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.
Claims 1-5, 9, 12-15, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Miller et al. (US PGPub No. 2011/0066872), hereinafter referred to as MILLER.
Consider Claim 1,
MILLER teaches an electronic device of communicating with a storage device comprising a volatile memory and a nonvolatile memory (MILLER, e.g., Fig 4(420,422)), the electronic device comprising:
a monitoring circuit configured to identify state information of the electronic device while data is stored in the volatile memory (MILLER, e.g., ¶0055, information from sensors is considered state information.); and
an operation controller configured to transmit to the storage device a flush command instructing to perform a flush operation by which the data stored in the volatile memory is stored in the nonvolatile memory based on the state information of the electronic device (MILLER, e.g., ¶0027, flush from cache to NVM; ¶0029, PSE may be a function of voltage or temperature.).
Consider Claim 2,
Miller further teaches wherein the monitoring circuit is configured to output a trigger signal according to a result of identifying the state information (MILLER, e.g., ¶0064, test in response to event (i.e., trigger); ¶0009, detect primary power loss state.), and
wherein the operation controller is configured to transmit the flush command to the storage device in response to the trigger signal being received from the monitoring circuit (MILLER, e.g., ¶0058, flush during test; ¶0009, flush in response to power loss trigger.).
Consider Claim 3,
MILLER further teaches a power supply unit configured to supply first power to the storage device (MILLER, e.g., Fig 4(402)); and
a backup power supply unit configured to be charged by the power supply unit (MILLER, e.g., Fig 4(412)).
Consider Claim 4,
MILLER further teaches wherein the monitoring circuit is configured to output the trigger signal when an accumulated number of times or an accumulated time that an event occurs is greater than a threshold value (MILLER, e.g., ¶0063, in response to an event (i.e., > 0);¶0009, power loss greater than 0 times.), wherein the event is represented by a state value indicating a voltage or a current of the first power of the power supply unit is less than a lower limit of a reference range or greater than an upper limit of the reference range (MILLER, e.g., loss of primary power (i.e., below minimum operating threshold.), and wherein the state value is included in the state information (MILLER, e.g., ¶0009, receive information about energy available.).
Consider Claim 5,
MILLER further teaches wherein the operation controller is configured to control the backup power supply unit to supply second power to the storage device instead of the power supply unit in response to the trigger signal (MILLER, e.g., ¶0009, backup provides power if primary is lost.).
Consider Claim 9,
MILLER further teaches wherein the monitoring circuit is configured to output the trigger signal when identifying an alarm signal from the state information (MILLER, e.g., ¶0009, loss of primary power is considered an alarm signal.).
Consider Claim 12,
MILLER teaches a method of operating an electronic device that communicates with a storage device comprising a volatile memory and a nonvolatile memory (MILLER, e.g., Fig 4(420,422)), the method comprising:
identifying state information of the electronic device while data is stored in the volatile memory (MILLER, e.g., ¶0055, information from sensors is considered state information.); and
transmitting to the storage device a flush command instructing to perform a flush operation by which the data stored in the volatile memory is stored in the nonvolatile memory based on the state information of the electronic device (MILLER, e.g., ¶0027, flush from cache to NVM; ¶0029, PSE may be a function of voltage or temperature.).
Consider Claim 13,
MILLER further teaches wherein the state information comprises at least one of: a state value indicating voltage or current of a power supply unit that supplies power to the storage device; remaining life of a backup power supply unit that is charged by the power supply unit; a temperature value inside the electronic device; and a state of a latch configured to attach the storage device to the electronic device or detach the storage device from the electronic device (MILLER, e.g., ¶0055, temperature sensor.).
Consider Claim 14,
MILLER further teaches wherein the identifying of the state information of the electronic device comprises:
identifying whether an event occurs that the state value included in the state information is less than a lower limit of a reference range or greater than an upper limit of the reference range (MILLER, e.g., loss of primary power (i.e., below minimum operating threshold.), and wherein the state value is included in the state information (MILLER, e.g., ¶0009, receive information about energy available.); and
identifying whether an accumulated number of times or an accumulated time that the event occurs is greater than a threshold value (MILLER, e.g., ¶0063, in response to an event (i.e., > 0);¶0009, power loss greater than 0 times.), and wherein the transmitting of the flush command to the storage device comprises, when it is identified that the accumulated number of times or the accumulated time that the event occurs is greater than the threshold value, transmitting the flush command to the storage device (MILLER, e.g., ¶0009, flush in response to power loss trigger (i.e., > 0 times).).
Consider Claim 15,
MILLER further teaches supplying power by the backup power supply unit instead of the power supply unit in response to the accumulated number of times or the accumulated time being greater than the threshold value (MILLER, e.g., ¶0009, backup provides power if primary is lost.).
Consider Claim 19,
MILLER teaches an electronic system comprising:
a storage device comprising a volatile memory, a nonvolatile memory, and a memory interface (MILLER, e.g., Fig 4(420,422), volatile and non-volatile memory with plural memory interfaces.); and
an electronic device that comprises:
an interface configured to communicate with the memory interface; and
a flush controller configured to identify state information of the electronic device while data is stored in the volatile memory (MILLER, e.g., ¶0055, information from sensors is considered state information.), and based on the state information, transmit a flush command to the storage device through the interface, wherein the storage device further comprises a memory controller configured to perform a flush operation by which the data stored in the volatile memory is stored in the nonvolatile memory in response to the flush command received through the memory interface (MILLER, e.g., ¶0058, flush during test; ¶0009, flush in response to power loss trigger.).
Consider Claim 20,
MILLER further teaches wherein a power supply unit configured to generate first power (MILLER, e.g., Fig 4(402)); and a backup power supply unit configured to be charged by the power supply unit and generate second power (MILLER, e.g., Fig 4(412)), and wherein the storage device further comprises a power device configured to generate an operating voltage for performing the flush operation using one of the first power supplied from the power supply unit and the second power supplied from the backup power supply unit (MILLER, e.g., ¶0009, backup provides power if primary is lost; ¶0009, flush in response to power loss trigger.).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MILLER.
Consider Claim 7,
MILLER further teaches a temperature sensor configured to obtain a temperature value inside the electronic device (MILLER, e.g., ¶0055, temperature sensor.), wherein the temperature value is included in the state information (MILLER, e.g., ¶0029, energy providing capabilities is a function of temperature.), but fails to expressly describe wherein the monitoring circuit is configured to output the trigger signal according to an event that the temperature value is less than a lower limit of a reference range or greater than an upper limit of the reference range. The examiner takes official notice of the fact that power supplies and electronics are prone to failure when operated outside of their recommended temperature ranges. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to output a trigger signal (i.e., flush signal) in response to a temperature signal being outside of a reference range because it ensures data is saved when failure due to temperature extremes is imminent.
Consider Claim 17,
MILLER teaches the method of operating the electronic device of Claim 13, above, and additionally teaches wherein the identifying of the state information of the electronic device comprises: identifying whether an accumulated number of times or an accumulated time that the event occurs is greater than a threshold value, and wherein the transmitting of the flush command to the storage device comprises, when it is identified that the accumulated number of times or the accumulated time that the event occurs is greater than the threshold value, transmitting the flush command to the storage device (MILLER, e.g., ¶0063, perform test in response to a temperature event (i.e., > 0); ¶0057, flush cache in response to test (i.e., in response to the temperature event.), but fails to expressly describe identifying whether an event occurs that the temperature value inside the electronic device included in the state information is less than a lower limit of a reference range or greater than an upper limit of the reference range. The examiner takes official notice of the fact that power supplies and electronics are prone to failure when operated outside of their recommended temperature ranges. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to output a trigger signal (i.e., flush signal) in response to a temperature signal being outside of a reference range because it ensures data is saved when failure due to temperature extremes is imminent.
Claims 8, 10, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MILLER in view of SOBOLEWSKI (US PGPub No. 2003/0063431)
Consider Claim 8,
MILLER teaches the electronic device of claim 2, above, and further teaches detecting a loss of power to the storage system, but fails to describe a latch configured to secure the storage device in a locked state, and detach the storage device from the electronic device in an unlocked state, wherein, in the locked state, the storage device is attached to the electronic device, and wherein the monitoring circuit is configured to output the trigger signal when a state of the latch included in the state information is changed from the locked state to the unlocked state. SOBOLEWSKI describes methods and systems for avoiding data loss when power loss is imminent and is considered analogous prior art. SOBOLEWSKI does teach a latch configured to secure the storage device in a locked state, and detach the storage device from the electronic device in an unlocked state, wherein, in the locked state, the storage device is attached to the electronic device (SOBOLEWSKI, e.g., Fig 6; ¶0017, latch mechanism is used to attach element to electronic device.), and wherein the monitoring circuit is configured to output the trigger signal when a state of the latch included in the state information is changed from the locked state to the unlocked state (SOBOLEWSKI, e.g., ¶0043-0044, output trigger signal when no longer locked (i.e., unlocked).). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of MILLER with at least the cited teachings of SOBOLEWSKI because it avoids accidental disconnection while avoiding data loss in the event of imminent disconnection.
Consider Claim 10,
MILLER teaches the electronic device of claim 2, above, and further teaches an interface configured to transmit the flush command to the storage device and a connection circuit configured to transmit the flush command to the storage device through the interface in response to a trigger (MILLER, e.g., Fig 1B, shows memory control interface and connection.), but fails to teach a latch configured to output an output signal indicating a state change when a state of the storage device is changed from a locked state in which the storage device is attached to the electronic device to an unlocked state in which the storage device is detached from the electronic device; and a connection circuit configured to transmit a trigger signal in response to the output signal of the latch. SOBOLEWSKI describes methods and systems for avoiding data loss when power loss is imminent and is considered analogous prior art. SOBOLEWSKI does teach a latch configured to output an output signal indicating a state change when a state of the storage device is changed from a locked state in which the storage device is attached to the electronic device to an unlocked state in which the storage device is detached from the electronic device and a connection circuit configured to transmit a trigger signal in response to the output signal of the latch (SOBOLEWSKI, e.g., Fig 6; ¶0017, latch mechanism is used to attach element to electronic device; ¶0043-0044, output trigger signal when no longer locked (i.e., unlocked).). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of MILLER with at least the cited teachings of SOBOLEWSKI because it avoids accidental disconnection while avoiding data loss in the event of imminent disconnection.
Consider Claim 18,
MILLER teaches the method of operating the electronic device of Claim 13, above, and additionally teaches transmitting the flush command to the storage device in response to a trigger (MILLER, e.g., Fig 1B, shows memory control interface and connection.), but fails to detail wherein the identifying of the state information of the electronic device comprises identifying whether a state of the latch included in the state information changes from a locked state in which the storage device is attached to the electronic device to an unlocked state in which the storage device is detached from the electronic device, and wherein the transmitting a trigger signal in response to the output signal of the latch, when it is identified that the state is changed from the locked state to the unlocked state.SOBOLEWSKI describes methods and systems for avoiding data loss when power loss is imminent and is considered analogous prior art. SOBOLEWSKI does teach identifying whether a state of the latch included in the state information changes from a locked state in which the storage device is attached to the electronic device to an unlocked state in which the storage device is detached from the electronic device, and wherein the transmitting a trigger signal in response to the output signal of the latch, when it is identified that the state is changed from the locked state to the unlocked state (SOBOLEWSKI, e.g., Fig 6; ¶0017, latch mechanism is used to attach element to electronic device; ¶0043-0044, output trigger signal when no longer locked (i.e., unlocked).). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of MILLER with at least the cited teachings of SOBOLEWSKI because it avoids accidental disconnection while avoiding data loss in the event of imminent disconnection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 11, and 16 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art fails to teach or fairly obviate, in combination with the other elements recited, outputting the trigger signal when remaining life of the backup power supply unit is less than a threshold value required for the flush operation or the specific details related to the internal structure of the electronic device as described in Claim 10.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Gary W Cygiel whose telephone number is (571)270-1170. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 11am-3pm PST.
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, Arpan P Savla can be reached at (571) 272-1077. 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.
/Gary W. Cygiel/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2137
Prosecution Insights