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 final office action is responsive to the amendments filed on 08/07/2025.
Claims 13-18 and 21-34 are pending.
Response to Amendment
Applicant has amended independent claims 13 and dependent claims 14-18 to include new/old limitations in a form not previously presented necessitating new search and considerations. Claims 1-12, 19-20 have been canceled, and new claims 21-34 have been added by the Applicant.
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 21-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more or integrating into practical application.
Based upon at least the decision by the United States Supreme Court in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 2354 (2014), post-Alice precedential court decisions, and 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, claims 21-26 are determined to be directed to an abstract idea. Examples of abstract ideas include at least Mathematical concepts, Mental process and Certain Methods of organizing human activity. Independent claim 1 is directed to “distributing task to one or more devices based on indication of capability of one of more devices in the signal received by one or more antennas; and redistributing one or more parts of compute task to some but not all of the electronic devices responsive to a failure to decode the compute result” as the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim.
Step 1
As described in MPEP § 2106, subsection III, Step 1 of the eligibility analysis asks: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Claims 21 recites a method, which falls within the “process” category of 35 U.S.C. § 101. Thus, the analysis determines whether the claims recite a judicial exception and fail to integrate the exception into practical application. See Memorandum, 84 Fed. Re. 54-55. If both elements are satisfied, the claims are directed to a judicial exception under the first step of the Alice/Mayo test, See id.
Step 2A Prong One
As described in MPEP § 2106, subsection III, Step 2A of the Office’s eligibility analysis is the first part of the Alice/Mayo test, i.e., the Supreme Court’s "framework for distinguishing patents that claim laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas from those that claim patent-eligible applications of those concepts." Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573 U.S. 208, 217-18, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1981 (2014) (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 77-78, 101 USPQ2d at 1967-68).
Step 2A is a two-prong inquiry, in which examiners determine in Prong One whether a claim recites a judicial exception, and if so, then determine in Prong Two if the recited judicial exception is integrated into a practical application of that exception.
Independent claim 21 recites the following steps:
Claim Elements
21. (New) A method of operating an electronic device, the method comprising:
generic computing
receiving, using one or more antennas, statistics from a set of electronic devices that are different from the electronic device;
information gathering
distributing, using one or more processors and the one or more antennas, one or more parts of a compute task to the set of electronic devices responsive to the statistics indicating that distributing the one or more parts of the compute task to the set of electronic devices is expected to produce an amount of performance gain that exceeds a threshold;
mental process abstract idea e.g. scheduling
receiving, using the one or more antennas, compute results of the one or more parts of the compute task from the set of electronic devices;
information gathering
attempting to decode, using the one or more processors, the compute results received from the set of electronic devices; and
generic computing
re-distributing, using the one or more processors and the one or more antennas, the one or more parts of the compute task to some but not all of the electronic devices in the set of electronic devices responsive to a failure to decode the compute results received from the set of electronic devices.
mental process abstract idea e.g. scheduling
The overall process described by claim 21 steps [iii] and [vi] describes “concepts performed in the human mind” or “observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion.” Memorandum, 84 Fed. Reg, 52. Thus steps [iii] recite the abstract concept of [m]ental processes.” Id. For example, claim 21 step [iii] recites “distributing, using one or more processors and the one or more antennas, one or more parts of a compute task to the set of electronic devices responsive to the statistics indicating that distributing the one or more parts of the compute task to the set of electronic devices is expected to produce an amount of performance gain that exceeds a threshold;”, which is a combination of observation, evaluation, judgement and opinion, and may be performed by human mind alone or with the aid of pen and paper. Similar, step [vi] recites “re-distributing, using the one or more processors and the one or more antennas, the one or more parts of the compute task to some but not all of the electronic devices in the set of electronic devices responsive to a failure to decode the compute results received from the set of electronic devices”, which is directed to redistributing tasks for which results are failed to decode, and can be performed by human mind alone or with the aid of pen and paper. The courts consider a mental process (thinking) that "can be performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper" to be an abstract idea. CyberSource Corp. v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1372, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1695 (Fed. Cir. 2011).
Thus, claim 21 recites a judicial exception.
Step 2A, Prong Two
As described in MPEP § 2106, subsection III, Step 2A of the Office’s eligibility analysis is the first part of the Alice/Mayo test, i.e., the Supreme Court’s "framework for distinguishing patents that claim laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas from those that claim patent-eligible applications of those concepts." Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573 U.S. 208, 217-18, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1981 (2014) (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 77-78, 101 USPQ2d at 1967-68).
Step 2A is a two-prong inquiry, in which examiners determine in Prong One whether a claim recites a judicial exception, and if so, then determine in Prong Two if the recited judicial exception is integrated into a practical application of that exception.
Because claims 21 recite a judicial exception, Analysis determines if the claims recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into practical application. In addition to the limitations of claim 21 discussed above that recite the abstract concepts, claim 1 also recites additional steps [i]-[ii] and [iv]-[v]. Claim 1 in step [i] recites “method of operating an electronic device”, which is examples of generic computing component/ method and may not be considered an improvement in the functioning of a computer or technology or technical field. Claim 1 in step [ii] recites “receiving, using one or more antennas, statistics from a set of electronic devices that are different from the electronic device;”, which is directed to information gathering. Information gathering is considered insignificant extra-solution activity and therefore doesn’t integrate the abstract idea into practical application. See MPEP § 2106.04(d) I. § 2106.05(g). Claim 1 step [iv] recites “receiving, using the one or more antennas, compute results of the one or more parts of the compute task from the set of electronic devices”, which is also resembles the idea of information gathering and therefore doesn’t integrate the abstract idea into practical application. See MPEP § 2106.04(d) I. § 2106.05(g). Claim 1 in step [v] recites “attempting to decode, using the one or more processors, the compute results received from the set of electronic devices”, which is common computing method and is neither inventive nor provide improvement to technology and/or technical field. The Specification doesn’t provide additional details that would distinguish the additional limitations recited in claim 1 steps [i]-[ii] and [iv]-[v] from a generic implementation of the abstract idea. Thus, the claim elements recited in steps [i]-[ii] and [iv]-[v], under broadest reasonable interpretation, do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Thus, claim 21 recites a judicial exception without integrating into practical application.
Step 2B
As described in MPEP § 2106, subsection III, Step 2B of the Office’s eligibility analysis is the second part of the Alice/Mayo test, i.e., the Supreme Court’s "framework for distinguishing patents that claim laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas from those that claim patent-eligible applications of those concepts." Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573 U.S. 208, 217, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1981 (2014) (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. 66, 101 USPQ2d 1961 (2012)).
Step 2B asks: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Because claims 21 is directed to judicial exception, analysis must determine, according to Alice, whether these claims recite an element, or combination of elements that is enough to ensure that the claim is directed to significantly more than a judicial exception.
The Memorandum, Section III (B) (footnote 36) states:
In accordance with existing guidance, an Examiner’s conclusion that an additional element (or combination of elements) is well understood, routine, conventional activity must be supported with a factual determination. For more information concerning evaluation of well-understood, routine, convention activity, see MPEP 2106.05(d), as modified by the USPTO Berkheimer Memorandum.
The Berkheimer Memorandum, Section III(A)(1) states:
A Specification demonstrates the well-understood, routine, conventional nature of additional elements when it describes the additional elements as well-understood or routine or conventional (or an equivalent term), as a commercially available product, on in a manner that indicates that the additional elements are sufficiently well-known that the specification does not need to describe the particulars of such additional elements to satisfy 35 §U.S.C. 112(a). A finding that an element is well-understood, routine, or conventional cannot be based only on the fact that the specification is silent with respect to describing such element.
As indicated above, claim 21 recites additional claim elements in steps [i]-[ii] and [iv]-[v] beside the identified judicial exception. Additional claim element in step [i] recites “method of an electronic device”, which is directed to generic computing components/method (See Background) and do not amount to significantly more. Claim 1 step [ii] recites additional claim elements “receiving, using one or more antennas, statistics from a set of electronic devices that are different from the electronic device;”, which is directed to information gathering. Information gathering is considered insignificant extra-solution activity and doesn’t amount to significantly more (See MPEP 2106.05(g) ). Claim 1 step [iv] recites additional claim elements of “receiving, using the one or more antennas, compute results of the one or more parts of the compute task from the set of electronic devices;”, which is also describing the information being gathered and doesn’t amount to significantly more (See MPEP 2106.05(g)). Claim 1 in step [v] recites “attempting to decode, using the one or more processors, the compute results received from the set of electronic devices;”, which is generic computing method (See cited prior art e.g., Liu et al [0019], Prakash [0027], Narayanaswamy [0197])and are not amount to significantly more.
As such these additional claim elements are not directed to anything beyond conventional nature of these elements or otherwise more than well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the field of computing. These limitations either alone or in combination simply append well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception. Further, the Specification doesn’t provide additional details that would distinguish the additional limitations as recited in the claim from a generic implementation of the abstract idea.
Thus, claims 21 are not directed to judicial exception without integrating into practical application or amount to significantly more.
Claim 22 recites “storing the statistics received from the set of electronic devices; and updating the statistics stored at the storage circuitry based on the compute results received from the set of electronic devices”, which is directed to storing and updating stored information, and is directed to common computing method.
Claim 23 recites “identifying, using the one or more processors, one or more deterministic straggler devices in the set of electronic devices based on the statistics, wherein distributing the one or more parts of the compute task to some but not all of the electronic devices in the set comprises distributing the one or more parts of the compute task to all of the electronic devices in the set of electronic devices except for the identified one or more deterministic straggler devices”, which is directed to identifying slower device and distributing tasks to devices other than the slower devices and is a combination of observation, evaluation, judgement and opinion.
Claim 24 recites “updating, using the one or more processors, a coding scheme of the compute task responsive to the failure to decode the compute results received from the set of electronic devices”, which is directed to a combination of observation, evaluation, judgement and opinion.
Claim 25 recites “wherein receiving the statistics from the set of electronic devices comprises receiving the statistics via one or more wireless access points communicatively coupled between the electronic device and the set of electronic devices”, which is directed to information gathering and is considered insignificant extra solution activity.
Claim 26 recites “wherein using the one or more antennas to distribute the one or more parts of the compute task to the set of electronic devices comprises transmitting signals to the set of electronic devices via one or more wireless access points communicatively coupled between the electronic device and the set of electronic devices”, which is directed to information transmission and is considered insignificant extra solution activity and/or well-understood, routine and conventional (See MPEP 2106.05(d)II).
Therefore, the claim(s) 21-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed to judicial exception without integrating into practical application or significantly more.
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 13-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (US 2018/0276048 A1, hereafter Liu) in view of Hwang et al. (US 11,860,869 B1, hereafter Hwang).
Liu was cited in the last office action.
As per claim 13, Liu teaches the invention substantially as claimed including a method of operating an electronic device ( fig. 2 electronic modular device 102 components 104 [0001] managing, performance, computational tasks, associated with modular devices), the method comprising:
receiving, using one or more antennas, statistics from a set of electronic devices that are different from the electronic device (fig. 2 electronic device 102 electronic modular component 104 response communication 216 one or more computing devices 108 [0044] fig. 2 electronic modular components 104, configured, to receive communication 216 from computing devices, communication, advertising components, indicating the availability of computing devices 108 [0045] obtain one or more set of data associated with one or more computational resources of one or more computing devices 108 [0046] set of data, indicative, communication capability 230, processing capability 232 and/or storage capability 234 [0074] electronic modular components 104, include, network interface, antennas);
distributing, using one or more processors and one or more antennas one or more parts of a compute task to the set of electronic devices ([0066] fig. 3 312 [0007] electronic modular component 104, include, one or more processors, memory devices [0017] modular electronic device can determine whether a computational task would be beneficial in view of available computing device(s) and their associated computational resources and can selectively coordinate the performance of the task (or at least a portion of the task) by such available computing device(s) [0031] electronic modular component 104 processors, perform operations for managing computational tasks [0074] electronic modular components 104, include, network interface, antennas [0050] determine whether to perform, at least portion of, computational task, computing devices, based on potential benefit [0054] coordinate the performance of computational task, partition, tasklets, allocating among computing devices 108 and/or electronic components 104 ) when responsive to the statistics indicating that distributing the one or more parts of the compute task to the set of electronic devices is expected to produce a first amount of performance gain ([0046] set of data, indicative, communication capability 230, processing capability 232 and/or storage capability 234 [0053] Electronic modular component(s) 104 can be configured to coordinate the performance of computational task 210 such that, at least a portion of, computational task 210 can be performed by one or more of the computing device(s) 108. This can occur, when potential benefit 236 outweighs the amount of computational resource(s) to be used in the performance of computational task 210 [0057] second score outweighs first scores i.e. performance gain );
performing, using the one or more processors, the compute task locally when responsive to the statistics indicating that distributing the one or more parts of the compute task to the set of electronic devices is expected to produce a second amount of performance gain that is less than the first amount of performance gain ([0053] Electronic modular component(s) 104 can be configured to coordinate the performance of computational task 210 such that, at least a portion of, computational task 210 can be performed by one or more of the computing device(s) 108. This can occur, when potential benefit 236 outweighs the amount of computational resource(s) to be used in the performance of computational task 210 [0057] second score outweighs first scores i.e. performance gain i.e. can also determine if the benefit doesn’t outweigh [0050] determine that it is not cost effective, electronic modular components i.e. locally perform a portion of computational task i.e. can also determine when it is cost effective ); and
distributing, using the one or more processors and the one or more antennas, the one or more parts of the compute task to some but not all of the electronic devices in the set of electronic devices ([0053] Electronic modular component(s) 104 can be configured to coordinate the performance of computational task 210 such that, at least a portion of, computational task 210 can be performed by one or more i.e. not all of the computing device(s) 108) responsive to the statistics indicating that distributing the one or more parts of the compute task to the set of electronic devices is expected to produce a third amount of performance gain that is less than the first amount of performance gain and greater than the second amount of performance gain([0053] This can occur, when potential benefit 236 outweighs the amount of computational resource(s) to be used in the performance of computational task 210 [0057] second score outweighs first scores ).
Liu doesn’t specifically teach performing task locally; distributing one or more part of the compute tasks to some but not all the computing devices, when third amount of performance gain is less than the first amount and greater than the second amount of performance gain.
Hwang, however, teaches performing task locally ((fig. 1 query engine 110 172 174 fig. 5 local query executor 530);
distributing one or more part of the compute tasks to some but not all the computing devices (col 10 lines 11-25 corresponding request may be resubmitted to another storage node col 16 lines 1-5 perform retries when needed col 17 lines 42- 47 switch to a single query engine mode, plan query, in order to perform query col 26 lines 5-40 wireless connection), when third amount of performance gain is less than the first amount and greater than the second amount of performance gain (col 19 lines 4-30 predicted performance of the query at the local query engine may be better than performance achieved remotely, performance of query, better, performed, on the remote query engine, cross-type plan, utilizes both the local and remote query engines col 21 lines 5-20 cost estimations or prediction, weight alternative query plans, different query engine types, select a plan according to the estimated performances of the plan).
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 Liu with the teachings of Hwang of local executor for executing the query locally, resubmitting the task to another storage node i.e. not the failed node, selection of query plan based on the performance estimation to improve efficiency and allow performing task locally; distributing one or more part of the compute tasks to some but not all the computing devices, when third amount of performance gain is less than the first amount and greater than the second amount of performance gain to the method of Liu as in the instant invention. The combination would have been obvious because applying the known method of local executor for executing the query locally, resubmitting the task to another storage node i.e. not the failed node, selection of query plan based on the performance estimation taught by Hwang to the method of Liu to yield predictable results as in the instant invention.
As per claim 14, Liu teaches wherein receiving the statistics from the set of electronic devices comprises receiving the statistics via one or more wireless access points that are communicatively coupled between the electronic device and the set of electronic devices (fig. 2 modular electronic device 102 electronic modular component 104 one or more other computing device(s) 108 [0034] 104 communicate with one or more 108 [0074] electronic modular components 104, include, network interface, antennas, transmitters).
As per claim 15, Liu teaches wherein distributing the one or more parts of the compute task to some but not all of the electronic devices in the set comprises distributing the one or more parts of the compute task to all of the electronic devices in the set of electronic devices ([0054] allocating tasklets associated with computational task 210 among computing device(s) 108).
Hwang teaches remaining claim elements of identifying, using the one or more processors, one or more deterministic straggler devices in the set of electronic devices (col 10 lines 10-15 if a storage node fails (this may include less-than-complete failures, e.g. a process failure for query processing), allocating to all except for the identified one or more deterministic straggler devices (col 10 lines 10-15 the corresponding request (e.g., to process a batch of pages or tuples) may be resubmitted to another storage node that stores the data (e.g., a full segment from the same protection group (PG)).
As per claim 16, Liu teaches wherein using the one or more antennas to distribute the one or more parts of the compute task to the set of electronic devices comprises transmitting signals to the set of electronic devices via one or more wireless access points communicatively coupled between the electronic device and the set of electronic devices ([0050] Electronic modular component(s) 104 can be configured to determine whether to perform, at least a portion of, computational task 210 with one or more of the computing device(s) 108 [0053] Electronic modular component(s) 104 can be configured to coordinate the performance of computational task 210 such that, at least a portion of, computational task 210 can be performed by one or more i.e. not all of the computing device(s) 108 [0054] allocating tasklets associated with computational task 210 among computing device(s) 108 ).
As per claim 17, Liu teaches instructing, using the one or more antennas, the set of electronic devices to transmit the statistics to the electronic device ([0042] fig. 2 102, 104, 108 electronic modular component(s) 104 can be configured to send one or more request(s) 214 (e.g., communications) for information indicative of an availability of one or more of the computing device(s) 108 ).
As per claim 18, Liu teaches transmitting, using the one or more antennas, a message to an authentication server that requests that the authentication server instruct the set of electronic devices to transmit the statistics to the electronic device ([0074] electronic modular components 104, include, network interface, antennas, transmitter fig. 2 electronic device 102 electronic modular component 104 response communication 216 one or more computing devices 108 [0044] fig. 2 electronic modular components 104, configured, to receive communication 216 from computing devices, communication, advertising components, indicating the availability of computing devices 108 [0045] obtain one or more set of data associated with one or more computational resources of one or more computing devices 108 [0046] set of data, indicative, communication capability 230, processing capability 232 and/or storage capability 234 [0034] electronic device 102 modular component 104, computing devices 108, communicate via Wi-Fi).
Hwang teaches remaining claim elements of message to authentication server requests that the authentication server instruct devices to transmit the statistics (col 7 lines 50-60 implement user authentication and access control procedures, network based service access request to access a particular database).
Claims 21-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu and further in view of Hwang , as applied to above claims, and further in view of Alnafoosi et al. (US 2014/0101283 A1, hereafter Alnafoosi).
As per claim 21, Liu teaches the invention substantially as claimed including a method of operating an electronic device (fig. 2 electronic modular device 102 components 104 [0001] managing, performance, computational tasks, associated with modular devices), the method comprising:
receiving, using one or more antennas, statistics from a set of electronic devices that are different from the electronic device (fig. 2 electronic device 102 electronic modular component 104 response communication 216 one or more computing devices 108 [0044] fig. 2 electronic modular components 104, configured, to receive communication 216 from computing devices, communication, advertising components, indicating the availability of computing devices 108 [0045] obtain one or more set of data associated with one or more computational resources of one or more computing devices 108 [0046] set of data, indicative, communication capability 230, processing capability 232 and/or storage capability 234 [0074] electronic modular components 104, include, network interface, antennas [0034] electronic device 102 modular component 104, computing devices 108, communicate via Wi-Fi);
distributing, using one or more processors and the one or more antennas, one or more parts of a compute task to the set of electronic devices ([0066] fig. 3 312 [0007] electronic modular component 104, include, one or more processors, memory devices [0017] modular electronic device can determine whether a computational task would be beneficial in view of available computing device(s) and their associated computational resources and can selectively coordinate the performance of the task (or at least a portion of the task) by such available computing device(s) [0031] electronic modular component 104 processors, perform operations for managing computational tasks [0074] electronic modular components 104, include, network interface, antennas [0050] determine whether to perform, at least portion of, computational task, computing devices, based on potential benefit [0054] coordinate the performance of computational task, partition, tasklets, allocating among computing devices 108 and/or electronic components 104 ) responsive to the statistics indicating that distributing the one or more parts of the compute task to the set of electronic devices is expected to produce an amount of performance gain that exceeds a threshold ([0046] set of data, indicative, communication capability 230, processing capability 232 and/or storage capability 234 [0053] Electronic modular component(s) 104 can be configured to coordinate the performance of computational task 210 such that, at least a portion of, computational task 210 can be performed by one or more of the computing device(s) 108. This can occur, when potential benefit 236 outweighs the amount of computational resource(s) to be used in the performance of computational task 210 [0057] second score outweighs first scores i.e. performance gain).
Liu doesn’t specifically teach receiving, using the one or more antennas, compute results of the one or more parts of the compute task from the set of electronic devices; attempting to decode, using the one or more processors, the compute results received from the set of electronic devices; and re-distributing, using the one or more processors and the one or more antennas, the one or more parts of the compute task to some but not all of the electronic devices in the set of electronic devices responsive to a failure to decode the compute results received from the set of electronic devices.
Hwang, however, teaches receiving, using the one or more antennas, compute results of the one or more parts of the compute task from the set of electronic devices (col 4 lines 20-33 fig. 1 query 140 query engine 130 return result of portion of query 156 to the query engine 110, results 156 obtained col 26 lines 5-40 wireless connection);
attempting to decode, using the one or more processors, the compute results received from the set of electronic devices (col 4 lines 27-33 obtain results for query and incorporate or analyze these results with the results 156 obtained from query engine 130); and
re-distributing, using the one or more processors and the one or more antennas, the one or more parts of the compute task to some but not all of the electronic devices in the set of electronic devices (col 10 lines 11-25 corresponding request may be resubmitted to another storage node col 16 lines 1-5 perform retries when needed col 17 lines 42- 47 switch to a single query engine mode, plan query, in order to perform query col 26 lines 5-40 wireless connection) responsive to a failure to decode the compute results received from the set of electronic devices (col 10 lines 11-25 process failure for query processing, col 16 lines 1-5 track the failure of requested external data; col 17 lines 45-50 previously query plan failed).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Liu with the teachings of Hwang of obtaining the results of the portion of query, analyze /incorporate the obtained result, resubmit / retry the request or portion of request responsive to failure to improve efficiency and accuracy to allow receiving, using the one or more antennas, compute results of the one or more parts of the compute task from the set of electronic devices; attempting to analyze, using the one or more processors, the compute results received from the set of electronic devices; and re-distributing, using the one or more processors and the one or more antennas, the one or more parts of the compute task to some but not all of the electronic devices in the set of electronic devices responsive to a failure to analyze / incorporate the compute results received from the set of electronic devices to the method of Liu as in the instant invention. The combination would have been obvious because supplementing the distributed computing taught by Liu with the teachings of retrying the portion of task if the result obtained failed to be incorporate / analyzed as taught by Hwang to yield predictable result with efficiency and accuracy.
Liu and Hwang, in combination, do not specifically teach decode the results, failure to decode the result.
Alnafoosi, however, teaches decode the results ([0107] decode the encoded slices), failure to decode the result ([0086] number of failures, decode threshold).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Liu and Hwang with the teachings of Alnafoosi of decoding the encoded slices and threshold number of decoding failure to improve efficiency and allow decode the results, failure to decode the result to the method of Liu and Hwang as in the instant invention. The combination would have been obvious because supplementing the analyzing and incorporating the retrieved query response / data using distributed computing taught by Liu and Hwang with the teachings of decoding and decoding failure threshold as taught by Alnafoosi to yield predictable result with efficiency and accuracy.
As per claim 22, Liu teaches storing, using storage circuitry, the statistics received from the set of electronic devices ( fig. 2 electronic device 102 electronic modular component 104 response communication 216 one or more computing devices 108 [0044] fig. 2 electronic modular components 104, configured, to receive communication 216 from computing devices, communication, advertising components, indicating the availability of computing devices 108 [0045] obtain one or more set of data associated with one or more computational resources of one or more computing devices 108 [0046] set of data, indicative, communication capability 230, processing capability 232 and/or storage capability 234 [0074] electronic modular components 104, include, network interface, antennas [0034] electronic device 102 modular component 104, computing devices 108, communicate via Wi-Fi); and
updating, using the one or more processors, the statistics stored at the storage circuitry based on the compute results received from the set of electronic devices ( [0045] electronic modular component(s) 104 can be configured to obtain one or more set(s) of data associated with one or more computational resource(s) of one or more of the computing device(s) 108 [0072] memory device, store, information accessible by processors [0073] memory device 514, store data, information associated with one or more of computing device).
As per claim 23, Liu teaches wherein distributing the one or more parts of the compute task to some but not all of the electronic devices in the set comprises distributing the one or more parts of the compute task to all of the electronic devices in the set of electronic devices ([0054] allocating tasklets associated with computational task 210 among computing device(s) 108).
Hwang teaches remaining claim elements of identifying, using the one or more processors, one or more deterministic straggler devices in the set of electronic devices based on statistics (col 10 lines 10-15 if a storage node fails (this may include less-than-complete failures, e.g. a process failure for query processing), allocating to all except for the identified one or more deterministic straggler devices (col 10 lines 10-15 the corresponding request (e.g., to process a batch of pages or tuples) may be resubmitted to another storage node that stores the data (e.g., a full segment from the same protection group (PG)).
As per claim 24, Alnafoosi teaches updating, using the one or more processors, a coding scheme of the compute task responsive to the failure to decode the compute results received from the set of electronic devices ([0107] decode the encoded slices, [0086] number of failures, decode threshold [0222] DS encodes data2 format needs to be changed, format).
As per claim 25, Liu teaches wherein receiving the statistics from the set of electronic devices comprises receiving the statistics via one or more wireless access points that are communicatively coupled between the electronic device and the set of electronic devices (fig. 2 modular electronic device 102 electronic modular component 104 one or more other computing device(s) 108 [0034] 104 communicate with one or more 108 [0074] electronic modular components 104, include, network interface, antennas, transmitters).
As per claim 26, Liu teaches wherein using the one or more antennas to distribute the one or more parts of the compute task to the set of electronic devices comprises transmitting signals to the set of electronic devices via one or more wireless access points communicatively coupled between the electronic device and the set of electronic devices ([0050] Electronic modular component(s) 104 can be configured to determine whether to perform, at least a portion of, computational task 210 with one or more of the computing device(s) 108 [0053] Electronic modular component(s) 104 can be configured to coordinate the performance of computational task 210 such that, at least a portion of, computational task 210 can be performed by one or more i.e. not all of the computing device(s) 108 [0054] allocating tasklets associated with computational task 210 among computing device(s) 108 ).
Claims 27-29, 32-33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu, as applied to above claims, and further in view of Dawson et al. (US 2013/0239128 A1, hereafter Dawson).
As per claim 27, Liu teaches the invention substantially as claimed including a method of operating an electronic device (fig. 2 electronic modular device 102 components 104 [0001] managing, performance, computational tasks, associated with modular devices), the method comprising:
receiving, using one or more antennas, statistics from a set of electronic devices that are different from the electronic device via one or more wireless access points communicatively coupled between the electronic device and the set of electronic devices (fig. 2 electronic device 102 electronic modular component 104 response communication 216 one or more computing devices 108 [0044] fig. 2 electronic modular components 104, configured, to receive communication 216 from computing devices, communication, advertising components, indicating the availability of computing devices 108 [0045] obtain one or more set of data associated with one or more computational resources of one or more computing devices 108 [0046] set of data, indicative, communication capability 230, processing capability 232 and/or storage capability 234 [0074] electronic modular components 104, include, network interface, antennas [0034] electronic device 102 modular component 104, computing devices 108, communicate via Wi-Fi);
distributing, using one or more processors and one or more antennas, one or more parts of a compute task to the set of electronic devices ([0066] fig. 3 312 [0007] electronic modular component 104, include, one or more processors, memory devices [0017] managing performance of computational task, modular electronic device, select, specific computational tasks, manage the performance of such task by one or more additional computing devices, identify one or more computing device, available to potentially perform, at least portion of, the data archiving procedure, modular electronic device can determine whether a computational task would be beneficial in view of available computing device(s) and their associated computational resources and can selectively coordinate the performance of the task (or at least a portion of the task) by such available computing device(s), Based, at least in part, on the capabilities of the available computational resources and/or the potential benefit, the modular electronic device can determine whether to perform, at least a portion of, the data archiving procedure with one or more of the computing device(s) [0031] electronic modular component 104 processors, perform operations for managing computational tasks [0074] electronic modular components 104, include, network interface, antennas [0050] determine whether to perform, at least portion of, computational task, computing devices, based on potential benefit [0054] coordinate the performance of computational task, partition, tasklets, allocating among computing devices 108 and/or electronic components 104 ) responsive to the statistics indicating that distributing the one or more parts of the compute task to the set of electronic devices is expected to produce a first performance gain that exceeds a threshold ([0017] Based, at least in part, on the capabilities of the available computational resources and/or the potential benefit, the modular electronic device can determine whether to perform, at least a portion of, the data archiving procedure with one or more of the computing device(s) [0046] set of data, indicative, communication capability 230, processing capability 232 and/or storage capability 234 [0053] Electronic modular component(s) 104 can be configured to coordinate the performance of computational task 210 such that, at least a portion of, computational task 210 can be performed by one or more of the computing device(s) 108. This can occur, when potential benefit 236 outweighs the amount of computational resource(s) to be used in the performance of computational task 210 [0057] second score outweighs first scores i.e. performance gain; first score 240 indicating the resource to be used in performing the data archiving procedure i.e. threshold, second score 242 increase in storage gained by performing the data archiving procedure); and
performing, using the one or more processors, the compute task locally responsive to the statistics indicating that distributing the one or more parts of the compute task to the set of electronic devices is expected to produce a second performance gain that is less than the threshold ([0053] Electronic modular component(s) 104 can be configured to coordinate the performance of computational task 210 such that, at least a portion of, computational task 210 can be performed by one or more of the computing device(s) 108. This can occur, when potential benefit 236 outweighs the amount of computational resource(s) to be used in the performance of computational task 210 [0057] second score outweighs first scores i.e. performance gain i.e. can also determine if the benefit doesn’t outweigh [0050] determine that it is not cost effective, electronic modular components i.e. locally perform a portion of computational task i.e. can also determine when it is cost effective ).
Liu doesn’t specifically teach to performing compute task locally.
Dawson, however, teaches performing compute task locally ([0047] performance benefit, executed on local system).
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 Liu with the teachings of Dawson of executing the task on local system for performance benefit and allow performing compute task locally to the method of Liu as in the instant invention. The combination would have been obvious because supplementing the method of determining whether to distribute the task based on performance gain as taught by Liu with the teachings of executing the task locally for performance benefit as taught by Dawson to yield predictable results.
As per claim 28, Liu teaches wherein distributing the one or more parts of the compute task to the set of electronic devices comprises transmitting signals to the set of electronic devices via the one or more wireless access points (fig. 2 modular electronic device 102 electronic modular component 104 one or more other computing device(s) 108 [0034] 104 communicate with one or more 108 [0074] electronic modular components 104, include, network interface, antennas, transmitters).
As per claim 29, Liu teaches wherein the compute task comprises an image processing task ([0002] functions such as capturing an image).
As per claim 32, Liu teaches wherein the compute task comprises a sensing task ([0019] computational task, include sensing task).
As per claim 33, Liu teaches wherein the compute task comprises a spreadsheet task ([0017] computational task, data archiving procedure [0019] data encryption / decryption procedure [0019] [0073] data, retrieved, manipulated, created, and/or stored).
Claims 30, 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Dawson, and further in view of Alnafoosi, as applied to the above claims.
As per claim 30, Liu and Dawson, in combination, do not specifically teach wherein the compute task comprises a video processing task.
Alnafoosi, however, teaches wherein the compute task comprises a video processing task ([0100] task, data, distributed processing of the tasks on the data, entertainment video files [0173] data, video).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Liu and Dawson with the teachings of Alnafoosi of distributed processing task for video files/data to improve extendibility and allow the compute task comprises a video processing task to the method of Liu and Dawson as in the instant invention. The combination would have been obvious because substituting the distributed computing task taught by Liu and Dawson with the video data processing tasks taught by Alnafoosi to yield predictable result of processing video task with improved efficiency.
As per claim 34, Alnafoosi teaches receiving, using the one or more antennas, compute results of the one or more parts of the compute task from the set of electronic devices ([0104] Upon completion of generating their respective partial results 102, the DST execution units send, via the network 24, their partial results 102 to the inbound DST processing section 82 of the DST client module 34. The inbound DST processing section 82 processes the received partial results 102 to produce a result 104);
attempting to decode, using the one or more processors, the compute results received from the set of electronic devices ([0155] inbound DST processing section, retrieving stored data, encoded data slices, encoding modules, decodes the encoding data to produce data partition); and
updating, using the one or more processors, a coding scheme of the compute task responsive to a failure to decode the compute results received from the set of electronic devices ([0107] decode the encoded slices, [0086] number of failures, decode threshold [0222] DS encodes data2 format needs to be changed, format).
Claims 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu in view of Dawson, as applied to above claims and further in view of Ebrahimi Afrouzi et al. (US 2022/0026920 A1, Ebrahim Afrouzi).
As per claim 31, Liu and Dawson, in combination, do not specifically teach elements of claim 31.
Ebrahimi Afrouzi, however, teaches wherein the compute task comprises a localization and mapping task ([0004] run higher level applications such as simultaneous localization and mapping SLAM).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to combine the teachings of Liu and Dawson with the teachings of Ebrahim Afrouzi of running SLAM applications to improve extensibility and allow the compute task comprises running SLAM application to the method of Liu and Dawson as in the instant invention. The combination would have been obvious because substituting the distributed computing task taught by Liu and Dawson with the SLAM application tasks taught by Ebrahimi Afrouzi to yield predictable result of processing video task with improved efficiency.
Examiners Note
Applicant is further reminded of that the cited paragraphs and in