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 .
Double Patenting (Non-Statutory)
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Double patenting between App. 19/031,533 and U.S. Patent No. 11,158,023 B2
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7, 9, and 11-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,158,023 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the methods steps of the current application with those of U.S. Patent No. 11,158,023 B2 as the claims of the current application are almost identical to those of the issued patent.
Application 19/031,533
U.S. Patent No. 11,158,023 B2
Claim 1
Claim 1
Claim 2
Claim 3
Claim 4
Claim 2
Claim 5
Claim 3
Claim 6
Claim 4
Claim 7
Claim 5
Claim 8
Claim 6
Claim 9
Claim 7
Claim 10
Claim 9
Claim 11
Claim 11
Claim 12
Claim 12
Claim 13
Claim 13
Claim 14
Claim 14
Claim 15
Claim 15
Claim 16
Claim 16
Claim 17
Claim 17
Claim 18
Claim 19
Claim 19
Claim 20
Claim 20
Claim 18
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are objected to, but would be allowable if the non-statutory double patenting rejections listed above are resolved. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
In regards to independent claim 1, none of the cited prior art alone or in combination provides motivation to teach “and a tiling engine configured to generate an untransformed display list for each tile of the plurality of tiles based on transformed position data, each of the untransformed display lists comprising information identifying each untransformed primitive block that comprises at least one untransformed primitive that, when transformed, at least partially falls within the respective tile, rasterization logic comprising: fetch logic configured to fetch, for each untransformed primitive block identified in an untransformed display list for a tile, the untransformed geometry data for each of the untransformed primitives in that untransformed primitive block ;second transformation logic configured to transform the fetched untransformed geometry data to generate transformed geometry data; a cache to store the transformed geometry data; and logic configured to render the untransformed primitives from the transformed geometry data”dehn/16 184/16 184-response-002.docx, as the references only describe systems for tile based architecture in which memory is allocated for processing a set of primitives in addition to allocation of primitives with respect to spatial positions, however the references fail to explicitly disclose the transformation process as described above to render untransformed primitives from transformed data geometry, in conjunction with the remaining limitations of claim 1 for the purpose of implementing a primitive block generator.
In regards to independent claim 18, this claim recites limitations similar in scope to that of claim 1, and thus is objected to under the same rationale as provided above.
In regards to dependent claims 2-17, 19, and 20, these claims depend from claims 1 and 18 above, and thus are objected to under the same rationale as provided above.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 2023/0401667 A1– Reference is of particular relevance to the application as it discloses a method of operating a graphics processor to process sets of geometry to generate an output, where each set of geometry is associated with lower level geometry including vertex data to be used when rendering the geometry as well a separate higher level representation of the geometry.
US 2014/0071150 A1– Reference is of particular relevance to the application as it discloses a method and system for generating and shading a computer graphics image in a tile-based computer graphics system.
US 2022/0392154 A1– Reference is of particular relevance to the application as it discloses 3-D rendering systems include a rasterization section that can fetch untransformed geometry, transform geometry and cache data for transformed geometry in a memory.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TERRELL M ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-3526. The examiner can normally be reached 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, KENT CHANG can be reached at 571-272-7667. 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.
/TERRELL M ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2614
Prosecution Insights