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 § 103
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.
1. Claims 1, 6, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chilimbi et al. (US 2004/0103408), “Chilimbi”, in view of Heirman et al. (US 2019/0095333), “Heirman”.
2. As per claim 1, Chilimbi discloses classifying write requests [prefetch determination requests, abstract] for different streams into write-ahead [Hot Data Stream 760, figure 13] and write-behind [non-Hot Data Stream 760, figure 13] according to order constraints [Data Reference Sequence, figure 13]; and recording the streams to meet the order constraints [prefetching the hot data stream, abstract].
Chilimbi does not disclose expressly (making the write-ahead) a double write (for the streams).
Heirman discloses a double data rate (DDR) prefetch (“write-ahead”) in paragraph 55.
Chilimbi and Heirman are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of prefetching.
Before the effective filing date of the application, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Chilimbi by including the DDR prefetch as taught by Heirman in paragraph 55.
The motivation for doing so would have been to provide system flexibility as expressly taught by Heirman in paragraph 55.
3. As per claims 6 and 10, the examiner directs the applicant’s attention to claim rejection above.
Conclusion
A. Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5 and 7-9 are objected to.
The closest prior art of record, “Chilimbi” discloses prefetching hot data stream in the abstract.
The primary reasons for allowance of claims 2 and 7 in the instant application is the combination with the inclusion in these claims that “wherein the streams are classified into a leader stream and a follower stream according to the order constraints, and the order constraints include a constraint condition within the leader stream, and a constraint condition between the leader stream and the follower stream”. The prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious the above recited combination.
The primary reasons for allowance of claim 5 in the instant application is the combination with the inclusion in these claims that “wherein the recording of the streams comprises: verifying the order constraints for the streams from the double write; and recording each of the streams to meet the order constraints”. The prior art of record neither anticipates nor renders obvious the above recited combination.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's response must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(b) and § 707.07(a) of the MPEP.
B. Claims Rejected
Claims 1, 6, and 10 are rejected.
C. Direction for Future Remarks
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAE UN YU whose telephone number is (571)272-1133. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Tim Vo can be reached on (571)272-3642. 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.
/JAE U YU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2138
Prosecution Insights