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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s Application filed on 4/07/2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending for this examination.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d).
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/08/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Objections - Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Examiner notes that there are multiple instances (for example, Paragraphs 0024, 0031, 0042, 0043, 0087, and 0107) in Applicant’s Specification where the phrases “decompress data as and when…” and “compress data as and when…”, which seems to be an incomplete phrases. More specifically, the “decompress data as” and “compress data as” implies that the data is being decompressed / compressed into something (i.e. a specific format or something else), which is not expressly written out. If this was just left as decompressing data and compressing data, then the phrases would be fine, but with the “as” there, it is unknown if Applicants are implying an extra step or if this was a typo. Examiner requests clarification and correction if needed.
Appropriate correction is required.
Objections - Abstract
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because:
In lines 5-6, “decoding unit that is operable to (at least) decompress data as and when…” seems to be an incomplete phrase. More specifically, this limitation with the “decompress data as” is implying that the data is being decompressed into something (i.e. a specific format or something else), which is not expressly written out. If this was just left as decompressing data, then the phrase would be fine, but with the “as” there, it is unknown if Applicants are implying an extra step or if this was a typo. Examiner requests clarification and correction if needed.
Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3-4, 10-11, 13-14, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, lines 15-16, “configured to decompress data as and when…” seems to be an incomplete phrase. More specifically, this limitation with the “decompress data as” is implying that the data is being decompressed into something (i.e. a specific format or something else), which is not expressly written out. If this was just left as decompressing data, then the phrase would be fine, but with the “as” there, it is unknown if Applicants are implying an extra step or if this was a typo. Examiner requests clarification and correction if needed.
In claim 3, line 5, “decompress input frame data as and when…” and line 6, “compress output frame data as and when” seems to be an incomplete phrases. More specifically, these limitations with the “decompress input frame data as” and “compress output frame data as” is implying that the data is being decompressed / compressed into something (i.e. a specific format or something else), which is not expressly written out. If this was just left as decompressing input frame data and compressing output frame data, then the phrases would be fine, but with the “as” there, it is unknown if Applicants are implying an extra step or if this was a typo. Examiner requests clarification and correction if needed.
In claim 4, lines 6-7, “decompress such reference frame data as and when…” seems to be an incomplete phrase. More specifically, this limitation with the “decompress such reference frame data as” is implying that the data is being decompressed into something (i.e. a specific format or something else), which is not expressly written out. If this was just left as decompressing such reference frame data, then the phrase would be fine, but with the “as” there, it is unknown if Applicants are implying an extra step or if this was a typo. Examiner requests clarification and correction if needed.
In claim 10, lines 19-20, “configured to decompress data as and when…” seems to be an incomplete phrase. More specifically, this limitation with the “decompress data as” is implying that the data is being decompressed into something (i.e. a specific format or something else), which is not expressly written out. If this was just left as decompressing data, then the phrase would be fine, but with the “as” there, it is unknown if Applicants are implying an extra step or if this was a typo. Examiner requests clarification and correction if needed.
In claim 11, lines 15-16, “configured to decompress data as and when…” seems to be an incomplete phrase. More specifically, this limitation with the “decompress data as” is implying that the data is being decompressed into something (i.e. a specific format or something else), which is not expressly written out. If this was just left as decompressing data, then the phrase would be fine, but with the “as” there, it is unknown if Applicants are implying an extra step or if this was a typo. Examiner requests clarification and correction if needed.
In claim 13, line 5, “decompress input frame data as and when…” and line 6, “compress output frame data as and when” seems to be an incomplete phrases. More specifically, these limitations with the “decompress input frame data as” and “compress output frame data as” is implying that the data is being decompressed / compressed into something (i.e. a specific format or something else), which is not expressly written out. If this was just left as decompressing input frame data and compressing output frame data, then the phrases would be fine, but with the “as” there, it is unknown if Applicants are implying an extra step or if this was a typo. Examiner requests clarification and correction if needed.
In claim 14, lines 6-7, “decompress such reference frame data as and when…” seems to be an incomplete phrase. More specifically, this limitation with the “decompress such reference frame data as” is implying that the data is being decompressed into something (i.e. a specific format or something else), which is not expressly written out. If this was just left as decompressing such reference frame data, then the phrase would be fine, but with the “as” there, it is unknown if Applicants are implying an extra step or if this was a typo. Examiner requests clarification and correction if needed.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim 20 is not limited to tangible embodiments. In view of Applicant’s disclosure, specification Pages 27-28, definitions and examples are provided for “computer software carrier”, “computer program product”, and “computer readable medium”. However, Examiner points out that claim 20 specifically uses the term “computer readable storage medium”, which is not a specific term described in Applicant’s specification. As such, this term can be interpreted to not be limited to tangible embodiments and include intangible embodiments (e.g. carrier signals / signals per se, program per se, etc.). As such, claim 20 would not be limited to statutory subject matter and are therefore non-statutory. Examiner suggests amending the “computer readable storage medium” of claim 20 to read as --non-transitory computer readable storage medium-- or to amend it to read as --computer readable medium-- which has examples already provided in Applicant’s Specification.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are deemed to be allowable subject matter.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Prior art teaches systems and methods for decoding and decompressing data from memory back to the processor such that the processor receives uncompressed data, however, the prior art does not fairly teach or suggest, individually or in combination, a system and method implemented on a video processor having a memory interface managing memory access requests and requestor unit issuing memory transaction requests to the memory interface, where the requestor unit comprises a memory access circuit receiving memory access requests and issuing memory transaction requests to the memory interface, and respective decoding unit positioned between the memory access circuit and the memory interface that is configured to decompress data when it is read in the requestor unit and provide an uncompressed view (original data / raw data without space saving algorithms applied to the data) to the memory access circuit as claimed. Examiner finds prior arts that teach decompression of data in video processing systems such as Satpathy et al. (US 9,564,917) that teaches a system on a chip comprising multiple processors including a processor with multiple cores that can do image processing and video compression / decompression where compressed data is decompressed by a data decoder, however Examiner finds that prior art does not specifically teach this arrangement of elements in implementing decompressing of data by a respective decoding unit positioned between the memory access circuit and memory interface such that data is decompressed by the decoder and provided as an uncompressed view of data to a memory access circuit as claimed. The prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious the above recited combination.
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).
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Satpathy et al. (US 9,564,917) teaches a system on a chip comprising multiple processors including a processor with multiple cores that can do image processing and video compression / decompression where compressed data is decompressed by a data decoder.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL SUN whose telephone number is (571)270-1724. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4pm EST.
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, Jyoti Mehta can be reached on 571-270-3995. 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.
/MICHAEL SUN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2183
Prosecution Insights