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 .
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 3, 5, 6, 9, 14, 16, 17, and 20 recite various groups of limitations in the alternative using the term “one or more of the following”. Thus, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the aforementioned claims, and those claims dependent thereon, require only one of the aforementioned alternatives, and the other non-selected alternatives need not be disclosed by the prior art in rejecting the claims. Furthermore, any limitations which further limit a non-selected alternative, in either the aforementioned claims or those claims dependent thereon, are thus also directed to a non-selected alternative, and need not be disclosed by the prior art in rejecting the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim(s) 6 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “high-performance computing device” in Claim 6 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high-performance computing device” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear as to what level of performance a computing device must have in order to be considered high-performance.
The term “big data read-write service” in Claim 6 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “big data read-write service” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear as to what amount of data is necessary in order to be considered big data.
The term “high-performance computing device” in Claim 17 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “high-performance computing device” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear as to what level of performance a computing device must have in order to be considered high-performance.
The term “big data read-write service” in Claim 17 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “big data read-write service” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear as to what amount of data is necessary in order to be considered big data.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 12-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication Number 2017/0205863 to Lee et al. (“Lee”).
In reference to Claim 1, Lee discloses an energy efficiency management method, comprising: detecting a type of sensitivity to a performance requirement of a service running in a device (See Paragraphs 159 and 164 [workload is classified as memory bounded, compute bounded, typical, or other]); selecting a part of a plurality of running parameters of the device based on the type of sensitivity, wherein the selected part of the plurality of running parameters are one or more running parameters in the plurality of running parameters with lower relevance to the type of sensitivity than any unselected running parameter in the plurality of running parameters (See Paragraphs 125-126, 128, 131-132, 134, 158,160-162, 166, and 169-171); and adjusting the selected part of the plurality of running parameters or an associated parameter associated with the selected part of the plurality of running parameters to reduce a corresponding resource occupied by the service, wherein power consumption of the device after the adjustment is lower than power consumption of the device before the adjustment (See Paragraphs 128 and 161-162).
In reference to Claim 2, Lee discloses the limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Lee further discloses that the plurality of running parameters of the device comprise a plurality of running parameters required for running the service (See Paragraphs 128 and 162).
In reference to Claim 3, Lee discloses the limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Lee further discloses that the service comprises one or more of the following: an instruction delay–sensitive service that is sensitive to a response delay of instruction processing (See Paragraphs 32, 36, and 131 [compute bound]), a cache bandwidth–sensitive service that is sensitive to a cache bandwidth in the device, a memory bandwidth–sensitive service that is sensitive to a memory bandwidth in the device (See Paragraphs 32, 36, and 131 [memory bound]), or a storage medium response delay–sensitive service that is sensitive to a response delay of a storage medium in the device (See Paragraphs 32, 36, and 131 [memory bound]).
In reference to Claim 4, Lee discloses the limitations as applied to Claim 3 above. Lee further discloses that for the instruction delay–sensitive service, the selected part of the plurality of running parameters or the associated parameter includes a parameter corresponding to a first resource that has no impact on the response delay of instruction processing or has an impact less than a first threshold on the response delay of instruction processing, wherein the first resource is in a plurality of resources required for running the instruction delay–sensitive service (See Paragraphs 128, 131, and 162); for the cache bandwidth–sensitive service, the selected part of the plurality of running parameters or the associated parameter includes a parameter corresponding to a second resource that has no impact on the cache bandwidth in the device or has an impact less than a second threshold on the cache bandwidth in the device, wherein the second resource is in a plurality of resources required for running the cache bandwidth–sensitive service; for the memory bandwidth–sensitive service, the selected part of the plurality of running parameters or the associated parameter includes a parameter corresponding to a third resource that has no impact on the memory bandwidth in the device or has an impact less than a third threshold on the memory bandwidth in the device, wherein the third resource is in a plurality of resources required for running the memory bandwidth–sensitive service (See Paragraphs 128, 131, and 162); and for the storage medium response delay–sensitive service, the selected part of the plurality of running parameters or the associated parameter includes a parameter corresponding to a fourth resource that has no impact on the response delay of the storage medium in the device or has an impact less than a fourth threshold on the response delay of the storage medium in the device, wherein the fourth resource is in a plurality of resources required for running the storage medium response delay–sensitive service (See Paragraphs 128, 131, and 162).
In reference to Claim 5, Lee discloses the limitations as applied to Claim 3 above. Lee further discloses that the plurality of running parameters of the device comprise one or more of the following: a state of a processor core in the device (See Paragraph 128 [active or idle core]), a frequency of the processor core (See Paragraph 128), a frequency of a memory, a duty cycle of the memory, a frequency of a cache, and a state of the storage medium; for the instruction delay–sensitive service, the selected part of the plurality of running parameters comprises one or more of the following: the frequency of the memory, the duty cycle of the memory, the frequency of the cache, and the state of the storage medium; for the cache bandwidth–sensitive service, the selected part of the plurality of running parameters comprises one or more of the following: the state of the processor core, the frequency of the processor core, the frequency of the memory, the duty cycle of the memory, and the state of the storage medium; for the memory bandwidth–sensitive service, the selected part of the plurality of running parameters comprises one or more of the following: the state of the processor core (See Paragraphs 128, 131, and 162), the frequency of the processor core (See Paragraphs 128, 131, and 162), the frequency of the cache, and the state of the storage medium; and for the storage medium response delay–sensitive service, the selected part of the plurality of running parameters comprises one or more of the following: the state of the processor core (See Paragraphs 128, 131, and 162), the frequency of the processor core (See Paragraphs 128, 131, and 162), the frequency of the memory, the duty cycle of the memory, and the frequency of the cache.
In reference to Claim 6, Lee discloses the limitations as applied to Claim 3 above. Lee further discloses that the instruction delay–sensitive service comprises one or more of the following: an e-commerce transaction service, a financial transaction service, an online education service, and a high-performance computing service (See Paragraph 96); the cache bandwidth–sensitive service and the memory bandwidth–sensitive service comprise one or more of the following: a video-on-demand service, a big data read-write service (See Paragraph 96 [web serving and network processing]), and a distributed storage service (See Paragraph 96 [web serving]); and the storage medium response delay–sensitive service comprises one or more of the following: a data backup service, and a video data transmission service between a video surveillance camera and a storage device (See Paragraphs 99 and 120-121).
In reference to Claim 11, Lee discloses the limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Lee further discloses that after the adjusting the selected part of the plurality of running parameters or an associated parameter associated with the selected part of the plurality of running parameters, the method further comprises: adjusting an adjustment amplitude of the selected part of the plurality of running parameters or the associated parameter based on a difference between power consumption of the device after the adjustment and power consumption of the device before the adjustment and a difference between performance of the service after the adjustment and performance of the service before the adjustment; and readjusting the selected part of the plurality of running parameters or the associated parameter based on the adjusted adjustment amplitude, wherein power consumption of the device after the readjustment is lower than power consumption of the device before the readjustment (See Paragraphs 154-157, 161-162 and 169-171).
Claim 12 recites limitations that are substantially equivalent to those of Claim 1, as in rejected under similar reasoning. Lee further discloses at least one processor and at least one memory, and the at least one memory stores a computer program for execution by the at least one processor to cause the apparatus to perform the operations (See Paragraphs 235-236).
Claim 13 recites limitations that are substantially equivalent to those of Claim 2, as in rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 14 recites limitations that are substantially equivalent to those of Claim 3, as in rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 15 recites limitations that are substantially equivalent to those of Claim 4, as in rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 16 recites limitations that are substantially equivalent to those of Claim 5, as in rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 17 recites limitations that are substantially equivalent to those of Claim 6, as in rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim(s) 1-10 and 12-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication Number 2016/0103691 to Sethia et al. (“Sethia”).
In reference to Claim 1, Sethia discloses an energy efficiency management method, comprising: detecting a type of sensitivity to a performance requirement of a service running in a device (See Paragraphs 52, 55, and 67 [detect type and requirements of executing kernel]); selecting a part of a plurality of running parameters of the device based on the type of sensitivity, wherein the selected part of the plurality of running parameters are one or more running parameters in the plurality of running parameters with lower relevance to the type of sensitivity than any unselected running parameter in the plurality of running parameters (See Paragraphs 54-59 and 88-90); and adjusting the selected part of the plurality of running parameters or an associated parameter associated with the selected part of the plurality of running parameters to reduce a corresponding resource occupied by the service, wherein power consumption of the device after the adjustment is lower than power consumption of the device before the adjustment (See Paragraphs 88-90).
In reference to Claim 2, Sethia discloses the limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Sethia further discloses that the plurality of running parameters of the device comprise a plurality of running parameters required for running the service (See Paragraphs 54-59 and 88-90).
In reference to Claim 3, Sethia discloses the limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Sethia further discloses that the service comprises one or more of the following: an instruction delay–sensitive service that is sensitive to a response delay of instruction processing (See Paragraphs 52 and 55-56 [compute intensive]), a cache bandwidth–sensitive service that is sensitive to a cache bandwidth in the device (See Paragraphs 52 and 57-58 [cache sensitive]), a memory bandwidth–sensitive service that is sensitive to a memory bandwidth in the device (See Paragraphs 52 and 57-58 [memory intensive]), or a storage medium response delay–sensitive service that is sensitive to a response delay of a storage medium in the device (See Paragraphs 52 and 57-58 [memory intensive]).
In reference to Claim 4, Sethia discloses the limitations as applied to Claim 3 above. Sethia further discloses that for the instruction delay–sensitive service, the selected part of the plurality of running parameters or the associated parameter includes a parameter corresponding to a first resource that has no impact on the response delay of instruction processing or has an impact less than a first threshold on the response delay of instruction processing, wherein the first resource is in a plurality of resources required for running the instruction delay–sensitive service (See Paragraphs 52 and 55-56); for the cache bandwidth–sensitive service, the selected part of the plurality of running parameters or the associated parameter includes a parameter corresponding to a second resource that has no impact on the cache bandwidth in the device or has an impact less than a second threshold on the cache bandwidth in the device, wherein the second resource is in a plurality of resources required for running the cache bandwidth–sensitive service (See Paragraphs 52 and 57-58); for the memory bandwidth–sensitive service, the selected part of the plurality of running parameters or the associated parameter includes a parameter corresponding to a third resource that has no impact on the memory bandwidth in the device or has an impact less than a third threshold on the memory bandwidth in the device, wherein the third resource is in a plurality of resources required for running the memory bandwidth–sensitive service (See Paragraphs 52 and 57-58); and for the storage medium response delay–sensitive service, the selected part of the plurality of running parameters or the associated parameter includes a parameter corresponding to a fourth resource that has no impact on the response delay of the storage medium in the device or has an impact less than a fourth threshold on the response delay of the storage medium in the device, wherein the fourth resource is in a plurality of resources required for running the storage medium response delay–sensitive service (See Paragraphs 52 and 57-58).
In reference to Claim 5, Sethia discloses the limitations as applied to Claim 3 above. Sethia further discloses that the plurality of running parameters of the device comprise one or more of the following: a state of a processor core in the device, a frequency of the processor core (See Paragraphs 55-56), a frequency of a memory (See Paragraphs 57-58), a duty cycle of the memory, a frequency of a cache (See Paragraphs 57-58), and a state of the storage medium; for the instruction delay–sensitive service, the selected part of the plurality of running parameters comprises one or more of the following: the frequency of the memory (See Paragraphs 55-58), the duty cycle of the memory, the frequency of the cache (See Paragraphs 55-58), and the state of the storage medium; for the cache bandwidth–sensitive service, the selected part of the plurality of running parameters comprises one or more of the following: the state of the processor core, the frequency of the processor core (See Paragraphs 55-58), the frequency of the memory (See Paragraphs 55-58), the duty cycle of the memory, and the state of the storage medium; for the memory bandwidth–sensitive service, the selected part of the plurality of running parameters comprises one or more of the following: the state of the processor core, the frequency of the processor core (See Paragraphs 55-58), the frequency of the cache (See Paragraphs 55-58), and the state of the storage medium; and for the storage medium response delay–sensitive service, the selected part of the plurality of running parameters comprises one or more of the following: the state of the processor core, the frequency of the processor core (See Paragraphs 55-58), the frequency of the memory (See Paragraphs 55-58), the duty cycle of the memory, and the frequency of the cache (See Paragraphs 55-58).
In reference to Claim 6, Sethia discloses the limitations as applied to Claim 3 above. Sethia further discloses that the instruction delay–sensitive service comprises one or more of the following: an e-commerce transaction service, a financial transaction service, an online education service, and a high-performance computing service (See Paragraphs 52 and 77); the cache bandwidth–sensitive service and the memory bandwidth–sensitive service comprise one or more of the following: a video-on-demand service, a big data read-write service (See Paragraphs 52 and 77), and a distributed storage service; and the storage medium response delay–sensitive service comprises one or more of the following: a data backup service, and a video data transmission service between a video surveillance camera and a storage device.
In reference to Claim 7, Sethia discloses the limitations as applied to Claim 1 above. Sethia further discloses that target resources required for running the service are distributed in a plurality of resource groups, wherein different resource groups of the plurality of resource groups comprise a same resource (See Figure 1 Numbers 2, 4, 6, and 8), and wherein the adjusting the selected part of the plurality of running parameters or an associated parameter associated with the selected part of the plurality of running parameters comprises: adjusting, at different amplitudes based on the different resource groups, a running parameter related to the target resources or an associated parameter associated with the running parameter related to the target resources (See Paragraph 103).
In reference to Claim 8, Sethia discloses the limitations as applied to Claim 7 above. Sethia further discloses that the plurality of resource groups comprises a hot resource group and a warm resource group, wherein resource usage of the hot resource group is relatively higher than resource usage of the warm resource group (See Paragraph 103 [every SM/GPU makes a separate determination to increase/decrease/maintain, and thus can all have different usage levels]), and wherein the adjustment at different amplitudes comprises: adjusting the hot resource group to a group of improving resource usage or maintaining an original resource usage (See Paragraph 103); and adjusting the warm resource group to a group of reducing resource usage (See Paragraph 103).
In reference to Claim 9, Sethia discloses the limitations as applied to Claim 8 above. Sethia further discloses that the service comprises one or more of the following: an instruction delay–sensitive service that is sensitive to a response delay of instruction processing (See Paragraphs 52 and 55-56 [compute intensive]), a cache bandwidth–sensitive service that is sensitive to a cache bandwidth in the device (See Paragraphs 52 and 57-58 [cache sensitive]), a memory bandwidth–sensitive service that is sensitive to a memory bandwidth in the device (See Paragraphs 52 and 57-58 [memory intensive]), or a storage medium response delay–sensitive service that is sensitive to a response delay of a storage medium in the device (See Paragraphs 52 and 57-58 [memory intensive]); for the instruction delay–sensitive service, the target resources include a processor core in the device (See Figure 1 Numbers 2, 4, 6, and 8), and the adjustment at different amplitudes comprises one or more of the following: increasing or skipping adjusting a frequency of a processor core in the hot resource group, and decreasing a frequency of a processor core in the warm resource group (See Paragraph 103); for the cache bandwidth–sensitive service, the target resources include a cache in the device (See Figure 1 Numbers 10, 12, 14, and 15), and the adjustment at different amplitudes comprises one or more of the following: increasing or skipping adjusting a frequency of a cache in the hot resource group, and decreasing a frequency of a cache in the warm resource group (See Paragraph 103); for the memory bandwidth–sensitive service, the target resources include a memory in the device (See Figure 1 Numbers 10, 12, 14, 15, and 16), and the adjustment at different amplitudes comprises one or more of the following: increasing or skipping adjusting a frequency of a memory in the hot resource group (See Paragraph 103), increasing or skipping adjusting a duty cycle of the memory in the hot resource group, decreasing a frequency of a memory in the warm resource group (See Paragraph 103), and decreasing a duty cycle of the memory in the warm resource group; and for the storage medium response delay–sensitive service, the target resources include a storage medium in the device, and the adjustment at different amplitudes comprises one or more of the following: maintaining a storage medium in the hot resource group in a working state, and setting a state of a storage medium in the warm resource group to a standby state.
In reference to Claim 10, Sethia discloses the limitations as applied to Claim 9 above. Sethia further discloses that the plurality of resource groups comprises a cold resource group, wherein resource usage of the cold resource group is lower than the resource usage of the warm resource group (See Paragraph 103 [every SM/GPU makes a separate determination to increase/decrease/maintain, and thus can all have different usage levels]), and wherein the adjustment at different amplitudes further comprises: for the instruction delay–sensitive service, turning off a part of or all processor cores in the cold resource group (See Paragraph 103); for the cache bandwidth–sensitive service, releasing a part of or all caches in the cold resource group (See Paragraphs 42 and 103); for the memory bandwidth–sensitive service, releasing a part of or all memories in the cold resource group (See Paragraphs 42 and 103); and for the storage medium response delay–sensitive service, setting a state of a storage medium in the cold resource group to an idle state.
Claim 12 recites limitations that are substantially equivalent to those of Claim 1, as in rejected under similar reasoning. Lee further discloses at least one processor and at least one memory, and the at least one memory stores a computer program for execution by the at least one processor to cause the apparatus to perform the operations (See Paragraphs 7-10).
Claim 13 recites limitations that are substantially equivalent to those of Claim 2, as in rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 14 recites limitations that are substantially equivalent to those of Claim 3, as in rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 15 recites limitations that are substantially equivalent to those of Claim 4, as in rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 16 recites limitations that are substantially equivalent to those of Claim 5, as in rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 17 recites limitations that are substantially equivalent to those of Claim 6, as in rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 18 recites limitations that are substantially equivalent to those of Claim 7, as in rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 19 recites limitations that are substantially equivalent to those of Claim 8, as in rejected under similar reasoning.
Claim 20 recites limitations that are substantially equivalent to those of Claim 9, as in rejected under similar reasoning.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11 February 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12 September 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Conclusion
The art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS J CLEARY whose telephone number is (571)272-3624. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-5PM.
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, Andrew Jung can be reached at 571-270-3779. 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.
/THOMAS J. CLEARY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2175
Prosecution Insights