DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This non-final office action responsive to the RCE filed on 04/10/2025.
Claims 1-27 are pending.
Response to Amendment
Applicant has amended independent claims 1, 21-23 and dependent claim 9-10 to include new/old limitations in a form not previously presented necessitating new search and considerations. New claims 24-27 have been added by the Applicant.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. - An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Use of the word "means" (or “step for") in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112 (f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112 sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim elements in this application that use the word “means” are presumed to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112 (f) except as otherwise indicated in an office action. Similarly, claim elements that do not use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed not to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an office action.
Claims 22 is presumed to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because these claims use the “means for” language.
Since claim limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph, claim 22 is interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification (as recognized by one of ordinary skills in art) for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), sixth paragraph limitation:
means for storing information (published application [0018] [0047] [0049] fig. 1 102 116 i.e. storage device, database)
means for processing : (published Application [0046] fig. 1 104 i.e. CPU, core, SMP, MPP)
allocated using a computational resource manager (fig. 1 120 [0054])
If applicant wishes to provide further explanation or dispute the examiner’s interpretation of the corresponding structure, applicant must identify the corresponding structure with reference to the specification by page and line number, and to the drawing, if any, by reference characters in response to this Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claim 1, 21-27 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
receiving ..., as part of satisfying the first request in claims 1, 21-23.
request remains pending while the additional quantity of computational resources is received in claim 24-26.
additional quantity of computations resources is provided … incremental fulfillment of the first request in claim 27.
Applicant indicated support for in paragraph [0008]-[0012], [0019]-[0020], [0023]-[0024], [0067]-[0071] and [0087]-[0090] of the specification. No where the cited portion in the specification specifically describes that additional quantity of computational resources from the computational resource manager “as part of satisfying the first request”. Absence of second request before allocation of additional quantity in the description doesn’t necessarily points to the fact that additional quantity computational resources as part of satisfying the first request e.g. it could be due to failure /pause of already allocated resources i.e. one of the resources among the second quantity of resource. As for claim 24-26, cited paragraph doesn’t specifically teach first request is pending or waiting while the additional quantity of computational resources. As for claim 27, while description does recite “incremental fulfillment”. Cited paragraph doesn’t specifically teach incremental fulfillment of the first request (i.e. incremental fulfillment could be due to other possible reasons like failure / stopping / pausing of allocated resources).
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 1-4, 15-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu et al. (US 2018/0165129 A1, hereafter Chu) in view of Kamboj et al. (US 10,824,474 , hereafter Kamboj), and further in view of Ahmed et al. (US 2021/0191782 A1, hereafter Ahmed).
Both Chu and Kamboj were cited in the last office action.
As per claim 1, Chu teaches the invention substantially as claimed including a method for performing a distributed computation on a computing system using computational resources dynamically allocated using a computational resource manager ([0004] distributed computing system, computational resources, resource manager, run data processing applications), the method including:
storing information specifying quantities of computational resources associated with respective ones of a plurality of program portions of the program ([0005] storing information specifying target quantities of computational resources associated with respective ones of a number of program portions of the program),
where the program portions perform successive data and each program portion uses computational resources granted by the computational resource manager enabling that program portion to be executed in the computing system ([0005] where each program portion uses computational resources granted by the computational resource manager enabling that program portion to be executed in the computing system [0034] program portions are interrelated, data flow link, one program portion may receive data from or provide data to another program portion i.e. successive);
requesting, in a first request, a first quantity of computational resources associated with a first program portion of the plurality of program portions from the computational resource manager ([0009] some requests in at least one set of requests may correspond to quantities of computational resources of different sizes [0011] computational resources associated with requests [0005] requests for submission to the computations resource manager);
receiving, in response to the first request, a second quantity of computational resources from the computational resource manager, less than the requested first quantity of computational resources ([0041] resource manager 120, receive requests for computational resources, grant only some of the requested container i.e. an integer number of containers less than the total number of containers requested);
performing computation associated with the first portion of the program using the second quantity of computational resources while the first request for the first quantity of computational resources is not fully granted ([0041] resource manager, may grant only some of the requested containers i.e. number of container less than the total number of containers requested, computer program or portion of the program may then execute using the computational resources in the granted container [0050] VDL, even if there is not high enough quantity of computational resources as desired, the computation is still able to start);
while performing the computation associated with the first portion of the program using the second quantity of computational resources ([0041] resource manager, may grant only some of the requested containers i.e. number of container less than the total number of containers requested, [0050] VDL, even if there is not high enough quantity of computational resources as desired, the computation is still able to start [0064] VDL type components, fulfillment ratio, relates to percentage of the target computations resources that have been allocated / granted; fig. 3 386 [0050] VDL, even if there is not high enough quantity of computational resources as desired, the computation is still able to start), receiving an additional quantity of computational resources from the computational resource manager ([0065] granted, partial request, least fulfilled component being more fulfilled than the second least fulfilled component [0067] fig. 3 386-388:y-386 step 386/388 repeatedly run until all of the components are completely fulfilled i.e. additional resource allocation [0012]); and
the additional quantity of computational resources ([0065] granted, partial request, least fulfilled component being more fulfilled than the second least fulfilled component [0067] fig. 3 386-388:y-386 step 386/388 repeatedly run until all of the components are completely fulfilled i.e. additional resource allocation [0012] [0050] VDL, even if there is not high enough quantity of computational resources as desired, the computation is still able to start) while performing computation associated with the first portion using the second quantity of computational resources ( [0050] VDL, even if there is not high enough quantity of computational resources as desired, the computation is still able to start [0067] fig. 3 386-388:y-386 step 386/388 repeatedly run until all of the components are completely fulfilled i.e. additional resource allocation [0012] [0079] repeatedly run to fairly distribute the remaining computational resources to other components [0050] VDL, even if there is not high enough quantity of computational resources as desired, the computation is still able to start).
Chu doesn’t specifically teach program portion performs successive transformations of data, receiving an additional quantity of resources as part of satisfying the first request; performing additional computation associated with the first portion of the program using the additional quantity of computational resources.
Kamboj, however, teaches program portion performs successive transformations of data (col 6 lines 54-67 ETL services, transform, one or more storage, another location, perform various transformation operations, store the transformed data for further processing col 17 lines 5-10 interdependent portions, series of stages / tasks / operations);
receiving an additional quantity of resources (col 15 lines 17-25 automatic resource replacement i.e. without receiving another request / dynamic allocation );
performing additional computation associated with the first portion of the program using the additional quantity of computational resources (col 15 lines 17-25 monitor/check status portion of the program being performed at hosts, perform resource management function such as failure recovery, automatic resource replacement or dynamic allocation e.g. increasing software containers, for the portion; status includes created, running, cancelled, completed, failed; col 15 lines 40-45 execution of the program can continue from the point at which the execution at which the execution context was stored, idempotency is preserved).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to combine the teachings of Chu with the teachings of Kamboj of ETL services performing various transformation operations in series, automatic resource replacement or dynamic allocation of resource e.g. containers from the points where execution context was stored e.g. in case of failure recovery or portion of program status being created, cancelled, failed to improve efficiency and allow program portion performs successive transformations of data, performing additional computation associated with the first portion of the program using the additional quantity of computational resources. The combination of cited analogous prior art would have been obvious because applying the known method of ETL service performing various transformations in series, automatic resource replacement for performing computations to the method of Chu to yield predictable results with reasonable expectation of success and improved efficiency.
Chu and Kamboj doesn’t specifically teach receiving additional quantity of resources as part of satisfying the first request.
Ahmed, however, teaches receiving additional quantity of resources as part of satisfying the first request ([0034] fig. 3 available resources are dynamically being updated as resources are allocated, in the situation, where a range of requested resources are specified, some but not all requested resources were available, as additional resources become available, so those additional resources can be assigned).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to combine the teachings of Chu and Kamboj with the teachings of Ahmed of assigning additional request as additional resource become available in case where some but not all requested resources were available to improve resource efficiency and allow receiving additional quantity of resources as part of satisfying the first request to the method of Chu and Kamboj as in the instant invention.
The combination of cited analogous prior art would have been obvious because applying the known method of assigning resource as it becomes available in a case where less than requested resources were assigned as taught by Ahmed to the method of Chu and Kamboj to yield expected results of assigning additional resource upon availability in response to partial fulfilment of the request with improved efficiency.
As per claim 2, Chu teaches wherein the information specifying quantities of computational resources associated with respective ones of a plurality of program portions of the program includes characteristics of one or more program components associated with the respective ones of the plurality of program portions ([0005] quantities of computational resources associated with respective ones of a number of program portions of the program [0034] program portions, components [0044] each component, associated, constraints, layout type - FDL, VDL).
As per claim 3, Chu teaches wherein the characteristics include a degree of parallelism associated with each of the one or more program components and a quantity of computational resources required for each of the one or more program components to execute ([0044] component, constraints, FDL, VDL, specify constraints related to the number of instances of a component that are to execute parallel, target quantity of resources needed for a component with a particular layout).
As per claim 4, chu teaches wherein the quantity of computational resources associated with a program portion of the plurality of program portions is determined based at least in part on the degree of parallelism associated with each of the one or more program components ([0044] component, constraint, number of instances that are to execute in parallel, target quantity of computational resources needed for a component with a particular layout) and the quantity of computational resources required for each of the one or more program components to execute ([0005] quantities of computational resources associated with program portions [0034] program portions, components [0044] target quantity of computational resources needed for a component).
As per claim 15, Kamboj teaches retaining at least some of the second quantity of computational resources and the additional quantity of computational resources upon completion of execution of the first program portion (col 3 lines 48-55 resource manager, manage, allocation / deallocation of resources, allocated resources have completed the work, cleanup / other operations to ready the computing resources for performing work for other distributed data processing programs col 3 lines 38-44 Computing resources of pool(s) of computing resources may be dedicated to performing work for a single type of distributed data processing program or platform, or may be preconfigured to perform work for multiple different types of data processing platforms. ).
As per claim 16, Kamboj teaches performing computation associated with a second portion of the program using at least some of the retained computational resources (col 3 lines 48-60 allocate resources, completed, work, cleanup, ready the resource for other programs, provide, interface, obtain resource allocations; col 3 lines 3-43 Computing resources of pool(s) of computing resources may be dedicated to performing work for a single type of distributed data processing program or platform, or may be preconfigured to perform work for multiple different types of data processing platforms).
As per claim 17, Chu teaches wherein a third quantity of the received computational resources become unavailable during the performing of computation associated with the first program portion ([0049] if computation fails due to failure of one or more hosts), the method further including requesting the third quantity of computational resources from the computational resource manager ([0041] resource manager, receives requests, computational resources ), receiving the third quantity of computational resources from the computational resource manager ([0041] grants, container, number of units of the computational resources for use by the program), and continuing performing computation associated with the first program portion using the received third quantity of computational resources ([0049] computation, restart, different set of hosts).
As per claim 18, Chu teaches wherein the computational resource manager is opaque regarding a quantity of computational resources available for the computing system (fig. 1 resource manager 120 resource requesting module 122 execution module 112 [0055] generally not the case that resource requesting module 122 has knowledge of the resources available in the execution module 112; lack of knowledge of the resources available in the execution module [0041] resource manager 120, based on an amount of available computations resources).
As per claim 19, Chu teaches storing output data from the first program portion ([0036] generate output data which is stored back in the data source or in the data storage system) and performing computation associated with a second program portion of the plurality of program portions including reading and processing the stored output data ([0034] different interrelated program portions, data processing programs, process data during runtime, data received from the data source; interrelated or interdependent program portions may also be dependent on each other for execution; one program portion may receive data from or provide data to another program portion).
As per claim 20, Kamboj teaches performing computation associated with a second program portion of the plurality of program portions including receiving and processing a stream of output data from the first program portion (col 17 lines 5-10 interdependent portions, series of tasks, operations of a distributed data processing program which may depend upon the results of a previous stage to complete).
Claim 21 recites a system for performing limitations similar to claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected for the same rationale.
Claim 22 recites a system for performing limitations similar to claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected for the same rationale.
Claim 23 recites a non-transitory a computer-readable medium, for performing limitations similar to claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected for the same rationale.
As per claim 24, Chu teaches wherein the first request remains pending while the additional quantity of computational resources is received ([0041] if sufficient computational resources are available, grants i.e. can also determine when the resource is insufficient and therefore not grant; otherwise, based on the available resources, grant only some of the requested containers, or may not grant any of the requested container [0057] insufficient resources for allocating the computational resources required to execute [0058] unable to execute).
As per claim 25, Ahmed teaches wherein the additional quantity of computational resources is received in further response to the first request ([0034] fig. 3 available resources are dynamically being updated as resources are allocated, in the situation, where a range of requested resources are specified, some but not all requested resources were available, as additional resources become available, so those additional resources can be assigned 52).
As per claim 26, Chu teaches wherein the first request remains pending before the additional quantity of computational resources is received ([0041] if sufficient computational resources are available, grants i.e. can also determine when the resource is insufficient and therefore not grant; otherwise, based on the available resources, grant only some of the requested containers, or may not grant any of the requested container [0057] insufficient resources for allocating the computational resources required to execute [0058] unable to execute).
As per claim 27, Ahmed teaches wherein the additional quantity of computational resources is provided as part of incremental fulfillment of the first request ([0034] fig. 3 available resources are dynamically being updated as resources are allocated, in the situation, where a range of requested resources are specified, some but not all requested resources were available, as additional resources become available, so those additional resources can be assigned 52).
Claims 5-7, 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu in view of Kamboj, and further in view of Ahmed, as applied to above claims, and further in view of Bahramshahry et al. (US 2020/0026580 A1, hereafter Bahramshahry).
Bahramshahry was cited in the last office action.
As per claim 5, Chu teaches wherein executing computation associated with the first portion of the program using the second quantity of computational resources ([0041] computer program or portion of the program may then execute using the computational resources in the granted container [0050] VDL, even if there is not high enough quantity of computational resources as desired, the computation is still able to start) includes first program portion ([0008] minimum request for each program, partial request corresponding to less than the complete target quantity of computational resources [0009] minimum request, program portion, partial request corresponding to a single unit of computational resource).
Chu, Kamboj and Ahmed, in combination, do not specifically teach partitioning the program portion into a plurality of sub-portions according to the received second quantity of computational resources.
Bahramshahry, however, teaches partitioning the program portion into a plurality of sub-portions according to the received second quantity of computational resources ([0360] workload, split, extent, criteria, amount of computing resource available via host, optimize use of available computing [0396] schedulers, considered, factors including available compute, overhead increase associated with executing each additional workload-subpart).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to combine the teachings of Chu, Kamboj and Ahmed with the teachings of Bahramshahry of splitting the workload based on available computing resource to improve efficiency and allow partitioning the program portion into a plurality of sub-portions according to the received second quantity of computational resources to the method of Chu, Kamboj and Ahmed as in the instant invention.
The combination of the cited analogous prior art would have been obvious because applying the method of splitting workload based on criteria such as available computing resource amount as taught by Bahramshahry to the method of Chu, Kamboj and Ahmed to yield predictable results with reasonable expectation of success and improved efficiency.
As per claim 6, Chu teaches performing computation associated with the first portion of the program using the second quantity of computational resources ([0041] computer program or portion of the program may then execute using the computational resources in the granted container [0050] VDL, even if there is not high enough quantity of computational resources as desired, the computation is still able to start)
Bahramshahry teaches performing computation for a first sub-portion of the plurality of sub-portions using the second quantity of computational resources while one or more other sub-portions of the plurality of sub-portions wait to perform computation, such that the first sub-portion is the sub-portion among the plurality of sub-portions that is configured to use most or all of the second quantity of computational resources for execution ([0503] workloads p1 and p3 are processing, no available virtual resources within the pool, the other workload must wait [0398] dividing a workload, sub-part of the workload, further dividing a workload sub-part [0399] sub-part, divided, further).
As per claim 7, Chu teaches wherein performing computation associated with the first portion of the program using the additional quantity of computational resources to the received second quantity of computational resources ([0064] VDL type components, fulfillment ratio, relates to percentage of the target computations resources that have been allocated / granted; fig. 3 386 [0050] VDL, even if there is not high enough quantity of computational resources as desired, the computation is still able to start), and receiving an additional quantity of computational resources ([0065] granted, partial request, least fulfilled component being more fulfilled than the second least fulfilled component [0067] fig. 3 386-388:y-386 step 386/388 repeatedly run until all of the components are completely fulfilled i.e. additional resource allocation [0012]).
Bahramshahry teaches remaining claim elements of repartitioning the first program portion into an updated plurality of sub-portions according to the received second quantity of computational resources and additional quantity of computing resources ([0360] workload, split, extent, criteria, amount of computing resource available via host i.e. available resources means the second quantity and additional quantity, optimize use of available computing [0396] factors including available compute [0398] dividing a workload, sub-part of the workload, further dividing a workload sub-part [0399] sub-part, divided, further).
As per claim 11, Bahramshahry teaches wherein partitioning the first program portion into a plurality of sub-portions includes partitioning the first program portion according to characteristics of one or more of program components associated with the first program portion ([0360] workload, split, extent, criteria, amount of computing resource available via host, optimize use of available computing [0395] scheduler, quantity of sub-parts, workload, is divided [0396] factors including available compute, cost of execution, overhead cost associated with splitting a workload, ability to complete workload sub-parts in compliance with SLT or QoS requirements).
As per claim 12, Chu teaches wherein the characteristics of the plurality of program portions include a degree of parallelism associated with each of the one or more program components and a quantity of computational resources required for each of the one or more program components to execute ([0044] component, constraints, FDL, VDL, specify constraints related to the number of instances of a component that are to execute parallel, target quantity of resources needed for a component with a particular layout).
As per claim 13, Bahramshahry teaches wherein a first one or more instances of a first program component are partitioned into the first sub-portion and a second one or more instances of the first program component are partitioned into a second sub-portion ([0357] splitting of workload [0360] workload, split, extent, criteria [0398] dividing a workload, sub-part of the workload, further dividing a workload sub-part [0399] sub-part, divided, further).
As per claim 14, Kamboj teaches the second quantity of computational resources and the additional quantity of computational resources upon completion of execution of the first program portion (col 3 lines 50-60 allocated resources have completed the work for which the resource were allocated, cleanup).
Bahramshahry teaches remaining claim elements of relinquishing resources ([0175] freeing up resources [0207] freeing computing capacity).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-10 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Interpreting the claims in light of the specification and based on the argument present by the Applicant in the remarks filed on 04/10/12026, Examiner finds the claimed invention is patentably distinct from the prior art of record. The prior art of record does not expressly teach or render obvious the invention as recited in amended independent claims.
The combination of prior arts of record do not expressly teach or render obvious the limitations of “performing computation associated with a first sub-portion of the updated plurality of sub-portions using the additional quantity of computational resources while one or more other sub-portions of the updated plurality of sub-portions wait to perform computation, such that first sub-portion is configured to use most or all of the additional quantity” as recited in claim 8 and/or “performing computation associated with the first program portion of the program using the additional quantity of computational resources includes performing computation associated with the first sub-portion of the plurality of sub-portions using the second quantity of computational resources and performing computation associated with an additional part of the first portion using the additional quantity of computational resources” as recited in claim 9 or “the first sub-portion of the updated plurality of sub-portions is an expanded version of the first sub-portion of the plurality of sub-portions formed by adding one or more instances of one or more program components of the first program portion from other one or more sub-portions of the plurality of sub-portions to the first sub-portion of the plurality of sub-portions to obtain the first sub-portion of the updated plurality of sub-portions” as recited in claim 10”, when taken in the context of the claims as a whole, as recited in the independent claims 1, 21-22 and 23 in combination of dependent claims 8-10 and any intervening claims were not disclosed in the prior arts of record.
Response to Arguments
The previous 35 U.S.C. 101 abstract idea rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed on 04/10/2026 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of new grounds of rejections.
Examiners Note
Applicant is further reminded of that the cited paragraphs and in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant(s) and although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider all of the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Conclusion
Authorization for Internet Communication
Applicant is encouraged to submit an authorization to communicate with the Examiner via the internet by making the following statement (MPEP 502.03)
“Recognizing that internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with the undersigned and practitioners in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 and 37 CFR 1.34 concerning any subject matter of this application by video conferencing, instant messaging, or electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.”
Please note that the above statement can only by submitted via Central Fax (not Examiner’s Fax), Regular postal mail, or EFS Web using PTO/SB/439.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Brandwine et al. (US 2015/0121400 A1) teaches managing private use of program execution capacity when available quantity of nodes associated with program execution is less than the indicated quantity in the received request.
Bubba; Head (US-20090119673-A1) teaches predicting and managing resource allocation according to service level agreements
Childress; Rhonda L. (US 20110161497 A1) teaches method for outsourcing resources in a grid computing environment.
Chin; Bill Ying (US 20140007097A1) teaches dynamic resource allocation for virtual machines
Ernst et al.(US 2020/0183745 A1) teaches method for dynamically allocating resources in a multiprocessor system
Feng et al. (CN 109684078 A1) teaches resource dynamic allocation to dynamically increase or decrease the number of operation process to realize the dynamic expansion of resource capacity.
Kim et al. (US 2012/0079498 A1) teaches method for dynamic resource allocation of processing units
Prabhakar et al. (US 2007/0240161A1) teaches method for dynamic allocation of resources in a computing grid.
Russinovich; Mark Eugene et al. (US-20180359313-A1) teaches optimal allocation of dynamic cloud computing platform resources
Tavallevi et al. (US 2022/006928 A1) teaches pooled memory controller for thin-provisioning disaggregated memory
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABU ZAR GHAFFARI whose telephone number is (571)270-3799. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 9:00 - 17:00.
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. 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.
ABU ZAR GHAFFARI
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2195
/ABU ZAR GHAFFARI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2195
Prosecution Insights