DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. 18/912,740 has a total of 15 claims pending in the application; there are 3 independent claims and 12 dependent claims, all of which are ready for examination by the examiner.
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in the Republic of Korea on October 13, 2023. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the Republic of Korea application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
INFORMATION CONCERNING DRAWINGS
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: S230 in FIG. 2. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
INFORMATION CONCERNING THE SPECIFICATION
Specification
The applicant’s specification submitted is acceptable for examination purposes.
REJECTIONS BASED ON PRIOR ART
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-9 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Deneroff et al. (Patent Number US 7,406,086 B2) in view of Momona (Patent Number US 6,434,117 B1).
As per claim 1, Deneroff et al. discloses “A communication method by which a first device and a second device communicate through a request channel and a reply channel (where there is a FIFO pair with separate request and reply channels [Column 14, lines 19-25]. See [FIG. 8] for the node controller with dual FIFOs that connect the devices), the communication method comprising: outputting, by the first device, a burden signal including data to the second device through the request channel (see the process pertaining to the request queues and the data queue; Column 32, lines 56-67 to Column 33, lines 1-31).” Deneroff et al. discloses “storing, by the second device, the data (see the process pertaining to the request queues and the data queue; Column 32, lines 56-67 to Column 33, lines 1-31).”
However, Deneroff et al. does not disclose “providing, by the first device, a reply control signal indicating whether a reply is required” or discloses “and performing, by the second device, a reply to the stored data through the reply channel according to the reply control signal.” Momona discloses “providing, by the first device, a reply control signal indicating whether a reply is required (achieved by the multicast manager by directly setting the control register 40 of the destination node with a response indication, the multicast address of the destination node and a channel number obtained from the isochronous resource manager 10E; Column 5, lines 66-67 to Column 6, lines 1-8).” Momona discloses “and performing, by the second device, a reply to the stored data through the reply channel according to the reply control signal (When the reply indication is set in the control register 40 (step 513), the destination node 10C is conditioned to receive asynchronous stream packets containing the assigned channel number in their channel number field (step 514); Column 5, lines 66-67 to Column 6, lines 1-8).”
Deneroff et al. and Momona are analogous art in that they both disclose the use of queues in data transfers.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Deneroff et al. and Momona to enable dynamically setting or releasing a channel [Column 1, lines 44-50].
As per claim 2, Deneroff et al. discloses “The method of claim 1 (as disclosed by Deneroff et al. and Momona above), wherein the outputting of the burden signal further includes performing handshaking such that the first device further outputs a channel valid signal through the request channel and the second device outputs a ready signal indicating reception of a provided command and data through the request channel (as it pertains to data frames which includes information indicating if it is a request or a reply [Column 9, lines 40-50]. See also RqAvail and RqReady as well as the Valid signal; Column 17, lines 6-11 and 28-34).”
As per claim 3, Momona discloses “The method of claim 1 (as disclosed by Deneroff et al. and Momona above), wherein: the reply control signal has a first value for requesting a reply from a counterpart that has received the reply control signal and a second value for not requesting a reply from the counterpart that has received the reply control signal (When the reply indication is set in the control register 40 (step 513), the destination node 10C is conditioned to receive asynchronous stream packets containing the assigned channel number in their channel number field (step 514) [Column 5, lines 66-67 to Column 6, lines 1-8]. This is interpreted as a reply must be set before further action relating to that reply is taken).” Momona discloses “and the second device, upon receiving the reply control signal having the first value, performs a reply to the stored data through the reply channel (When the reply indication is set in the control register 40 (step 513), the destination node 10C is conditioned to receive asynchronous stream packets containing the assigned channel number in their channel number field (step 514) [Column 5, lines 66-67 to Column 6, lines 1-8]. This is interpreted as a reply must be set before further action relating to that reply is taken).”
As per claim 4, Momona discloses “The method of claim 1 (as disclosed by Deneroff et al. and Momona above), wherein: the reply control signal has a first value for requesting a reply from a counterpart that has received the reply control signal and a second value for not requesting a reply from the counterpart that has received the reply control signal (When the reply indication is set in the control register 40 (step 513), the destination node 10C is conditioned to receive asynchronous stream packets containing the assigned channel number in their channel number field (step 514) [Column 5, lines 66-67 to Column 6, lines 1-8]. This is interpreted as a reply must be set before further action relating to that reply is taken).” Momona discloses “and the second device, upon receiving the reply control signal having the second value, does not perform a reply to the stored data through the reply channel (When the reply indication is set in the control register 40 (step 513), the destination node 10C is conditioned to receive asynchronous stream packets containing the assigned channel number in their channel number field (step 514) [Column 5, lines 66-67 to Column 6, lines 1-8]. This is interpreted as a reply must be set before further action relating to that reply is taken).”
As per claim 5, Deneroff et al. discloses “A communication method by which a first device and a second device communicate through a request channel and a reply channel (where there is a FIFO pair with separate request and reply channels [Column 14, lines 19-25]. See [FIG. 8] for the node controller with dual FIFOs that connect the devices), the communication method comprising: providing, by the first device, a transmission parcel signal including data and a command regarding the data through a request channel (see the process pertaining to the request queues and the data queue; Column 32, lines 56-67 to Column 33, lines 1-31).”
However, Deneroff et al. does not disclose “providing, by the first device, a reply control signal indicating whether a reply is required” or “and performing, by the second device and the first device, no handshaking according to the reply control signal.” Momona discloses “providing, by the first device, a reply control signal indicating whether a reply is required (achieved by the multicast manager by directly setting the control register 40 of the destination node with a response indication, the multicast address of the destination node and a channel number obtained from the isochronous resource manager 10E; Column 5, lines 66-67 to Column 6, lines 1-8).” Momona discloses “and performing, by the second device and the first device, no handshaking according to the reply control signal (When the reply indication is set in the control register 40 (step 513), the destination node 10C is conditioned to receive asynchronous stream packets containing the assigned channel number in their channel number field (step 514); Column 5, lines 66-67 to Column 6, lines 1-8).”
Deneroff et al. and Momona are analogous art in that they both disclose the use of queues in data transfers.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Deneroff et al. and Momona to enable dynamically setting or releasing a channel [Column 1, lines 44-50].
As per claim 6, Momona discloses “The method of claim 5 (as disclosed by Deneroff et al. and Momona above), wherein the reply control signal has a first value for requesting a reply from a receiver of the reply control signal and a second value for not requesting a reply from a receiver of the reply control signal, and when the first device provides the reply control signal having the second value, the second device and the first device perform no handshaking (When the reply indication is set in the control register 40 (step 513), the destination node 10C is conditioned to receive asynchronous stream packets containing the assigned channel number in their channel number field (step 514) [Column 5, lines 66-67 to Column 6, lines 1-8]. This is interpreted as a reply must be set before further action relating to that reply is taken).”
As per claim 7, Deneroff et al. discloses “The method of claim 5 (as disclosed by Deneroff et al. and Momona above), wherein the transmission parcel signal includes data and a command transmitted from the first device to the second device through the request channel (see the process pertaining to the request queues and the data queue; Column 32, lines 56-67 to Column 33, lines 1-31).”
As per claim 8, Momona discloses “The method of claim 7 (as disclosed by Deneroff et al. and Momona above), wherein the transmission parcel signal further includes an address of the data (Column 4, lines 28-45).”
As per claim 9, Deneroff et al. discloses “The method of claim 5 (as disclosed by Deneroff et al. and Momona above), wherein the first device configured to receive a reception parcel signal from the second device through the reply channel (see the process pertaining to the request queues and the data queue; Column 32, lines 56-67 to Column 33, lines 1-31).”
As per claim 12, Deneroff et al. discloses “A communication method by which a first device and a second device communicate through a request channel and a reply channel (where there is a FIFO pair with separate request and reply channels [Column 14, lines 19-25]. See [FIG. 8] for the node controller with dual FIFOs that connect the devices), the communication method comprising: providing, by the first device, a first parcel signal including a command regarding first data through a request channel (see the process pertaining to the request queues and the data queue; Column 32, lines 56-67 to Column 33, lines 1-31).” Deneroff et al. discloses “providing, by the first device, a second parcel signal including a command regarding second data through the request channel (see the process pertaining to the request queues and the data queue; Column 32, lines 56-67 to Column 33, lines 1-31).”
However, Deneroff et al. does not disclose “outputting, by the first device, a first ready signal” or “outputting, by the second device, the first data without state transition of the second device and the first device, and outputting, by the second device, the second data.” Momona discloses “outputting, by the first device, a first ready signal (achieved by the multicast manager by directly setting the control register 40 of the destination node with a response indication, the multicast address of the destination node and a channel number obtained from the isochronous resource manager 10E; Column 5, lines 66-67 to Column 6, lines 1-8).” Momona discloses “outputting, by the second device, the first data without state transition of the second device and the first device, and outputting, by the second device, the second data (When the reply indication is set in the control register 40 (step 513), the destination node 10C is conditioned to receive asynchronous stream packets containing the assigned channel number in their channel number field (step 514); Column 5, lines 66-67 to Column 6, lines 1-8).”
Deneroff et al. and Momona are analogous art in that they both disclose the use of queues in data transfers.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Deneroff et al. and Momona to enable dynamically setting or releasing a channel [Column 1, lines 44-50].
As per claim 13, Momona discloses “The method of claim 12 (as disclosed by Deneroff et al. and Momona above), wherein: the first parcel signal includes a read command for the first data and an address of the first data (Column 3, lines 30-34; FIG. 3).” Momona discloses “and the second parcel signal includes a read command for the second data and an address of the second data (Column 3, lines 30-34; FIG. 3).”
As per claim 14, Deneroff et al. discloses “The method of claim 12 (as disclosed by Deneroff et al. and Momona above), wherein the first ready signal has two bits, and each bit corresponds to whether one of the first data and the second data is received (it pertains to data frames which includes information indicating if it is a request or a reply [Column 9, lines 40-50]. See also RqAvail and RqReady as well as the Valid signal; Column 17, lines 6-11 and 28-34).”
As per claim 15, Deneroff et al. discloses “The method of claim 12 (as disclosed by Deneroff et al. and Momona above), wherein the providing of the first parcel signal and the providing of the second parcel signal further include performing handshaking such that the first device outputs a valid signal indicating that the request channel is valid and the second device outputs a second ready signal to the request channel (it pertains to data frames which includes information indicating if it is a request or a reply [Column 9, lines 40-50]. See also RqAvail and RqReady as well as the Valid signal; Column 17, lines 6-11 and 28-34).”
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Deneroff et al. (Patent Number US 7,406,086 B2) and Momona (Patent Number US 6,434,117 B1) in view of Yeh (Publication Number US 2008/0144493 A1).
As per claim 10, Deneroff et al. and Momona disclose “The method of claim 5 (as disclosed by Deneroff et al. and Momona above).” However, Deneroff et al. and Momona do not disclose the number of times a signal is performed as disclosed in the limitations “wherein: the providing of the transmission parcel signal is performed n times,” “the providing of the reply control signal indicating that a reply is not required is sequentially performed n-1 times,” “the first device provides the reply control signal indicating that a reply is required in the providing of an nth transmission parcel signal,” and “and acknowledgement between the first device and the second device on the providing of a last transmission parcel signal is performed, and wherein n is a natural number greater than or equal to 2, and k is a natural number less than n.”
Yeh discloses the number of times a signal is performed as disclosed in the limitation “wherein: the providing of the transmission parcel signal is performed n times (number of stages where a signal is performed; Paragraph 0077; FIG. 2-3).” Yeh discloses the number of times a signal is performed as disclosed in the limitation “the providing of the reply control signal indicating that a reply is not required is sequentially performed n-1 times (during a backoff phase; FIG. 2; Paragraphs 0077-0078).” Yeh discloses the number of times a signal is performed as disclosed in the limitation “the first device provides the reply control signal indicating that a reply is required in the providing of an nth transmission parcel signal (signals between backoff phases (examples include GA 50, SI 52, and RI 54); FIG. 2; Paragraphs 0077-0078).” Yeh discloses the number of times a signal is performed as disclosed in the limitation “and acknowledgement between the first device and the second device on the providing of a last transmission parcel signal is performed (signals between backoff phases (examples include GA 50, SI 52, and RI 54); FIG. 2; Paragraphs 0077-0078), and wherein n is a natural number greater than or equal to 2, and k is a natural number less than n (number of stages where a signal is performed; Paragraph 0077; FIG. 2-3).”
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Deneroff et al. and Momona with elements of Yeh for protection against interference and/or collision [Paragraph 0078].
As per claim 11, Deneroff et al. and Momona disclose “The method of claim 5 (as disclosed by Deneroff et al. and Momona above).” However, Deneroff et al. and Momona do not disclose the number of times a signal is performed as disclosed in the limitations “wherein: the providing of the transmission parcel signal is performed n times” and “and the providing of the reply control signals indicating that a reply is not required is performed a plurality of times, wherein the first device performs the providing of the reply control signal indicating that a reply is required every k times out of the n times such that an acknowledgement process is performed between the first device and the second device, and wherein n is a natural number greater than or equal to 2, and k is a natural number less than n.”
Yeh discloses the number of times a signal is performed as disclosed in the limitation “wherein: the providing of the transmission parcel signal is performed n times (number of stages where a signal is performed; Paragraph 0077; FIG. 2-3).” Yeh discloses the number of times a signal is performed as disclosed in the limitation “and the providing of the reply control signals indicating that a reply is not required is performed a plurality of times (during a backoff phase; FIG. 2; Paragraphs 0077-0078), wherein the first device performs the providing of the reply control signal indicating that a reply is required every k times out of the n times such that an acknowledgement process is performed between the first device and the second device (signals between backoff phases (examples include GA 50, SI 52, and RI 54); FIG. 2; Paragraphs 0077-0078), and wherein n is a natural number greater than or equal to 2, and k is a natural number less than n (number of stages where a signal is performed; Paragraph 0077; FIG. 2-3).”
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the elements of Deneroff et al. and Momona with elements of Yeh for protection against interference and/or collision [Paragraph 0078].
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF REFERENCES CITED BY APPLICANT
As required by M.P.E.P. 609(c), the applicant's submission of the Information Disclosure Statement dated November 11, 2024; and April 17, 2025, is acknowledged by the examiner and the cited references have been considered in the examination of the claims now pending. As required by M.P.E.P 609 C(2), a copy of the PTOL-1449 initialed and dated by the examiner is attached to the instant office action.
RELEVENT ART CITED BY THE EXAMINER
The following prior art made of record and relied upon is citied to establish the level of skill in the applicant’s art and those arts considered reasonably pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. See MPEP 707.05(c).
The following references teach request and reply within data transfers.
U.S. PATENT NUMBERS:
2014/0156929 A1 – [Paragraphs 0065 and 0085]
2015/0006776 A1 – [Paragraph 0059]
The following references teach data transfers as it pertains to requests and replies over a period of time.
U.S. PATENT NUMBERS:7,453,878 B1 – [Column 3, lines 12-36]
CLOSING COMMENTS
Conclusion
The examiner requests, in response to this Office action, support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line no(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting the application.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Henry Yu whose telephone number is (571)272-9779. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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, IDRISS ALROBAYE can be reached at (571) 270-1023. 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.
/H.W.Y/Examiner, Art Unit 2181 January 23, 2026
/IDRISS N ALROBAYE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2181