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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sloane (US 2023/00006691).
Regarding claim 1, Sloane discloses data compression architecture in figure 2 that teaches: compressing, via a processing circuit (114, figure 1), the data at a compression rate (201) and storing the data into a memory (116, figure 1) ; calculating (202), via the processing circuit, a compression rate adjustment parameter, based on each time duration for reading or writing the memory in a first specific period of time and a time threshold; and adjusting (203 and 204), via the processing circuit, the compression rate based on the compression rate adjustment parameter (see para. 0041, figure 2 and its descriptions).
Regarding claim 9, Sloan further teaches in figure 1 that teaches: wherein the memory is shared by a plurality of applications implemented via the processing circuit (see figure 1 and descriptions).
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 is similar to claim 1. Therefore, claim 11 is rejected as well as claim 1, such as: Sloane discloses data compression architecture in figure 2 that teaches: compressing, via a processing circuit (114, figure 1), the data at a compression rate (201) and storing the data into a memory (116, figure 1) ; calculating (202), via the processing circuit, a compression rate adjustment parameter, based on each time duration for reading or writing the memory in a first specific period of time and a time threshold; and adjusting (203 and 204), via the processing circuit, the compression rate based on the compression rate adjustment parameter (see para. 0041, figure 2 and its descriptions).
Regarding claim 19, Sloan further teaches in figure 1 that teaches: wherein the memory is shared by a plurality of applications implemented via the processing circuit (see figure 1 and descriptions).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but it would be considered for allowable if it is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to fairly teach or suggest invented features, which is: wherein the compression rate adjustment parameter is equal to a total number of times that the time duration for reading or writing the memory is higher than the time threshold in the first specific period of time divided by a total number of times that the memory is read or written in the first specific period of time.
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but it would be considered for allowable if it is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to fairly teach or suggest invented features, which is: wherein the operation of adjusting the compression rate based on the compression rate adjustment parameter comprises: increasing the compression rate when the compression rate adjustment parameter is higher than a first threshold; keeping the compression rate unchanged when the compression rate adjustment parameter is higher than a second threshold and lower than the first threshold; and decreasing the compression rate when the compression rate adjustment parameter is lower than the second threshold.
Claim 4 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but it would be considered for allowable if it is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to fairly teach or suggest invented features, which is: wherein the operation of calculating the compression rate adjustment parameter comprises: calculating a time margin for each time that the memory is read or written in the first specific period of time, wherein the time margin is equal to the time threshold minus the time duration for reading or writing the memory; wherein the compression rate adjustment parameter is equal to the sum of all of the time margins of each time that the memory is read or written in the first specific period of time.
Claim 5 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but it would be considered for allowable if it is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to fairly teach or suggest invented features, which is: wherein the operation of adjusting the compression rate based on the compression rate adjustment parameter comprises: increasing the compression rate when the compression rate adjustment parameter is lower than a first threshold; keeping the compression rate unchanged when the compression rate adjustment parameter is higher than the first threshold and lower than a second threshold; and decreasing the compression rate when the compression rate adjustment parameter is higher than the second threshold.
Claim 6 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but it would be considered for allowable if it is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to fairly teach or suggest invented features, which is: wherein the operation of adjusting the compression rate based on the compression rate adjustment parameter comprises: increasing the compression rate when the compression rate adjustment parameter is negative; keeping the compression rate unchanged when the compression rate adjustment parameter is equal to zero; and decreasing the compression rate when the compression rate adjustment parameter is positive.
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but it would be considered for allowable if it is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to fairly teach or suggest invented features, which is: wherein the operation of calculating the compression rate adjustment parameter comprises: calculating a time margin for each time that the memory is read or written in the first specific period of time, wherein the time margin is equal to the time threshold minus the time duration for reading or writing the memory; calculating a total time margin, wherein the total time margin is equal to the sum of all of the time margins of each time that the memory is read or written in the first specific period of time; and calculating a normalization parameter, wherein the normalization parameter is equal to a total number of times that the memory is read or written in the first specific period of time multiplied by the time threshold; wherein the compression rate adjustment parameter is equal to the total time margin divided by the normalization parameter.
Claim 8 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but it would be considered for allowable if it is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to fairly teach or suggest invented features, which is: wherein the operation of adjusting the compression rate based on the compression rate adjustment parameter comprises: increasing the compression rate when the compression rate adjustment parameter is lower than a first threshold; keeping the compression rate unchanged when the compression rate adjustment parameter is higher than the first threshold and lower than a second threshold; and decreasing the compression rate when the compression rate adjustment parameter is higher than the second threshold.
Claim 10 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but it would be considered for allowable if it is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to fairly teach or suggest invented features, which is: compressing, via the processing circuit, the data at the compression rate which has been adjusted and storing the data into the memory, in a second specific period of time preceding the first specific period of time.
Claim 12 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but it would be considered for allowable if it is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to fairly teach or suggest invented features, which is: wherein the compression rate adjustment parameter is equal to a total number of times that the time duration for reading or writing the memory is higher than the time threshold in the first specific period of time divided by a total number of times that the memory is read or written in the first specific period of time.
Claim 13 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but it would be considered for allowable if it is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to fairly teach or suggest invented features, which is: wherein the processing circuit is further configured to: increase the compression rate when the compression rate adjustment parameter is higher than a first threshold; keep the compression rate unchanged when the compression rate adjustment parameter is higher than a second threshold and lower than the first threshold; and decrease the compression rate when the compression rate adjustment parameter is lower than the second threshold.
Claim 14 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but it would be considered for allowable if it is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to fairly teach or suggest invented features, which is: wherein the processing circuit is further configured to: calculate a time margin for each time that the memory is read or written in the first specific period of time, wherein the time margin is equal to the time threshold minus the time duration for reading or writing the memory; wherein the compression rate adjustment parameter is equal to the sum of each of the time margins of each time that the memory is read or written in the first specific period of time.
Claim 15 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but it would be considered for allowable if it is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to fairly teach or suggest invented features, which is: wherein the processing circuit is further configured to: increase the compression rate when the compression rate adjustment parameter is lower than a first threshold; keep the compression rate unchanged when the compression rate adjustment parameter is higher than the first threshold and lower than a second threshold; and decrease the compression rate when the compression rate adjustment parameter is higher than the second threshold.
Claim 16 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but it would be considered for allowable if it is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to fairly teach or suggest invented features, which is: wherein the processing circuit is further configured to: increase the compression rate when the compression rate adjustment parameter is negative; keep the compression rate unchanged when the compression rate adjustment parameter is equal to zero; and decrease the compression rate when the compression rate adjustment parameter is positive.
Claim 17 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but it would be considered for allowable if it is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to fairly teach or suggest invented features, which is: wherein the processing circuit is further configured to: calculate a time margin for each time that the memory is read or written in the first specific period of time, wherein the time margin is equal to the time threshold minus the time duration for reading or writing the memory; calculate a total time margin, wherein the total time margin is equal to the sum of each of the time margins of each time that the memory is read or written in the first specific period of time; and calculate a normalization parameter, wherein the normalization parameter is equal to a total number of times that the memory is read or written in the first specific period of time multiplied by the time threshold; wherein the compression rate adjustment parameter is equal to the total time margin divided by the normalization parameter.
Claim 18 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but it would be considered for allowable if it is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to fairly teach or suggest invented features, which is: wherein the processing circuit is further configured to: increase the compression rate when the compression rate adjustment parameter is lower than a first threshold; keep the compression rate unchanged when the compression rate adjustment parameter is higher than the first threshold and lower than a second threshold; and decrease the compression rate when the compression rate adjustment parameter is higher than the second threshold.
Claim 20 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but it would be considered for allowable if it is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The closest prior art of record, considered individually or in combination, fails to fairly teach or suggest invented features, which is: wherein the processing circuit is further configured to compress the data at the compression rate which has been adjusted and storing the data into the memory, in a second specific period of time preceding the first specific period of time.
Cited References
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Cited references are related to instant application subject matters.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAM T MAI whose telephone number is (571)272-1807. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6am-2pm eastern time.
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, Dameon Levi can be reached at 571 272-2105. 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.
/LAM T MAI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2845
Prosecution Insights