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
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-5, 9, 12-13, 17, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cho et al. (US 20160163087 A1).
Regarding Claim 9, Cho discloses A system (¶3 reciting “ methods and apparatuses for rendering 3D data”. Fig. 4 showing an example of a rendering device.) comprising:
one or more processing units to: (Fig. 4 showing geometry processor 310, identical tile detector 320 and pixel processor 330)
determine, for each buffer of a plurality of buffers associated with an application processing a plurality of frames, a plurality of statistics based on draw calls received by a respective buffer, wherein the plurality of statistics includes at least one of: a draw call count, a viewport draw call count, or a matching draw data count; (¶56 reciting “The frame buffer 400 stores images received from the rendering device 300.” Fig. 3 showing a draw call input (corresponding to draw call statistics) for frames N and N+1. Further, ¶62 reciting “the rendering device 300 receives an instruction in a form as shown in FIG. 3 and performs a rendering.”) and
determine, based on a score derived from the plurality of statistics of one or more buffers of the plurality of buffers, at least one buffer of the plurality of buffers for post processing operations. (¶65 reciting “FIG. 3 shows a case in which an instruction received for the N+1th frame is identical to an instruction received for the Nth frame. Therefore, the rendering device 300 may re-use a result of rendering the Nth frame for rendering the N+1th frame.” Further, ¶91 reciting “In operation 930, the rendering device 300 compares an identification code of a tile to be rendered to an identification code of a previous tile,” and ¶92 reciting “In operation 940, based on a result of the comparison, the rendering device 300 renders a current frame by re-using an image stored in a frame buffer or performing pixel processing of the tile to be rendered.”)
Claim 1, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 9, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 9.
Claim 17, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 9, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 9. (¶106 reciting “The instructions or software to control a processor or computer to implement the hardware components and perform the methods as described above, and any associated data, data files, and data structures, are recorded, stored, or fixed in or on one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media.”)
Regarding Claim 12. Cho discloses The system of claim 9, wherein the score reflects a likelihood of the at least one buffer being associated with a specified buffer type. (¶65 reciting “FIG. 3 shows a case in which an instruction received for the N+1th frame is identical to an instruction received for the Nth frame. Therefore, the rendering device 300 may re-use a result of rendering the Nth frame for rendering the N+1th frame.”)
Claim 4, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 12, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 12.
Claim 19, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 12, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 12.
Regarding Claim 13, Cho discloses The system of claim 9, wherein the at least one buffer has a largest score indicating that the at least one buffer is to be used for the post processing operations. (¶65 reciting “FIG. 3 shows a case in which an instruction received for the N+1th frame is identical to an instruction received for the Nth frame. Therefore, the rendering device 300 may re-use a result of rendering the Nth frame for rendering the N+1th frame.”)
Claim 5, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 13, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 13.
Claim 20, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 13, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as Claim(s) 13.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-3, 6-8, 10-11, 14-16, and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding Claim 10, the closest art Cho discloses The system of claim 9. However, the closest art fails to teach wherein to determine the plurality of statistics based on the draw calls received by the respective buffer, the one or more processing units are further to: generate a data structure for each buffer of the plurality of buffers, wherein the data structure includes the plurality of statistics; and responsive to detecting a draw call directed to the at least one buffer of the plurality of buffers, update a statistic of the plurality of statistics of the data structure corresponding to the at least one buffer.
Claim 11 depends on Claim 10, and also contains allowable subject matter.
Claims 15-16 depends on Claim 11, and also contains allowable subject matter.
Claims 2-3, and 18 are similar in scope to Claims 10-11, and also contain allowable subject matter.
Claims 7-8 are similar in scope to Claims 15-16, and also contain allowable subject matter.
Regarding Claim 14, the closest art Cho discloses The system of claim 9. However, the closest art fails to teach wherein to determine, based on the score derived from the plurality of statistics of the one or more buffers, the at least one buffer of the plurality of buffers for the post processing operations, the one or more processing units are further to: apply a weight coefficient of a set of weight coefficients to at least one statistic of the plurality of statistics of a respective data structure, wherein at least one weight coefficient reflects a degree of relevance of a respective statistic to identifying a specific type of buffer among the plurality of buffers; and obtain a sum of the plurality of statistics.
Claims 6 is similar in scope to Claim 14, and also contains allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YI WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-6022. The examiner can normally be reached 9am - 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, Jason Chan can be reached at (571)272-3022. 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.
/YI WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2619
Prosecution Insights