using information from a control code validation and update area (“CCVUA”) prior to providing the run-time control code to the RAM area.
Claims 27-32 and 36-41 are objected based on their dependence.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. (See PTO—892).
For example, US 2013/0152206 A1, which is directed to METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR PREVENTING UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO INFORMATION STORED IN A NON-VOLATILE MEMORY
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMARE F TABOR whose telephone number is (571) 270-3155. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.—Fri.: 8:00 AM to 5:00 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, ALI SHAYANFAR can be reached at (571) 270-1050. 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.
/AMARE F TABOR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2434