DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
This Office action is in response to communications dated 5/12/2026.
Claims 1-7, 9-10, 12, and 19-20 are amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1 and 20 are rejected.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U. S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The Examiner thanks Applicant for amending claims 1 and 20 to cure the rejections of claims 1-19 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) made in the non-final Office action dated 2/12/2026 and therefore respectfully withdraws the rejections of claims 1-19 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) made therein.
Double Patenting
The Examiner maintains the nonstatutory double patenting rejection of claims 1 and 20 of the instant application in view of U.S. Patent No. 12,174,738 (“Tune”). The Examiner notes that the amendments to independent claim 1 to add “where the control circuitry is configured to control set associative access to the cache storage” is claimed by dependent claim 19 of Tune, which claims “…and where the control circuitry is configured to control set-associative access to the cache storage”.
The Examiner notes that the amendment to independent claim 20 to claim “and further controlling set-associative access to the cache storage” is claiming the same subject matter using slightly different wording.
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection of claims 1 and 20 of the instant application in view of U.S. Patent No. 12,174,738 (“Tune”) is therefore maintained.
Response to Arguments
In the Remarks dated 5/12/2026, Applicant substantially argues:
The amendments to independent claims 1 and 20 overcome the rejections of claims 1-19 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) made in the non-final Office action dated 2/12/2026.
Applicant’s arguments dated 5/12/2026 have been fully considered, and they are persuasive. As noted above, the Examiner has respectfully withdrawn the rejections of claims 1-19 and 20 under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) made in the non-final Office action dated 2/12/2026.
The amendments to independent claims 1 and 20 overcome the rejection of claims 1 and 20 of the instant application on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting rejection in view of U.S. Patent No. 12,174,738 (“Tune”).
Applicant’s arguments dated 5/12/2025 have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive. In the Remarks dated 5/12/2026, Applicant states that the amendments to independent claims 1 and 2o of the instant application incorporate subject matter of dependent claim 19 (see Remarks dated 5/12/2026, pages 1-2, section “Double Patenting”). As explained above, the amendments to independent claims 1 and 20 of the instant application correspond to language claimed in dependent claim 19 of Tune, so the rejection of claims 1 and 20 of the instant application on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting rejection in view of Tune still applies and is being maintained.
Conclusion
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel C. Chappell whose telephone number is (571)272-5003. The examiner can normally be reached 1000-1800, Eastern.
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, Jared I. Rutz can be reached at (571)272-5535. 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.
Daniel C. Chappell
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2135
/Daniel C. Chappell/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2135
Prosecution Insights