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 .
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 11/21/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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 1-5, 7-13, 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101
because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly
more.
When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, it must be
determined whether the claim is directed to one of the four statutory categories of
invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter (Step 1). If the
claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, the second step in the analysis is
to determine whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception (Step 2A). The Step 2A
analysis is broken into two prongs. In the first prong (Step 2A, Prong 1), it is determined
whether or not the claims recite a judicial exception (e.g., mathematical concepts,
mental processes, certain methods of organizing human activity). If it is determined in
Step 2A, Prong 1 that the claims recite a judicial exception, the analysis proceeds to the
second prong (Step 2A, Prong 2), where it is determined whether or not the claims
integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. If it is determined at step 2A,
Prong 2 that the claims do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical
application, the analysis proceeds to determining whether the claim is a patent-eligible
application of the exception (Step 2B). If an abstract idea is present in the claim, any
element or combination of elements in the claim must be sufficient to ensure that the
claim integrates the judicial exception into a practical application, or else amounts to
significantly more than the abstract idea itself. Applicant is advised to consult the 2019
PEG for more details of the analysis.
Step 1
According to the first part of the analysis, in the instant case, claims 1-5, 7-13, 15-18, 19, 20 are directed to a method, system and medium of quantum computing. Thus, each of the claims falls within one of the four statutory categories (i.e. process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter). Step 2A,
Step 2A, Prong 1
Following the determination of whether or not the claims fall within one of the four
categories (Step 1), it must be determined if the claims recite a judicial exception (e.g.
mathematical concepts, mental processes, certain methods of organizing human
activity) (Step 2A, Prong 1). In this case, the claims are determined to recite a judicial
exception as explained below.
Regarding Claims 1, 19 and 20 these claims recite
receiving, by a classical computing system comprising one or more processor devices, at least one quantum computing request; obtaining, by the classical computing system, quantum operation data from at least one quantum computing device; modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the plurality of quantum computing devices, wherein modifying the at least one quantum computing request further comprises: identifying, by the classical computing system, quantum circuit overlap between a quantum circuit of the at least one quantum computing request and a current quantum circuit of a first quantum computing device of the plurality of quantum computing devices; modifying, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data and the identified quantum circuit overlap to minimize circuit manipulation by the first quantum computing device to execute the at least one quantum computing request; and sending, by the classical computing system, the modified at least one quantum computing request to the first quantum computing device.
The claims recite a mental process. As set forth in MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)(C), “Claims can recite a mental process even if they are claimed as being performed on a computer”. They disclosed as a human user performing these functions, simply using a user computing device as a tool such as at specification [0018] and Fig. 1. Thus, the claim recites abstract ideas.
Step 2A, Prong 2
Following the determination that the claims recite a judicial exception, it must be
determined if the claims recite additional elements that integrate the exception into a
practical application of the exception (Step 2A, Prong 2). In this case, after considering
all claim elements individually and as an ordered combination, it is determined that the
claims do not include additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical
application of the exception as explained below.
In Prong Two, a claim is evaluated as a whole to determine whether the recited judicial exception is integrated into a practical application of that exception. A claim is not “directed to” a judicial exception, and thus is patent eligible, if the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application of that exception. A claim that integrates a judicial exception into a practical application will apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the judicial exception. MPEP 2106.04(d). The claims recite an abstract idea and further the claims as a whole does not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception. A claim that integrates a judicial exception into a practical application will apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the judicial exception. MPEP 2106.04(d).
Regarding Claims 1, 19 and 20 these claims
This limitation is understood to be generic computer equipment and mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea - which is not indicative of integration into a practical application, see MPEP 2106.05(f)) and mere Instructions to Apply an Exception.
Without the additional element(s) amount to merely the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) which is not indicative of integration into a practical application, see MPEP 2106.05(f))
Step 2B
Based on the determination in Step 2A of the analysis that the claims are
directed to a judicial exception, it must be determined if the claims contain any element
or combination of elements sufficient to ensure that the claim amounts to significantly
more than the judicial exception (Step 2B). In this case, after considering all claim
elements individually and as an ordered combination, it is determined that the claims do
not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than
the judicial exception for the same reasons given above in the Step 2A, Prong 2
analysis. Furthermore, each additional element identified above as being insignificant
extra-solution activity is also well-known, routine, conventional as described below.
Claims 1, 19 and 20: The claims do not include additional elements, alone or in combination, that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements amount to no more than generic computing components and field of use/technological environment which do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The underlying concept merely receives information, analyzes it, and store the results of the analysis – this concept is not meaningfully different than concepts found by the courts to be abstract (see Electric Power Group, collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis; see Cybersource, obtaining and comparing intangible data; see Digitech, organizing information through mathematical correlations; see Grams, diagnosing an abnormal condition by performing clinical tests and thinking about the results; see Cyberfone, using categories to organize store and transmit information; see Smartgene, comparing new and stored information and using rules to identify options). The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements when considered both individually and as a combination do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. For example, claim 1 recites modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the at least one quantum computing device, wherein modifying the at least one quantum computing request further comprises: identifying, by the classical computing system, quantum circuit overlap between a quantum circuit of the at least one quantum computing request and a current quantum circuit of a first quantum computing device of the plurality of quantum computing devices; modifying, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data and the identified quantum circuit overlap to minimize circuit manipulation by the first quantum computing device to execute the at least one quantum computing request; and sending, by the classical computing system, the modified at least one quantum computing request to the first quantum computing device. These elements are recited at a high level of generality and are well-understood, routine, and conventional activities in the computer art. Generic computers performing generic computer functions, without an inventive concept, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Looking at the elements as a combination does not add anything more than the elements analyzed individually. Therefore, these claims do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Step 2A/2B Prong 2 Dependent Claims
Regarding to claim 2-4
Claim 2-4 merely recite other additional elements that define the data in the quantum computing request which performing generic functions that when looking at the elements as a combination does not add anything more than the elements analyzed individually. Therefore, these claims also do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. These claims are not patent eligible.
Regarding to claim 5
Claim 5 merely recite other additional elements that define the quantum operation data in the quantum computing request which performing generic functions that when looking at the elements as a combination does not add anything more than the elements analyzed individually. Therefore, these claims also do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. These claims are not patent eligible.
Regarding to claim 7-13, 15-17
Claim 7-13, 15-17 merely recite other additional elements that define modify the quantum computing request at high level which performing generic functions that when looking at the elements as a combination does not add anything more than the elements analyzed individually. Therefore, these claims also do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. These claims are not patent eligible.
Regarding to claim 18
Claim 18 merely recite other additional elements that define modify the quantum computing request and send the request to quantum computers which performing generic functions that when looking at the elements as a combination does not add anything more than the elements analyzed individually. Therefore, these claims also do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself. These claims are not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-12, 15-17, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leigh et al. (Leigh) US 2020/0074346 in view of Cherek et al. (Cherek) US 2022/0012616
In regard to claim 1, Leigh disclose A method, ([0012]-[0016] method) comprising:
receiving, by a classical computing system comprising one or more processor devices, at least one quantum computing request; (Fig. 1, [0012]-[0019] [0021]-[0036] [0040] receiving, quantum computing request from client device (the computer system include client devices and various servers) to analysis server 140, the system has multiple processor devices)
obtaining, by the classical computing system, quantum operation data from a plurality of quantum computing devices; (Fig. 1, [0028]-[0036] receive quantum hardware information by 130 from the quantum computer system 110A…110N)
modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the plurality of quantum computing devices, ([0021]-[0023] [0029]-[0040] provide optimization recommendation for the implantation of algorithm of the quantum computing request by generating a second file by modifying the first file based on the quantum hardware information provided) wherein modifying the at least one quantum computing request further comprises:
modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data, to execute the at least one quantum computing request; ([0015]-[0023] [0028]-[0040] [0048]-[0053] [0058]-[0060] receive quantum hardware information by 130 from the quantum computer system, such as qubit capacities, number of qubits can be used, etc. and generate recommendation based on the received quantum hardware information, edit the first file to generate the second file based on the recommendations, and to execute the second file) and
sending, by the classical computing system, the modified at least one quantum computing request to the first quantum computing device. ([0032]-[0036] send the quantum computing request (the second file) to a quantum computer system by the server 160 for execution)
But Leigh fail to explicitly disclose “identifying, by the classical computing system, quantum circuit overlap between a quantum circuit of the at least one quantum computing request and a current quantum circuit of a first quantum computing device of the plurality of quantum computing devices; modify, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data and the identified quantum circuit overlap to minimize circuit manipulation by the first one quantum computing device;”
Cherek disclose identifying, by the classical computing system, quantum circuit overlap between a quantum circuit of the at least one quantum computing request and a current quantum circuit of a first quantum computing device of the plurality of quantum computing devices; ([0009]-[0027] identifying overlapping quantum circuits between the quantum computers by the computer system.)
modify, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data and the identified quantum circuit overlap to minimize circuit manipulation by the first one quantum computing device; ([0007]-[0027] updating the computing request based on the identified operation constraint and quantum circuit overlap requirement with optimal packing would run customer circuits simultaneously and therefore reduce the qubits used by the quantum computer. Note: please further define circuit manipulation and the quantum computing request to help move forward the prosecution, since they are very broad, call to discuss if necessary)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made to incorporate Cherek’s quantum circuit packing into Leigh’s invention as they are related to the same field endeavor of quantum computing. The motivation to combine these arts, as proposed above, at least because Cherek’s quantum circuit packing based on circuit overlap would help to provide more control mechanism to execute the quantum computing into Leigh’s system. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made that providing more control mechanism to execute the quantum computing based on circuit overlap would increase efficiency of the quantum computing.
In regard to claim 2, Leigh and Cherek disclose The method of claim 1, the rejection is incorporated herein.
Leigh disclose wherein receiving, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request further comprises: receiving, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request, the at least one quantum computing request comprising a Quantum Assembly (QASM) file. ([0021]-[0036] the file received in QASM file)
In regard to claim 3, Leigh and Cherek disclose The method of claim 1, the rejection is incorporated herein.
Leigh disclose wherein receiving, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request further comprises: receiving, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request, the at least one quantum computing request comprising a Quantum Assembly (QASM) file, the QASM file comprising qubit data, qubit manipulation data, and gate manipulation data. ([0021]-[0036] [0052] [0091]-[0092] the file received in QASM file, the file include qubit data, qubit manipulation data, and gate manipulation data, etc.)
In regard to claim 4, Leigh and Cherek disclose The method of claim 1, the rejection is incorporated herein.
Leigh disclose wherein receiving, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request further comprises: receiving, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request, the at least one quantum computing request comprising a plurality of quantum computing requests. ([0030]-[0040] [0044]-[0052] [0091]-[0092] receiving files, first file, user metadata related to the first file etc., for multiple quantum computers, for example)
In regard to claim 5, Leigh and Cherek disclose The method of claim 1, the rejection is incorporated herein.
Leigh disclose wherein obtaining, by the classical computing system, the quantum operation data from the plurality of quantum computing devices further comprises: obtaining, by the classical computing system, the quantum operation data from the plurality of quantum computing devices, the quantum operation data comprising at least one of processing speed, temperature, noise, error rate, hardware load, or resource utilization. ([0015]-[0020] [0028]-[0036] receive quantum hardware information by 130 from the quantum computer system, such as temperature, qubit capacities, number of qubits can be used, etc.)
In regard to claim 7, Leigh and Cherek disclose The method of claim 1, the rejection is incorporated herein.
Leigh disclose wherein modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the plurality of quantum computing devices further comprises: modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the plurality of quantum computing devices, the quantum operation data comprising current quantum operation data. ([0015]-[0023] [0028]-[0036] [0058]-[0064] provide optimization recommendation for the implantation of algorithm of the quantum computing request by generating a second file by modifying the first file based on the quantum hardware information provided, the quantum hardware information include current data, such as such as current temperature, current coherence time, qubit capacities, number of qubits can be used, etc.)
In regard to claim 8, Leigh and Cherek disclose The method of claim 1, the rejection is incorporated herein.
Leigh disclose wherein modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the plurality of quantum computing devices further comprises: modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the plurality of quantum computing devices, the quantum operation data comprising historical quantum operation data. ([0015]-[0023] [0028]-[0039] [0049][0058]-[0064] provide optimization recommendation for the implantation of algorithm of the quantum computing request by generating a second file by modifying the first file based on the quantum hardware information provided, the quantum hardware information include aggregated hardware information data, and the quantum hardware information is transmitted periodically)
In regard to claim 9, Leigh and Cherek disclose The method of claim 1, the rejection is incorporated herein.
Leigh disclose wherein modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the plurality of quantum computing devices further comprises: modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the plurality of quantum computing devices, the quantum operation data comprising at least one of processing speed, temperature, noise, error rate, hardware load, or resource utilization. ([0015]-[0023] [0028]-[0039] [0048]-[0053] [0058]-[0064] receive quantum hardware information by 130 from the quantum computer system, such as temperature, qubit capacities, number of qubits can be used, etc. and generate recommendation based on the received quantum hardware information, edit the first file to generate the second file based on the recommendations)
In regard to claim 10, Leigh and Cherek disclose The method of claim 1, the rejection is incorporated herein.
Leigh disclose wherein modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the plurality of quantum computing devices further comprises: modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request, the quantum operation data comprising qubit availability. ([0015]-[0023] [0028]-[0039] [0048]-[0053] [0058]-[0060] receive quantum hardware information by 130 from the quantum computer system, such as qubit capacities, number of qubits can be used, etc. and generate recommendation based on the received quantum hardware information, edit the first file to generate the second file based on the recommendations)
In regard to claim 11, Leigh and Cherek disclose The method of claim 1, the rejection is incorporated herein.
Leigh disclose wherein modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the plurality of quantum computing devices further comprises: modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to avoid conflicts based on current operation of the plurality of quantum computing devices. ([0015]-[0023] [0028]-[0039] [0043]-[0053] [0058]-[0060] “identify one or more destination quantum computer systems that are capable of implementing an algorithm (e.g., by determining whether a qubit capacity of a respective quantum computer system is equal to or greater than the qubit size required to implement the algorithm” to edit the first file to generate the second file based on the recommendations)
In regard to claim 12, Leigh and Cherek disclose The method of claim 1, the rejection is incorporated herein.
Leigh disclose wherein receiving, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request further comprises: receiving, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request, the at least one quantum computing request comprising a plurality of quantum computing requests; ([0030]-[0040] [0044]-[0052] [0091]-[0092] receiving files, first file, user metadata related to the first file etc., for example) and wherein modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the plurality of quantum computing devices further comprises: modifying, by the classical computing system, the plurality of quantum computing requests based on the quantum operation data to avoid conflicts between the plurality of quantum computing requests. ([0015]-[0023] [0028]-[0039] [0043]-[0053] [0058]-[0060] “identify one or more destination quantum computer systems that are capable of implementing an algorithm (e.g., by determining whether a qubit capacity of a respective quantum computer system is equal to or greater than the qubit size required to implement the algorithm” to edit the first file to generate the second file based on the recommendations for the multiple destination quantum computers)
In regard to claim 15, Leigh and Cherek disclose The method of claim 1, the rejection is incorporated herein.
Leigh disclose wherein receiving, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request further comprises: receiving, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request, the at least one quantum computing request comprising a plurality of quantum computing requests; ([0030]-[0040] [0044]-[0052] [0091]-[0092] receiving files, first file, user metadata related to the first file etc., for multiple quantum computers, for example)
and wherein modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data, to execute the at least one quantum computing request comprises: modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request to optimize circuit manipulation between the plurality of quantum computing requests. ([0015]-[0023] [0028]-[0040] [0041]-[0060] receive quantum hardware information by 130 from the quantum computer system, such as qubit capacities, number of qubits can be used, etc. and generate recommendations based on the received quantum hardware information, edit the first file and second file, etc. to generate recommendations for the quantum computer system to execute. Note: please further define the requests to help move forward the prosecution.)
But Leigh fail to explicitly disclose “modifying, the data to minimize circuit manipulation by the plurality of quantum computing devices comprises: modifying, the data to minimize circuit manipulation”
Cherek disclose modifying, the data to minimize circuit manipulation by the plurality of quantum computing devices comprises: modifying, the data to minimize circuit manipulation ([0007]-[0027] updating the computing request based on the identified operation constraint and quantum circuit overlap requirement with optimal packing would run customer circuits simultaneously and therefore reduce the qubits used by the quantum computer.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made to incorporate Cherek’s quantum circuit packing into Leigh’s invention as they are related to the same field endeavor of quantum computing. The motivation to combine these arts, as proposed above, at least because Cherek’s quantum circuit packing based on circuit overlap would help to provide more control mechanism to execute the quantum computing into Leigh’s system. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made that providing more control mechanism to execute the quantum computing based on circuit overlap would increase efficiency of the quantum computing.
In regard to claim 16, Leigh and Cherek disclose The method of claim 1, the rejection is incorporated herein.
Leigh disclose wherein modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the plurality of quantum computing devices further comprises: modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data ([0015]-[0023] [0028]-[0039] [0048]-[0053] [0058]-[0060] receive quantum hardware information by 130 from the quantum computer system, such as qubit capacities, number of qubits can be used, etc. and generate recommendation based on the received quantum hardware information, edit the first file to generate the second file based on the recommendations) to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the plurality of quantum computing devices, optimizing execution of the at least one quantum computing request to maximize speed, maximize accuracy, minimize redundancy, or maximize payload distribution. ([0015]-[0023] [0028]-[0039] [0048]-[0053] [0058]-[0060] the optimization recommendations to optimize the execution of the quantum computing request by editing longest coherence time allowed to implement the algorithm to increase the speed, and maximum error rate allowed to maximize accuracy, etc.)
In regard to claim 17, Leigh and Cherek disclose The method of claim 1, the rejection is incorporated herein.
Leigh disclose wherein receiving, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request further comprises: receiving, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request, the at least one quantum computing request comprising a plurality of quantum computing requests; ([0030]-[0040] [0044]-[0052] [0091]-[0092] receiving files, first file, user metadata related to the first file etc., for multiple quantum computers, for example) and wherein modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the at least one quantum computing device further comprises: modifying, by the classical computing system, the plurality of quantum computing requests to optimize execution of the plurality of quantum computing requests across a plurality of quantum computing devices. ([0015]-[0023] [0028]-[0039] [0048]-[0053] [0058]-[0060] receive quantum hardware information by 130 from the quantum computer system, such as qubit capacities, number of qubits can be used, etc. and generate recommendation based on the received quantum hardware information, edit the first file to generate the second file based on the recommendations to optimize the execution of the quantum computing across the quantum computers 110a-110n.)
In regard to claim 19, claim 19 is a system claim corresponding to the method claim 1 above and, therefore, is rejected for the same reasons set forth in the rejections of claim 1.
In regard to claim 20, claim 20 is a medium claim corresponding to the method claim 1 above and, therefore, is rejected for the same reasons set forth in the rejections of claim 1.
Claims 13, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leigh et al. (Leigh) US 2020/0074346 and Cherek et al. (Cherek) US 2022/0012616
as applied to claim 1, further in view of Iwasaki US 2022/0107786
In regard to claim 13, Leigh and Cherek disclose The method of claim 1, the rejection is incorporated herein.
Leigh disclose wherein receiving, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request further comprises: receiving, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request, the at least one quantum computing request comprising a plurality of quantum computing requests; ([0030]-[0040] [0044]-[0052] [0091]-[0092] receiving files, first file, user metadata related to the first file etc., for multiple quantum computers, for example) and wherein modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the plurality of quantum computing devices further comprises: modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data ([0015]-[0023] [0028]-[0039] [0048]-[0053] [0058]-[0060] receive quantum hardware information by 130 from the quantum computer system, such as qubit capacities, number of qubits can be used, etc. and generate recommendation based on the received quantum hardware information, edit the first file to generate the second file based on the recommendations)
But Leigh and Cherek fail to explicitly disclose “modifying, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to increase parallel execution of the plurality of quantum computing requests.”
Iwasaki disclose modifying, the at least one quantum computing request based on the quantum operation data to increase parallel execution of the plurality of quantum computing requests. ([0199]-[0207] editing the control script to change the execution condition, and degree of parallelism, etc.)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made to incorporate Iwasaki’s programming tool for the quantum computing into Cherek and Leigh’s invention as they are related to the same field endeavor of quantum computing. The motivation to combine these arts, as proposed above, at least because Iwasaki’s modifying the execution condition using programming tool would help to provide more control mechanism to execute the quantum computing into Cherek and Leigh’s system. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made that providing more control mechanism to execute the quantum computing would facilitate modelling based on user’s need and therefore improve user experience using the device.
In regard to claim 18, Leigh and Cherek disclose The method of claim 1, the rejection is incorporated herein.
Leigh disclose wherein receiving, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request further comprises: receiving, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing request, the at least one quantum computing request comprising a plurality of quantum computing requests; ([0030]-[0040] [0044]-[0052] [0091]-[0092] receiving files, first file, user metadata related to the first file etc., for multiple quantum computers, for example) wherein modifying, by the classical computing system, the at least one quantum computing requests based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the at least one quantum computing device further comprises: modifying, by the classical computing system, the plurality of quantum computing requests based on the quantum operation data to optimize execution of the at least one quantum computing request by the at least one quantum computing device; ([0015]-[0023] [0028]-[0039] [0048]-[0053] [0058]-[0060] receive quantum hardware information by 130 from the quantum computer system, such as qubit capacities, number of qubits can be used, etc. and generate recommendation based on the received quantum hardware information, edit the first file to generate the second file based on the recommendations to optimize the execution of the quantum computing algorithm on the quantum computers) and wherein sending, by the classical computing system, the modified plurality of quantum computing requests to the at least one quantum computing device further comprises: ([0032]-[0036] send the quantum computing request (the second file) to a quantum computer system by the server 160 for execution)
But Leigh and Cherek fail to explicitly disclose “sending, by the classical computing system, a first portion of the plurality of modified quantum computing requests to a first quantum computing device and a second portion of the plurality of modified quantum computing requests to a second quantum computing device.”
Iwasaki disclose sending, by the classical computing system, a first portion of the plurality of modified quantum computing requests to a first quantum computing device and a second portion of the plurality of modified quantum computing requests to a second quantum computing device. ([0084]-[0105] [0143]-[0146][0199]-[0207] sending a part of the process to a quantum computer based on a criteria designated by the user and second part to a second quantum computer by dividing the problem, for example)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made to incorporate Iwasaki’s programming tool for the quantum computing into Cherek and Leigh’s invention as they are related to the same field endeavor of quantum computing. The motivation to combine these arts, as proposed above, at least because Iwasaki’s modifying the execution condition using programming tool and sending the script to the quantum computer would help to provide more control mechanism to execute the quantum computing into Cherek and Leigh’s system. Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data of the claimed invention was made that providing more control mechanism to execute the quantum computing would facilitate modelling based on user’s need and therefore improve user experience using the device.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 11/21/2025 with regard to claim 1-20 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Documents PATENT DATE INVENTOR(S) TITLE
US 20210152189 A1 2021-05-20 Murali et al.
INSTRUCTION SCHEDULING FACILITATING MITIGATION OF CROSSTALK IN A QUANTUM COMPUTING SYSTEM
Murali et al. Systems, computer-implemented methods, and computer program products that facilitate instruction scheduling to mitigate quantum gate crosstalk errors and/or qubit decoherence errors in a quantum device based on device characterization data are provided. According to an embodiment, a system can comprise a memory that stores computer executable components and a processor that executes the computer executable components stored in the memory. The computer executable components can comprise an assessment component that obtains device characterization data of a quantum device. The computer executable components can further comprise a scheduler component that generates a quantum gate execution schedule comprising parallel execution and serial execution of quantum gates in the quantum device based on the device characterization data… see abstract.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XUYANG XIA whose telephone number is (571)270-3045. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-4pm.
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, Jennifer Welch can be reached at 571-272-7212. 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.
XUYANG XIA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2143
/XUYANG XIA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2143