DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/03/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
The Preliminary Amendment, filed 12/30/2024 has been entered. Claims 1-20 have been canceled. Claims 21-40 have been added. Claims 21-40 are pending in the Application.
Claim Objections
Claims 36 is objected to because of the following informalities:
The typo “send the local interrupt signal to the local driver. local” should be corrected.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-37 of U.S. Patent No. 12,174,765. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter in the instant application is at least fully disclosed in the reference patent.
Claim 21 of the instant application is anticipated by the patent’s claim 1 in that claim 1 of the patent contain all the limitation of claim 21 of the instant application. Please see table below for the detailed claim comparison.
Further, the limitation of the other claims 22-40 are found with minor variations in the teaching of the patent claims 1-37.
Instant Application (18/988,345)
Patent No. 12,174,765
Claim 21: A system comprising:
a local driver configured to access a local interrupt configuration; and
Claim 1: An apparatus comprising:
a system bus driver;
electronic circuitry coupled with the local driver and configured to:
electronic circuitry, wherein the electronic circuitry:
receive, from a remote destination, a first interrupt signal; and
receives a first interrupt signal from a remote destination over a network protocol;
generate a local interrupt signal based on the first interrupt signal and the local interrupt configuration provided by the local driver.
generates a second interrupt signal based at least in part on the first interrupt signal and a local interrupt configuration provided by the system bus driver, wherein the second interrupt signal comprises a local interrupt;
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 21-22, 26-27, 31-32, and 36-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Campbell et al US 20130322264.
Regarding claim 21, Campbell teaches a system (see figure 5) comprising:
a local driver configured to access a local interrupt configuration (local processor 502, see para 0056, The local processor 502 maps various message signaled interrupts (MSIs) from the dedicated processor 508 into the local address space. These MSIs include events generated by remote sources on DFP member switches) and
electronic circuitry coupled with the local driver (circuitry of system 500 including the local network switch 510 and the dedicated processor 508) configured to:
receive, from a remote destination, a first interrupt signal (see para 0076, the dedicated processor 508 may be adapted for receiving multicast or unicast EL2T protocol packets encapsulating details of external events (from DFP system members) e.g. the interrupt signal from the local network switch 510); and
generate a local interrupt signal based on the first interrupt signal and the local interrupt configuration provided by the local driver (see para 0076, the dedicated processor 508 may be adapted for decoding the multicast or unicast EL2T packets to determine details of the external events encapsulated in the multicast or unicast EL2T packets, the dedicated processor 508 may be adapted for sending an MSI-based message e.g. the local interrupt signal to the local processor 502 including details of the external events).
Regarding claim 22, Campbell further teaches the first interrupt signal is received from the remote destination in a tunneled communication (see para 0076, the dedicated processor 508 may be adapted for receiving multicast or unicast EL2T protocol packets encapsulating details of external events).
Regarding claim 26, Campbell further teaches the system further comprising the remote destination (see figure 4, remote destination such as member 406).
Regarding claim 27, Campbell further teaches the first interrupt signal is received as part of a peripheral component interconnect express (PCIe) transaction layer packet (TLP) (see para 0020, enhanced layer 2 transport (EL2T) protocol packets encapsulating the interrupt details, also see para 0067, the local network switch 510 may switch any communication protocol known in the art, including but not limited to Ethernet, PCIe, PCIe-over-Ethernet, Fiber Channel (FC), Fiber Channel-over-Ethernet (FCoE), etc).
Regarding claim 31, Campbell further teaches the first interrupt signal comprises a message signaled interrupt (MSI) message, an MSI-X message, or a PCI-compatible interrupt hardware support (INTx) emulation (see para 0092, details that may be stored to the packet include, but are not limited to, the switch ID of the DFP system member, the event source, the event type, the event priority, and/or the MSI payload).
Regarding claim 32, Campbell further teaches the local interrupt signal comprises a message signaled interrupt (MSI) message, an MSI-X message, or a PCI-compatible interrupt hardware support (INTx) emulation (see para 0061, Some of the local interrupt sources may provide events over PCIe bus via MSI).
Regarding claim 36, Campbell further teaches the electronic circuitry is configured to: send the local interrupt signal to the local driver (see para 0076, the dedicated processor 508 may be adapted for decoding the multicast or unicast EL2T packets to determine details of the external events encapsulated in the multicast or unicast EL2T packets, the dedicated processor 508 may be adapted for sending an MSI-based message to the local processor 502 including details of the external events).
Regarding claim 37, Campbell teaches a system (see figure 5), comprising:
a local driver configured to access a local interrupt configuration (local processor 502, see para 0056, The local processor 502 maps various message signaled interrupts (MSIs) from the dedicated processor 508 into the local address space. These MSIs include events generated by remote sources on DFP member switches); and
electronic circuitry coupled with the local driver (circuitry of system 500 including the local network switch 510 and the dedicated processor 508) and configured to:
receive a remotely-generated interrupt signal (see para 0076, the dedicated processor 508 may be adapted for receiving multicast or unicast EL2T protocol packets encapsulating details of external events (from DFP system members) from the local network switch 510);
generate a local interrupt based on the remotely-generated interrupt signal and the local interrupt configuration provided by the local driver; and send the local interrupt to the local driver (see para 0076, the dedicated processor 508 may be adapted for decoding the multicast or unicast EL2T packets to determine details of the external events encapsulated in the multicast or unicast EL2T packets, the dedicated processor 508 may be adapted for sending an MSI-based message to the local processor 502 including details of the external events).
Regarding claim 38, Campbell further teaches the remotely-generated interrupt signal is received in a tunneled communication (see para 0076, the dedicated processor 508 may be adapted for receiving multicast or unicast EL2T protocol packets encapsulating details of external events).
Regarding claim 39, Campbell teaches A system (see figure 5) comprising:
a local driver configured to access a local interrupt configuration; and (local processor 502, see para 0056, The local processor 502 maps various message signaled interrupts (MSIs) from the dedicated processor 508 into the local address space. These MSIs include events generated by remote sources on DFP member switches); and
electronic circuitry coupled with the local driver (circuitry of system 500 including the local network switch 510 and the dedicated processor 508) and configured to:
receive, from a remote destination, a tunneled communication comprising a first interrupt signal (see para 0076, the dedicated processor 508 may be adapted for receiving multicast or unicast EL2T protocol packets encapsulating details of external events (from DFP system members) from the local network switch 510); and
generate a local interrupt signal based on the first interrupt signal and the local interrupt configuration provided by the local driver (see para 0076, the dedicated processor 508 may be adapted for decoding the multicast or unicast EL2T packets to determine details of the external events encapsulated in the multicast or unicast EL2T packets, the dedicated processor 508 may be adapted for sending an MSI-based message to the local processor 502 including details of the external events).
Regarding claim 40, Campbell further teaches the electronic circuitry is configured to send the local interrupt signal to the local driver over a system bus (bus of the system 500, see para 0076, the dedicated processor 508 may be adapted for decoding the multicast or unicast EL2T packets to determine details of the external events encapsulated in the multicast or unicast EL2T packets, the dedicated processor 508 may be adapted for sending an MSI-based message to the local processor 502 including details of the external events).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23-25, 28-30, and 33-35 are regarded as comprising allowable subject matter and would be allowable if (1) rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and (2) upon filing and acceptance of the Terminal Disclaimer to overcome the set forth double patenting rejection above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chung et al US 20110040913 discloses generating a local interrupt message based on an interrupt redirection table
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHONG H DANG whose telephone number is (571)272-0470. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30AM - 6:00PM.
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, Henry Tsai can be reached at (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 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.
/PHONG H DANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2184