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 .
Claims 65 – 84 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Claim(s) 65-84 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Lie et al (US20210224639) hereinafter Lie.
As to claim 65, Lie discloses a method comprising: receiving, at a wavelet filter of a processing element (Fig. 5 with compute element 520 , a wavelet (para. 0099) associated with a first virtual channel specifier (Fig. 5 and router 510 that transmits wavelets, para. 0330); and based on determining: that the first virtual channel specifier is different from a second virtual channel specifier associated with the wavelet filter (Fig. 5, and para. 0101), assigning the wavelet to one or more input queues of the processing element associated with the first virtual channel specifier (para. 0102), and that the first virtual channel specifier is associated with the wavelet filter (picker chooses wavelet specifier, from queue, para. 0103), preventing the wavelet from being processed by the processing element (executing specific specifier, para. 0136).
As to claim 75, Lie discloses A system comprising: a wavelet filter of a processing element (Fig. 5 with compute element 520 , a wavelet (para. 0099) associated with a first virtual channel specifier (Fig. 5 and router 510 that transmits wavelets, para. 0330); and based on determining: that the first virtual channel specifier is different from a second virtual channel specifier associated with the wavelet filter (Fig. 5, and para. 0101), assigning the wavelet to one or more input queues of the processing element associated with the first virtual channel specifier (para. 0102), and that the first virtual channel specifier is associated with the wavelet filter (picker chooses wavelet specifier, from queue, para. 0103), preventing the wavelet from being processed by the processing element (executing specific specifier, para. 0136).
As to claims 66, and 76, Lie discloses the method, further comprising, based on the determining that the first virtual channel specifier is associated with the wavelet filter, preventing transmission of the wavelet (Fig. 5, where router 510 prevents transmission, para. 0332).
As to claims 67, and 77, Lie discloses the method, further comprising determining whether the wavelet is one of a control wavelet type or a data wavelet type (para. 0095).
As to claims 68, and 78, Lie discloses the method, wherein the wavelet filter comprises a counter, the method further comprising updating the counter based on the first virtual channel specifier (Fig. 8, and para. 0368).
As to claims 69, and 79, Lie discloses the method, wherein the wavelet filter comprises one or more configuration registers indicating a virtual channel specifier associated with the wavelet filter (Para. 0482).
As to claims 70, and 80, Lie discloses the method, wherein the one or more configuration registers comprise one or more fields indicating a filter operating mode, and wherein the updating the counter is based in part on the filter operating mode (para. 0084).
As to claims 71, and 81, Lie discloses the method, wherein the filter operating mode is one of a counter filter mode, a sparse filter mode, or a range filter mode (Counter filter, para. 0472).
As to claims 72,and 82, Lie discloses the method, wherein the filter operating mode is the counter filter mode, and wherein the one or more configuration registers indicate a maximum pass value of the wavelet filter, the method further comprising: comparing a value of the counter and the maximum pass value; and wherein the assigning the wavelet to the one or more input queues is based in part on the comparing (para. 0472).
As to claims 73, and 83, Lie discloses the method, wherein the filter operating mode is the sparse filter mode, and wherein the one or more configuration registers indicate a counter threshold of the wavelet filter, the method further comprising: comparing the counter to the counter threshold; and wherein the assigning the wavelet to the one or more input queues is based in part on the comparing (Comparison done, para. 0356).
As to claims 74, and 84, Lie discloses the method, wherein the first virtual channel specifier indicates a first virtual channel of a plurality of virtual channels of the processing element (para. 0115).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US20030208451, US11580376, and US2018034941 among other teach the management of wavelets in a system.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER ANTHONY DALEY whose telephone number is (571)272-3625. The examiner can normally be reached 7 - 3:30 pm.
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, Dr. Henry Tsai can be reached at 571 2724176. 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.
/C.A.D/Examiner, Art Unit 2184
/HENRY TSAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2184
Prosecution Insights