DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-23 are pending.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Faulkner et al. (Faulkner) (US 20220113789 A1) in view of Kashtan et al. (hereinafter Kashtan) (US 20220129327 A1).
Faulkner was cited as a prior art in the last office action mailed on 04/02/2026. The teachings of Faulkner are incorporated by reference to the extent that is applicable to amended claims.
By way of amendment, Applicant inserted the limitations “wherein: the plurality of processor cores are associated with execution of application workloads in a multi-tenant cloud computing environment that exhibits dynamically fluctuating network usage: at least one of the application workloads is a network latency sensitive application workload: and the at least one of the plurality of processor cores is to execute the network latency sensitive application workload” into claims 1, 11 and 20.
As to claims 1, 11, and 20, Faulkner further teaches wherein: the plurality of processor cores are associated with execution of application workloads in a multi-tenant cloud computing environment [FIG. 9: multi clients and servers in could network] that exhibits dynamically fluctuating network usage [0101: “In at least one embodiment, users contract with a web hosting provider to make memory space, processor capacity, and communication bandwidth available for their desired network resource in accordance with an amount of server resources a user desires to utilize.”] [The network bandwidth is dynamically changed.].
Faulkner does not teach wherein at least one of the application workloads is a network latency sensitive application workload and the at least one of the plurality of processor cores is to execute the network latency sensitive application workload.
Kashtan teaches wherein the application workloads is a network latency sensitive application workload and the at least one of the plurality of processor cores is to execute the network latency sensitive application workload [0016: “ a computer system has 8 processors, and 3 of the processors are designated as isolated processors. The remaining 5 processors are designated as non-isolated processors. Latency-sensitive tasks can be distributed across the 3 isolated processors by the scheduler. For example, if there are 6 latency-sensitive tasks, then 2 latency-sensitive tasks can be allocated to each of the 3 isolated processors by the scheduler. The scheduler can move latency-sensitive tasks to different isolated processors as needed during execution of the latency-sensitive tasks to balance the workload across the isolated processors.”].
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teaching of executing latency sensitive application workload in the computing system as suggested in Kashtan into Faulkner to implement application deployment and configuration. One having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such modification to achieve real-time responsiveness and improve user experience.
As to claims 2-10, 12-19 and 21-23, the rejections are respectfully maintained for the reasons as set forth in the previous office action mailed on 11/05/2025.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 11 and 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XUXING CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3486. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5:30PM.
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, Jaweed Abbaszadeh can be reached at 571-270-1640. 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.
/XUXING CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2176
Prosecution Insights