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 .
Claims 1-19 and 21 are pending. Claim 20 is cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Regarding 35 U.S.C. 112:
Applicant’s amendments and arguments regarding the rejection of claims 8 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered and are found to be persuasive. The rejections of claims 8 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are withdrawn as the amendments provide necessary clarity for the usage of the alias.
Regarding: Prior Art Rejections:
Applicant’s amendments and arguments regarding the rejection of claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are moot due to new grounds of rejection.
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.
Claims 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 15, 16, 18, 19, and 21 are rejected as being unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Gonciulea et al. US 20220309374 A1 in view of Dadashikelayeh et al. US 20170357539 A1 in view Allen US 11372689 B1.
Gonciulea and Dadashikelayeh are cited in a previous office action.
Regarding claim 1, Gonciulea teaches the invention substantially as claimed including:
A method, comprising:
receiving, by a first quantum computing device from a second quantum computing device, quantum core service (QCS) metadata for a second QCS executing on the second quantum computing device wherein the QCS metadata is indicative of at least one functionality of the second QCS ([0031] driver node 130 may send the appropriate operations to each worker node 140 … each worker node 140 may receive its own set of operations based on the location (e.g., the binary prefix) for each operation; [0032] Driver node 130 may assign or issue each worker node 140 a variable set of dimensions (qubits) and the fixed values for the other dimensions),
configuring the second quantum computing device to forward a service request directed to the second QCS executing on the second quantum computing device to the first quantum computing device (Fig 1 communications path from Client 110 through Service 125 through driver node 130 out to worker nodes 140);
initializing a first QCS of the first quantum computing device using the QCS metadata ([0048] a provisioning service provided by the driver node may to instantiate compute resources (e.g., worker nodes) based on the declarative instantiation plan), wherein the first QCS is configured to execute the at least one functionality of the second QCS ([0048] a provisioning service provided by the driver node may to instantiate compute resources (e.g., worker nodes) based on the declarative instantiation plan; [0050] once the resources are instantiated, the driver node may issue the relevant operations to each worker node based on the location prefix for each operation; [0051] the worker nodes may execute the operations that were issued by the driver node);
receiving, by the first quantum computing device, the service request from the second quantum computing device ([0050] once the resources are instantiated, the driver node may issue the relevant operations to each worker node based on the location prefix for each operation); and
servicing, using the first QCS, the service request ([0051] the worker nodes may execute the operations that were issued by the driver node).
While Gonciulea teaches that quantum computing is simulated on cloud nodes, it does not explicitly teach the service provisioning being performed on quantum computing devices.
However, Dadashikelayeh teaches provisioning services onto quantum computing devices ([0037] The quantum computer may be configured to perform one or more quantum algorithms).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have combined Dadashikelayeh’s configuring of quantum algorithms onto quantum computers with the centralized quantum provisioning system of Gonciulea. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination to provide Gonciulea’s system with the advantage of provisioning distributed quantum services across multiple quantum computers for improved scalability and capability (see Dadashikelayeh [0005] Systems and methods disclosed herein may be able to improve the quality of computing services with much greater capability, flexibility, and affordable costs. Scalable quantum computers disclosed herein may be complementary to digital computers wherein special-purpose computing resources are programmed or configured for certain classes of problems. Users in need of quantum computing services for their specific computing problems can access quantum-computing resources remotely, such as on the cloud).
Gonciulea and Dadashikelayeh do not explicitly teach receiving, by a first quantum computing device from a second quantum computing device, quantum core service (QCS) metadata for a second QCS executing on the second quantum computing device and
configuring the second quantum computing device to forward a service request directed to the second QCS executing on the second quantum computing device to the first quantum computing device.
However, Allen teaches receiving, by a first computing device from a second computing device, core service (QCS) metadata for a second QCS executing on the second computing device (Fig 4 Multi-Cloud Bursting Service deploys cloud nodes according to templates that enable performance of the jobs on the on-site premises; a multi-cloud bursting service, can generate one or more cloud agnostic burst templates for bursting one or more workload environments (e.g., infrastructure resources or nodes, execution environments, jobs or workloads, applications, cloud instances, etc.) on different cloud environments. Each cloud agnostic burst template can define a stack associated with a workload environment and one or more tasks for provisioning one or more cloud resources and deploying the workload environment on the one or more cloud resources. The stack can define or include, without limitation, one or more applications, one or more libraries, one or more services, an operating system, hardware requirements or preferences, and/or data for the workload environment. The stack can be used to generate and/or deploy the workload environment or an image thereof, Col 2 21-36); and
configuring the second computing device to forward a service request directed to the second QCS executing on the second computing device to the first computing device (Fig 4 Cloud Bursting Nodes integrated with onsite nodes means bursted job requests are forwarded to the integrated nodes; These provisioned nodes 412, 414, 416 can then be used to process the jobs or workloads associated with the cloud bursting request 404, Col 20 60-62).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have combined Allen with the system of Gonciulea and Dadashikelayeh. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination to provide Gonciulea and Dadashikelayeh’s system with the advantage of monitoring and managing incoming workload requests for improved task scheduling and system scalability in cloud systems (see Allen Col 1 40-45 However, on-premises network sites may have limited network or resource capacity, and thus may not be able to always handle all workload demands. To avoid service interruptions when an on-premises site is at full capacity, overflow traffic may be directed to a public cloud through cloud bursting).
Regarding claim 6, Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, and Allen teach the method of claim 1.
Gonciulea further teaches selecting the first quantum computing device as QCS manager based on one or more of a functionality of the first quantum computing device, a system load of the first quantum computing device, a geographical location of the first quantum computing device, or an environmental attribute of the first quantum computing device ([0027] service 120 may optimize the configuration of worker nodes 140 based on, for example, available computing resources, quantum operation(s) being executed, etc).
Regarding claim 7, Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, and Allen teach the method of claim 1.
Gonciulea further teaches configuring the second quantum computing device comprises configuring the second QCS executing on the second quantum computing device to forward the service request to the first quantum computing device ([0050] once the resources are instantiated, the driver node may issue the relevant operations to each worker node based on the location prefix for each operation).
Regarding claim 9, Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, and Allen teach the method of claim 1.
Gonciulea further teaches the first QCS and the second QCS comprise one of a qubit registry, a quantum task manager, or a quantum scheduler ([0028] Driver node 130 may compose a declarative instantiation plan; [0031] driver node 130 may send the appropriate operations to each worker node 140 based on the location; [0032] Driver node 130 may assign or issue each worker node 140 a variable set of dimensions (qubits) and the fixed values for the other dimensions. In one embodiment, the fixed values may be the prefix for that node; [0046] worker node 01 may manage both 010 and 011; [0051] worker nodes may communicate with each other to, for example, request a result for a dependency).
Regarding claim 10, it is the quantum computing system of claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected for the same reasons as claim 1.
Gonciulea further teaches a first system memory and a first processor device communicatively coupled to the first system memory ([0074] a computer or computer system, for example, that includes at least one memory).
Regarding claims 15, 16, and 18, they are the quantum computing system of claims 6, 7, and 9 respectively. Therefore, they are rejected for the same reasons as claims 6, 7, and 9 respectively.
Regarding claim 19, it is the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected for the same reasons as claim 1.
Gonciulea further teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon computer-executable instructions ([0074] the particular medium, i.e., the memory in the processing machine, utilized to hold the set of instructions and/or the data used in the invention may take on any of a variety of physical forms or transmissions, for example. Illustratively, the medium may be in the form of paper, paper transparencies, a compact disk, a DVD, an integrated circuit, a hard disk, a floppy disk, an optical disk, a magnetic tape, a RAM, a ROM, a PROM, an EPROM, a wire, a cable, a fiber, a communications channel, a satellite transmission, a memory card, a SIM card, or other remote transmission, as well as any other medium or source of data that may be read by the processors of the invention).
Regarding claim 21, Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, and Allen teach the method of claim 1.
Gonciulea further teaches wherein configuring the second quantum computing device to forward the service request further comprises configuring the second quantum computing device to forward the service request to the first quantum computing device based on a characteristic of the QCS metadata, wherein the characteristic of the QCS metadata comprises an availability of qubits of the second quantum computing device ([0027] service 120 may optimize the configuration of worker nodes 140 based on, for example, available computing resources, quantum operation(s) being executed, etc).
Allen further teaches configuring the second computing device to forward the service request to the first computing device based on a characteristic of the QCS metadata, wherein the characteristic of the QCS metadata comprises an availability of qubits of the second computing device (the trigger can define a threshold amount or a type of resources that should be available or capable of processing the job or workload at the time the job or workload request is submitted or within a specified grace period. If the threshold amount or type of resources available or capable is reached or exceed when the request is submitted or within the specified grace period, the trigger will cause the cloud bursting request 404 to be generated and transmitted to the multi-cloud bursting service 340A, Col 17 66- Col 18 8).
Claims 2 and 11 are rejected as being unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Gonciulea et al. US 20220309374 A1 in view of Dadashikelayeh et al. US 20170357539 A1 Allen US 11372689 B1 in further view of Li et al. US 20180246757 A1.
Li is cited in a previous office action.
Regarding claim 2, Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, and Allen teach the method of claim 1.
Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, and Allen do not explicitly teach causing the second QCS executing on the second quantum computing device to enter an inactive state.
However, Li teaches causing the second QCS executing on the second quantum computing device to enter an inactive state ([0076] After receiving a notification that the VNF module finishes migrating the running service on the second VM to the first VM, the VNFM module disables the second VM and releases an idle resource).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have combined Li’s disabling of unused resources with the centralized quantum service provisioning system of Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, and Allen. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination to provide Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, and Allen’s system with the advantage of increasing resource availability (see Li [0016] after the VNFM module receives a service migration completion notification from the VNF module, releasing, by the VNFM module, the second VM, to avoid a waste of idle resources).
Regarding claim 11, it is the quantum computing system of claim 2. Therefore, it is rejected for the same reasons as claim 2.
Claims 3 and 12 are rejected as being unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Gonciulea et al. US 20220309374 A1 in view of Dadashikelayeh et al. US 20170357539 A1 Allen US 11372689 B1 in view of Li et al. US 20180246757 A1 in further view of DeVilbiss et al. US 9473400 B1.
Devilbiss is cited in a previous office action.
Regarding claim 3, Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, Allen, and Li teach the method of claim 2.
Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, Allen, and Li do not explicitly teach detecting, by the second quantum computing device, a loss of connectivity with the first quantum computing device; and responsive to detecting the loss of connectivity, restarting the second QCS executing on the second quantum computing device.
However, DeVilbiss teaches detecting, by the second quantum computing device, a loss of connectivity with the first quantum computing device (Col 5 lines 53-55 the VNIC client 440 detects a problem with communicating with network 280, the problem notifier 442 can notify the hypervisor 450); and
responsive to detecting the loss of connectivity, restarting the second QCS executing on the second quantum computing device ([Abstract] the VNIC server failover mechanism selects the next VNIC client in the prioritized list as the active VNIC server, and establishes a connection to the VNIC client's CRQ; Col 5 lines 62-67 VNIC server failover mechanism 510 additionally includes a VNIC server selection mechanism 520 and a VNIC server monitor mechanism 530. The VNIC server selection mechanism 520 selects the highest VNIC server on the prioritized VNIC server list 480 when a CRQ is opened by a VNIC client; Examiner notes: losing connection to the first computing device triggers the failover mechanism to use the preferred next server which as claimed would be the second QCS that was made inactive during the transferring of the service. Selecting the failover server as the new active server and re-establishing the connection to utilize the new active server represents a reset).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have combined DeVilbiss’ server failover system with the quantum service provisioning system of Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, Allen, and Li. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination to provide Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, Allen, and Li’s system with the advantage of improving failure recovery and system resilience (see DeVilbiss Col 2 lines 9-15 When the selected VNIC server stops working, the VNIC server failover mechanism selects the next VNIC client in the prioritized list as the active VNIC server, and establishes a connection to the VNIC client's CRQ. In this manner, recovery of a failure in a VNIC server is done in a way that does not require any changes to the VNIC client).
Regarding claim 12, it is the quantum computing system of claim 3. Therefore, it is rejected for the same reasons as claim 3.
Claims 4, 8, 13, and 17 are rejected as being unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Gonciulea et al. US 20220309374 A1 in view of Dadashikelayeh et al. US 20170357539 A1 Allen US 11372689 B1 in further view of Manjunatha et al. US 20190306231 A1.
Manjunatha is cited in a previous office action.
Regarding claim 4, Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, and Allen teach the method of claim 1.
Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, and Allen do not explicitly teach updating a service definition for a quantum service of the second quantum computing device to cause the quantum service to direct the service request to the first quantum computing device.
However, Manjunatha teaches updating a service definition for a quantum service of the second quantum computing device to cause the quantum service to direct the service request to the first quantum computing device ([0071] he IP addresses which were configured on the failed node may be configured on any one of the other two nodes).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have combined Manjunatha’s utilization of a proxy manager on each node and the performing of reassignment of mapping table for service routing to a new node with the centralized quantum provisioning system of Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, and Allen. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination to provide Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, and Allen’s system with the advantage of maintaining and updating service routes to improve resource utilization and resiliency (see Manjuntha [0071] If one of the nodes fail (which may be a total failure or a partial failure, i.e. the node is unhealthy), the IP addresses which were configured on the failed node may be configured on any one of the other two nodes. In this way high availability is achieved. An example of reassigning an IP address, for example in the event of that a node fails, or becomes unhealthy, may comprise utilizing a mapping table associated with a node, as is now discussed with reference to FIG. 6).
Regarding claim 8, Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, and Allen teach the method of claim 1.
Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, and Allen do not explicitly teach updating an alias associated with the second QCS executing on the second quantum computing device to direct service requests to the first quantum computing device.
However, Manjunatha further teaches configuring the second quantum computing device comprises updating an alias associated with the second QCS of the second quantum computing device to direct service requests to the first quantum computing device ([0071] reassigning an IP address, for example in the event of that a node fails, or becomes unhealthy, may comprise utilizing a mapping table associated with a node; Claim 1 reassigning an IP address of the first node to a second node by updating a mapping table associating a virtual router associated with the IP address such that the IP address is associated with the second node).
Regarding claims 13 and 17, they are the quantum computing systems of claims 4 and 8 respectively. Therefore, they are rejected for the same reasons as claims 4 and 8 respectively.
Claims 5 and 14 are rejected as being unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Gonciulea et al. US 20220309374 A1 in view of Dadashikelayeh et al. US 20170357539 A1 Allen US 11372689 B1 in view of Manjunatha et al. US 20190306231 A1 in further view of Anderson US 20220011958 A1.
Anderson is cited in a previous office action.
Regarding claim 5, Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, Allen and Manjunatha teach the method of claim 4.
Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, Allen, and Manjunatha do not explicitly teach
However, Anderson teaches the service definition comprises a Quantum Assembly (QASM) file ([0036] Translator 620 converts the machine-independent instructions of QASM circuit program 144 to instructions 508 that are interpretable by quantum controller 112 (FIG. 5).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have combined Anderson’s usage of QASM for quantum instructions related to mapping with the centralized quantum provisioning system of Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, Allen, and Manjunatha. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination to provide Gonciulea, Dadashikelayeh, Allen, and Manjunatha’s system with the advantage of improving adaptability of the provisioning system by utilizing a widely adopted quantum language (see Anderson [0035] QML circuit program 148 results from transpiling QASM circuit program 144. QASM circuit program 144 defines logical quantum circuits in an assembly language that is independent of any specific quantum technology (e.g., superconductors vs. cold atoms)).
Regarding claim 14, it is the quantum computing system of claim 5. Therefore, it is rejected for the same reasons as claim 5.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to HARRISON LI whose telephone number is (703) 756-1469. The
examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:30pm ET.
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, Aimee Li can be reached on (571) 272-4169. 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.
/H.L./
Examiner, Art Unit 2195
/Aimee Li/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2195
Prosecution Insights