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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
The subject matter of claim 35 is disclosed in steps (d) - (f) of claim 31 (upon which claim 35 depends on).
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Reasons for Allowance
Claims 21-34 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Hu et al. US Patent Appl. Pub. No. 2008/0201591 (reference cited in Information Disclosure Statement, filed 01/14/2025) teaches monitoring performance counters in the CPU in order to predict the processor utilization of a next time interval based on the utilization of the current time interval, and scaling the CPU’s frequency and supply voltage up or down based on the predicted utilization (Abstract, FIG. 2, paragraph 0026).
Gendler, US Patent Appl. Pub. No. 2016/0231798 teaches a power management unit (PMU) requesting and receiving telemetry data from a first core, and determining the operating voltage and clock frequency of other cores based on the received telemetry data (Abstract, paragraph 0127, FIG. 17, paragraph 0140).
Bolan et al., US Patent Appl. Pub. No. 2008/0222435 teaches power management module dynamically apportioning the net power limit among devices, and communicating the apportioned power limit for each device back to the associated local controller for respective power limit change (Abstract, FIG. 4, paragraphs 0031-0033).
Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art (AAPA) teaches drawbacks associated with frequent and reactive throttling to processor performance level, the lack of sufficient warning when the power limit is breached, and dispensing frequency to the processor based on utilization alone (Specification, Background, page 2, lines 1-13).
Regarding claims 21, 26 and 31, none of the prior art and the AAPA disclose or suggest upon determining change in the utilization or change in power for the one or more PUs, determining a new target quantified power expenditure for the one or more PUs based at least in part on the determined change and on at least one of a platform power limit and an energy-performance preference, selecting a new operating frequency for the one or more PUs that satisfies the new target quantified power in accordance with a power relating frequency, utilization, and power for the one or more PUs, applying the new operating frequency to the one or more PUs until a next frequency-update cycle, and replicating such functionality for at least one other of the one or more PUs independently of one another, in combination with the remaining claim elements.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEFAN STOYNOV whose telephone number is (571)272-4236. The examiner can normally be reached 8AM - 4:30PM.
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.
/STEFAN STOYNOV/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2175
Prosecution Insights