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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the claim listing filed on May 26th, 2026. Claims 1, 3-8, 10-14, and 16-20 are currently pending.
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.
Claims 1, 3-8, 10-14, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mekad et al. (USPGPUB No. 2020/0073840 A1, hereinafter referred to as Mekad) in view of Suarez et al. (US Pat No. 10649949 B1, hereinafter referred to as Suarez) and further in view of Binder et al. (USPGPUB No. 2012/0166582 A1, hereinafter referred to as Binder) and further in view of Kerr et al. (USPGPUB No. 2020/0042471 A1, hereinafter referred to as Kerr).
Referring to claim 1, Mekad discloses a system comprising {see Fig. 1, “example system 8” [0019]}:
a memory device {“data center includes a set of storage nodes 12”, see Fig. 1 [0021]};
and a memory sub-system controller {subsystem controller “[data processing units] DPUs 17, in accordance with… support emerging use cases … can dynamically unplug storage and/or compute connectivity… [via] controller-based systems”, see Fig. 1, [0027]} operatively coupled to the memory device {see Fig. 1, “have an external PCIe connectivity option”, [0027]} via an active input/output expander (AIOE) {see Fig. 2, “[serial] PCIe interfaces 146 are also coupled to respective I/O expanders 147” [0048]};
the AIOE to perform operations comprising:
receiving, from the memory sub-system controller {“dynamically unplug storage and/or compute connectivity operating in one mode (for example, EP) and change it to a mode that would need the controller to dynamically change over to RC mode … PCIe controller-based systems”, see Fig. 1, [0027]} via the first interface of the AIOE, a reference clock signal {see Fig. 1, “reset line paths” including PERST where “these techniques to meet interface link up [reference clock] timing requirements”, both cited in [0029], see Fig. 1};
Mekad does not appear to explicitly disclose receiving, from the memory device via the second interface of the AIOE, a signal corresponding to data associated with an input/output (I/O) command;
converting, based on the reference clock signal, the signal corresponding to the data to a first interface-compliant signal;
and sending, to the memory sub-system controller, via the first interface, the first interface-compliant signal;
However, Suarez discloses receiving, from the memory device via the second interface of the AIOE {second interface “parallel port 1”, right side “130” of “expander 100”, see Fig. 1b, “8-bit digital I/O ports 130” (Col 4, lines 14-18)}, a signal corresponding to data associated with an input/output (I/O) command {two types I/O compliant commands I2C (Col 6, lines 33-36, Table 2) and SPI (Col 7, lines 55-58, see Table 3)};
converting, based on the reference clock signal {reference clock signals “Switching speed SPI 10 30 MHz Switching speed I.sup.2C 100 500 kHz” depending on the direct of the given command from left side to right side and vice-versa (see Fig. 1B, Column 4, Table I, last two rows)}, the signal corresponding to the data {“reads the output serial data (miso)”, see Figs. 5 and 7, Col 5, line 38} to a first interface-compliant signal {see Fig. 1, “serial I/O signals may be from an I2C or SPI bus”, see Figs. 1a and 1b, Col 4, lines 10-12};
and sending, to the memory sub-system controller, via the first interface {“table2 summarizes the I2c read and write transactions” in register bank 750 as claimed (Col 6, lines 33-36 and table 2 into Column 7}, the first interface-compliant signal {see Fig. 1, “provide full mesh (any-to-any) interconnectivity” [0035]};
Mekad and Suarez are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor, interfacing with I/O expanders.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Mekad/Binder and Suarez before him or her, to modify Mekad’s active input/output expander “expanders 147” incorporating Suarez’ “IO expander 100” and appropriate parallel circuitry “mux 680” (see Fig. 7).
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to implement means of expanding I/O signals without moving to a larger microcontroller (Suarez Col 1 lines 64-67) for designing circuitry for a given application using microcontrollers (Suarez Col 1 lines 56-62).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Suarez with Mekad to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim(s).
Neither Mekad or Suarez appears to explicitly disclose wherein the AIOE is coupled to the memory sub-system controller via a first interface, and wherein the AIOE is coupled to the memory device via a second interface, the AIOE to perform operations.
However, Binder discloses wherein the AIOE is coupled to the memory sub-system controller via a first interface {“controller that incorporates the electronics that bridge the NAND memory components”, [0043]}, and wherein the AIOE is coupled to the memory device via a second interface, the AIOE to perform operations {AIOE “connect to 255 device port expanders” ([0049])via parallel interface “via the second bus, which may be a parallel bus” [0087]}.
Mekad/Suarez and Binder are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor, interfacing with I/O expanders.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Mekad/Suarez and Binder before him or her, to modify Mekad/Suarez’s system (see Fig. 35) incorporating Binder’s “node 0 1008” (see Fig. 10, [0108]).
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to implement an improved networking or storage security method and system that is simple, secured, cost-effective, faithful, reliable, easy to use or sanitize, has a minimum part count, minimum hardware, and/or uses existing and available components, protocols, programs and applications for providing better security and additional functionalities, and provides a better user experience (Binder [0058]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Binder with Mekad/Suarez to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim(s).
Neither one of the group consisting of Mekad, Suarez, and Binder appears to explicitly disclose wherein the serial interface comprising one or more single signal lanes configured to transmit control signals between the memory sub-system controller and the AIOE and one or more differential signal lanes configured to transmit data signals between the memory sub-system controller and the AIOE, and wherein the AIOE is coupled to the memory device via a parallel interface, the AIOE to perform operations comprising:
Sending, to the memory sub-system controller, via at least one of the one or more differential signal lanes of the serial interface, the serial interface-compliant signal.
However, Kerr discloses wherein the serial interface comprising one or more single signal lanes {“control device interface 124a”, see Fig. 1 [0044], 1st sentence} configured to transmit control signals {“device interface 124a may be configured to serially connect to the package interface”, see Fig. 1 [0044], 2nd sentence} between the memory sub-system controller {“data errors from the IC package 106, such as read errors from a NAND flash device)”, see Fig. 1 [0046]} and the AIOE and one or more differential signal lanes {“interface 124b may be configured to connect, in parallel, to the IC packages 106 and 108 (e.g., through at least pins P5B through P8B,”, see Fig. 1 [0044]} configured to transmit data signals {“provide for transmitting differential signals and for receiving differential signals in parallel”, see Fig. 1 [0044]} between the memory sub-system controller and the AIOE {“package 106 may be a memory device, such as a NAND flash memory device [subsequent memory controller]” such as controller “132”, see Fig. 1 [0049], 1st sentence}, and wherein the AIOE is coupled to the memory device via a parallel interface {“semiconductor package using a serial interface and a parallel interface, according to one or more embodiments of the present disclosure.”, see Fig. 4 [0061], 1st sentence}, the AIOE to perform operations comprising:
Sending, to the memory sub-system controller {“The connection may be managed by die-specific [memory sub-system] controllers 132 and 132’, which may be included on the die 136”, see Figs. 1 and 3c [0060], 2nd sentence}, via at least one of the one or more differential signal lanes {“receive a differential signal from the IC package 106, and the pins P3A and P4A can be configured to transmit a differential signal to the IC package 106.”, see Fig. 3a [0057], 2nd sentence} of the serial interface {“At block 410, a serial interface of a package device may receive, from an external controller”, see Fig. 4 [0061]}, the serial interface-compliant signal {“first communication comprising device identity information, the first communication configured [serial interface compliant] according to a differential data signaling protocol”, see Fig. 4 [0061]}.
Mekad/Suarez/Binder and Kerr are analogous because they are from the same field of endeavor, peripheral device detection.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Mekad/Suarez/Binder and before him or her, to modify Mekad/Suarez/Binder’s system incorporating Kerr’s “communication for a semiconductor package using a serial interface and a parallel interface, according to one or more embodiments of the present disclosure” (see Fig. 4, [0061]).
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to implement an interface connection of NAND flash devices that consumes less power (Kerr [0004]) while recognizing/monitoring capacitive load increasing on controller pins (Kerr [0002] paraphrase).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Kerr with Mekad/Suarez/Binder to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim(s).
As per claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and Mekad discloses further comprising:
receiving, from the memory sub-system controller via the serial interface of the AIOE {see Fig. 2, “PCIe interfaces 146 are also coupled to respective I/O expanders 147” [0048]}, the I/O command referencing a logical address {see Fig. 1, “logically establish one or more virtual fabrics” [0023]};
translating the logical address to a physical address referencing the memory device {see Fig. 1, “any of a number of parallel data paths within the data center 10” [0035]};
generating a parallel interface-compliant signal {see Fig. 1, “provide full mesh (any-to-any) interconnectivity” [0035]}; and sending, to the memory device, via the parallel interface, the parallel interface-compliant signal {see Figs. 1 and 2, “spray individual packets for packet flows” [0036]}.
As per claim 4, the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated and Binder discloses wherein the I/O command is received via a differential signal {“the PCIe peripheral is bidirectional [I/O command]. A [PCIe] lane is commonly composed of a transmit pair and a receive pair, each of differential lines”, see Figs. 13 and 24, [0048]}.
As per claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and Mekad discloses further comprising:
responsive to receiving {“coupled to respective I/O expanders 147” receiving I/O commands as appropriate [0048]}, from the memory sub-system controller, the I/O command, sending, to the memory sub-system controller, an indication that the I/O command has been successfully received {see Fig. 1, “use the communication control channels to notify each of DPUs” [0023]}.
As per claim 6, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and Mekad discloses further comprising:
responsive to receiving a notification {see Fig. 1, “use the communication control channels to notify each of DPUs” [0023]} from a controller of the memory device indicating that the I/O command has been successfully performed {see Fig. 1, “facilitate communication of data across switch fabric 14” [0037]}, sending an indication to the memory sub-system controller that the I/O command has been successful performed {see Fig. 6, “send data from configuration register 156 to programmable I/O expander 170 via interface 164 to cause programmable I/O expander 170 to issue a reset signal” [0086]}.
As per claim 7, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and Suarez discloses further comprising:
improving a quality parameter {“provides operating specifications for a … expander 100”, see Figs. 1a and 1b, Col 4, lines 28-30} of the serial interface-compliant signal, wherein the quality parameter comprises at least one of {Examiner’s interpretation: recitation “at least one of” in conjunction with “or” treats this dependent as a Markush claim, thus the reference needs only disclose one member of the group in order to address the claim.} a jitter parameter or slew rate parameter {“Output Slew rate… V/us”, Table 1, Col 4, lines 43-45} of the serial interface-compliant signal {“serial I/O signals… converted to general purpose digital I/O signals”, see Figs. 1a and 1b, Col 4, lines 8-11}.
Referring to claims 8, 10, 11, 12, and 13 are method claim of claims reciting claim functionality corresponding to the system claim of claims 1, and 3-7, respectively, thereby rejected under the same rationale as claims 1, and 3-7 recited above.
Referring to claims 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 are non-transitory computer-readable storage medium claims reciting claim functionality corresponding to the system claim of claims 1, and 3-7, respectively, thereby rejected under the same rationale as claims 1, and 3-7 recited above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 05/26/2026 have been considered but deemed moot in view of the new ground of rejection(s).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references indicative the current state of the art regarding claim 1’s “memory subsystem controller”, “parallel interface”, or “serial interface”: US 20220342607 A1, US 20220092013 A1, US 11086811 B2, US 20200371703 A1, US 20190310945 A1, and US 20160132269 A1.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER A. BARTELS whose telephone number is (571)270-3182. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:00a-5:30pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dr. Henry Tsai can be reached on 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 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 the PAIR system, see http://pair-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.
/C. B./
Examiner, Art Unit 2184
/HENRY TSAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2184
Prosecution Insights