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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/30/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 7 applicant argues that Richardson does not disclose the added limitation of "receiving information descriptive of an obligation that is fulfillable by either the quantum computing system or the quantum client device, wherein the obligation comprises one or more actions associated with the quantum computing resource.". Examiner respectfully disagrees. The rejection does not rely on Richardson alone. Richardson teaches a quantum resource environment, including a client submitting a task description to a quantum task management service and the service selecting quantum computing resources for the client. Col 4, line 47-54 “The task management service may receive task descriptions from clients and select and orchestrate computing resources, including quantum computing resources, to perform the tasks on behalf of the clients. The computing resources may be selected based (at least in part) on task descriptions and on performance metrics of prior tasks”. Menon discloses that resource provisioning request are granted “[0041] In one aspect, the unified generic resource provisioning system grants resource provisioning requests only if certain conditions, specified within system rules, are satisfied.” And such rules may be stored as “constrains or expressions” executed before request are forwarded to service providers. Menon further teaches “[0050] In one embodiment of the invention, each approval has a stage header. A stage header contains data that indicates, to the unified generic resource provisioning system, the specific set of actors (potentially other users or systems) who need to approve access to a resource before a request for that resource can be granted.” Under BRI, Menon’s approval rule/condition and authorized action information teaches “information descriptive of an obligation” because it describes conditions associated with access to a resource and can be fulfilled by the users or systems with Richardson’s allocation of quantum computing resources.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 5-15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richardson (US 10817337 B1) in view of Menon (US 20130151705 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Richardson teaches:
A method comprising. (Claim 5. A computer-implemented method, comprising)
obtaining, by a quantum computing system from a quantum client device, information descriptive of a request to access a quantum computing resource and an intended action associated with the quantum computing resource. (col 19, line 48-55. A client 140 may submit a task description 145 that includes information describing one or more tasks that the client seeks to have the task management service 600 oversee. The task description 145 may include the name of a quantum algorithm, a description of a problem domain associated with quantum computing, a quantum algorithm itself, high-level programming code, an execution plan, an indication of desired results, and/or other suitable elements.)
based at least in part on the information, sending a quantum computing resource access request to a quantum access granting entity, wherein the quantum computing resource access request comprises information descriptive of: the quantum computing resource; the intended action; and an identity of the quantum client device; receiving information descriptive of an obligation that is fulfillable by either the quantum computing system or the quantum client device, wherein the obligation comprises one or more actions associated with the quantum computing resource. (col 20, line 61- col 21, line 13. In one embodiment, the computing resource selection component 610 (or another component of the service 600) may interact with a resource manager 180 to reserve the selected quantum computing resources 160 and classical computing resources 170. As shown in the example of FIG. 6, the computing resource selection component 610 may send a resource reservation request 615 to the resource manager 180. For a requested resource, the request 615 may indicate the high-level type of computing resource (e.g., quantum or classical), the desired characteristics of the resource (e.g., the qubit size for quantum resources or the memory and CPU class for classical resources), the name of an instance type, the reservation mode or duration, and/or other suitable characteristics. The quantum computing resources 160 and classical computing resources 170 may represent various pools of available resources, including quantum computing devices and classical computing devices in one or more data centers managed by the provider network 190.; see also col. 23, line 25 – col. 24, line 54)
Richardson does not appear to explicitly teach: providing a request to assign a preliminary lock to a resource for the client; responsive to sending the resource access request, receiving, from the granting entity, information indicative of a decision to grant resource access to the client.
However, Menon teaches a known process of resource management wherein : [0050] In one embodiment of the invention, each approval has a stage header. A stage header contains data that indicates, to the unified generic resource provisioning system, the specific set of actors (potentially other users or systems) who need to approve access to a resource before a request for that resource can be granted. Approval stage headers define the metadata for approvals which can be either linear or hierarchical. [0041] In one aspect, the unified generic resource provisioning system grants resource provisioning requests only if certain conditions, specified within system rules, are satisfied. For example, the unified generic resource provisioning system might receive, from a user, a request for a virtual machine to be provisioned for use with a specified project. In one embodiment of the invention, the unified generic resource provisioning system only forwards such a request to the service provider that allocates virtual machines to users if a quantity of virtual machines currently allocated to the specified project does not yet exceed a maximum quantity of virtual machines that the specified project is permitted to have. The rules for resource provisioning may be stored as constraints or expressions in the system. The rules may be stored by any rule engine that can execute the rules to ensure that the conditions are satisfied before requests are forwarded to service providers. [0083] It is not very practical for the unified generic resource provisioning system to wait for the multiple requests to be reconciled with correct license counts on the back-end system components or in the central database. Therefore, in one embodiment of the invention, the unified generic resource provisioning system reconciles license counts for a resource even before the request for the resource is submitted. This reconciliation can be accomplished through the use of two types of locks: soft locks and hard locks. [0084] The first type of lock is a soft lock. The unified generic resource provisioning system may be implemented as a set of separate, concurrently executing system server instances. While a resource is being edited by a user or HTTP session, the resource's license count is decremented and immediately broadcast to all other system servers to reflect the same license count number. The resource is soft-locked for a temporary period of time until the request for the resource has been fully submitted. This means that if the user forgets to complete the request session within a specified time period, the unified generic resource provisioning system will release the lock automatically. The broadcast event may send any state change information related to the resource or project (containing multiple resources) to other system servers through a flexible protocol that tells the other system servers which variable is being changed. The protocol may be used to also communicate, to the other system servers, a vector that defines the direction of state change (e.g., positive or negative) [0079] Finally, in block 318, the unified generic resource provisioning system notifies (in one embodiment of the invention, using the notification system disclosed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/287,973) the user that the resource has been provisioned. The unified generic resource provisioning system may do so in response to receiving a corresponding status event from the resource service provider. Thereafter, for as long as the resource remains provisioned to the user, the user can perform any authorized actions relative to the resource. See also [0050-0052]
Accordingly, as proper under MPEP 2143, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Richardson and Menon before them, to apply Menon’s known lock management technique to allocate resources in Richardson’s of quantum resources reservation system would yield predictable benefits. The result would a system capable of ensuring exclusive access to resources while avoiding conflicts with other resources and clients.
Regarding claim 2, Menon teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein the method further comprises sending information to the client indicative of the decision to grant resource access to the client. ([0079] Finally, in block 318, the unified generic resource provisioning system notifies (in one embodiment of the invention, using the notification system disclosed in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/287,973) the user that the resource has been provisioned. The unified generic resource provisioning system may do so in response to receiving a corresponding status event from the resource service provider. Thereafter, for as long as the resource remains provisioned to the user, the user can perform any authorized actions relative to the resource.)
Same motivation as claim 1
Regarding claim 3, Menon teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein the method further comprises, responsive to receiving the information indicative of the decision to grant resource access, providing a request to assign a hard lock to the resource for the client, wherein the hard lock is to block access to the resource by entities other than the client. ([0085] The second type of lock is a hard lock. Once a request has been submitted to a back-end component of the unified generic resource provisioning system and is being processed, hard locks are enabled to ensure that no other user can access that resource until the provisioning of the resource has been completed by the resource service provider. Before the provisioning of the resource is complete, unless the resource service provider sends an error message through a real-time synchronization event, the resource remains hard-locked.)
Same motivation as claim 1
Regarding claim 5, Richardson teaches:
The method of claim 3, wherein the method further comprises sending the information descriptive of the obligation to the quantum client device. (col 9 line 3- 16. The instance type may be associated with a quantum computing resource that has particular quantum computing characteristics, such as a particular number of qubits. The recommended instance may be pre-loaded with a suitable quantum algorithm 165 and/or an initial configuration 166 (e.g., initial values for the qubits) for that algorithm, or the algorithm may be recommended separately. The recommendation may be communicated to the client through any suitable interface, e.g., a graphical user interface (GUI) associated with the elastic quantum computing service 100. In one embodiment, the recommended instance may be provisioned and attached to a classical instance specified by the client based on user input accepting the recommendation.)
Regarding claim 6, Richardson teaches:
The method of claim 5, wherein the method further comprises receiving, from the quantum client device, information indicative of fulfillment of the obligation. (col 27, line 52-62. The client device 140 may provide input 1145 to the development environment 1100, e.g., across a network connection between the client device and the provider network 190. The input 1145 may represent, for example, entry of one or more programming elements, a selection of one or more programming elements presented by the development environment 1100 or an associated repository, acceptance or rejection of recommendations made by the development environment, input to compile or run or test a quantum algorithm, input to set an initial configuration of a quantum algorithm, and so on.)
Regarding claim 7, Menon teaches:
The method of claim 6, wherein the method further comprises providing a request to de-assign the hard lock from the resource for the client. ([0069] In one embodiment of the invention, each resource is also associated with one or more locks. Locks on resources may include soft locks and/or hard locks. Soft locks ensure that concurrent users are not editing the same resource simultaneously. A particular user may be granted a lock on a resource. While that lock is granted to the particular user, the system may allow the particular user to modify data associated with the resource, but prevent users other than the particular user from modifying data associated with the resource. Later, the lock on the resource may be released. While the resource's lock is not granted to any user, another user is allowed to obtain a lock on the resource. [0085] The second type of lock is a hard lock. Once a request has been submitted to a back-end component of the unified generic resource provisioning system and is being processed, hard locks are enabled to ensure that no other user can access that resource until the provisioning of the resource has been completed by the resource service provider. Before the provisioning of the resource is complete, unless the resource service provider sends an error message through a real-time synchronization event, the resource remains hard-locked.)
Same motivation as claim 1
Regarding claim 8, Richardson teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein the method further comprises performing the one or more actions associated with the quantum computing resource. (col 9, line 35-49. The attachment may be temporary, and the quantum computing resource(s) used to implement the quantum computing instance 161 may be returned to the pool of available quantum computing resources 160 when no longer needed or used by the classical instance. Deprovisioning the quantum computing instance 161 may include terminating the attachment (if not already terminated), deprogramming the quantum algorithm, erasing or resetting the values of any qubits, removing any client-specific data or metadata associated with the quantum instance (e.g., in a classical component that is local to the quantum computer and that manages the quantum computer), and/or otherwise preparing the reclaimed quantum computing resources for reuse by the same client or another client. E.N. The maintenance and reset operations are actions associated with the quantum resource. )
Regarding claim 9, Richardson teaches:
The method of claim 8, wherein performing the one or more actions associated with the quantum computing resource comprises providing, to the quantum access granting entity, instructions to release any policies associated with the decision to grant quantum computing resource access to the quantum client device. (col 15, line 21-35. In one embodiment, when the service 100 detects that the attachment 118 is terminated, the service may reclaim the resource(s) used to implement the quantum computing instance 161. The quantum computing resource(s) used to implement the quantum computing instance 161 may be returned to the pool of available quantum computing resources 160. Reclaiming the quantum computing instance 161 may include deprogramming the quantum algorithm, erasing or resetting the values of any qubits, removing any client-specific data or metadata associated with the quantum instance (e.g., in a classical component that is local to the quantum computer and that manages the quantum computer), and/or otherwise preparing the reclaimed quantum computing resources for reuse by the same client or another client.)
Regarding claim 10, Richardson teaches:
The method of claim 8, wherein performing the one or more actions associated with the quantum computing resource comprises: obtaining performance metrics associated with access of the quantum computing resource by the quantum client device; and providing the performance metrics to the quantum client device. (col 20, line 28-46. In one embodiment, the computing resources may be selected based (at least in part) on performance metric analysis 630, e.g., on analysis of performance metrics associated with prior tasks. For example, if a similar task (e.g., a task related to the same quantum computing problem domain or using a similar quantum algorithm) previously had superior performance on one type of resource in comparison to another, then the computing resource selection component 610 may select the resource that had the superior performance. In one embodiment, the computing resources may be selected based (at least in part) on a goal specified by the client 140, e.g., to optimize speed, accuracy, or cost. In one embodiment, the task management service 600 may recommend the use of particular quantum computing resources and/or classical computing resources to the client 140, and the resources may be selected and provisioned based (at least in part) on user input representing a selection among recommended options or a confirmation of the recommendation.)
Regarding claim 11, Richardson teaches:
The method of claim 8, wherein performing the one or more actions associated with the quantum computing resource comprises: providing, via an application programming interface (API) associated with the quantum computing resource, instructions to re-establish the quantum computing resource for subsequent access of the quantum computing resource. (col 23, line 4-21. The task management service 600 may be implemented in a service-oriented system in which multiple services (e.g., the resource manager 180, a computing virtualization service, and so on) collaborate according to a service-oriented architecture. In such an environment, the service 600 may offer its functionality as to multiple clients in a substantially concurrent manner. It is contemplated that any suitable number and configuration of clients may interact with the service 600. To enable clients to invoke functionality, the service 600 may expose any suitable interface(s), such as one or more APIs or other programmatic interfaces and/or graphical user interfaces (GUIs). The service 100 may be implemented using a plurality of different instances that are distributed throughout one or more networks, and each instance may offer access to the functionality of the corresponding service to various clients. For example, multiple computing devices may each offer the functionality of the service 600 to clients in various locations.)
Regarding claim 12, Richardson teaches:
The method of claim 1, wherein obtaining the request for access comprises obtaining, from the quantum client device via a quantum communication channel, the request for access to the quantum computing resource. (col 13, line 58-64. Upon receipt of user input representing a client's selection of a quantum computing instance type, such as instance type B 210B, the service 100 may provision and attach a quantum computing instance 161B of that particular instance type. The quantum algorithm 165 and initial configuration 166 may be selected from the catalog 200 or provided by the client. See also col 4, line 11-18. )
Regarding claim 13, Richardson teaches:
A quantum computing system, comprising: a memory; and a processor device coupled to the memory to: (Claim 1. A system, comprising:)
the claim recites similar limitation as corresponding claim 1 and is rejected for similar reasons as claim 1 using similar teachings and rationale.
Regarding claim 14, the claim recites similar limitation as corresponding claim 2 and is rejected for similar reasons as claim 2 using similar teachings and rationale.
Regarding claim 15, the claim recites similar limitation as corresponding claim 3 and is rejected for similar reasons as claim 3 using similar teachings and rationale.
Regarding claim 17, the claim recites similar limitation as corresponding claim 5 and is rejected for similar reasons as claim 5 using similar teachings and rationale.
Regarding claim 18, the claim recites similar limitation as corresponding claim 6 and is rejected for similar reasons as claim 6 using similar teachings and rationale.
Regarding claim 19, the claim recites similar limitation as corresponding claim 7 and is rejected for similar reasons as claim 7 using similar teachings and rationale.
Regarding claim 20, Richardson teaches:
A quantum computing system, comprising: a memory; and a processor device coupled to the memory to: (Claim 13 A computer-readable storage medium storing program instructions computer-executable to perform:
the claim recites similar limitation as corresponding claim 1 and is rejected for similar reasons as claim 1 using similar teachings and rationale.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLOS A ESPANA whose telephone number is (703)756-1069. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 a.m - 5 p.m EST.
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, LEWIS BULLOCK JR can be reached at (571)272-3759. 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.
/C.A.E./Examiner, Art Unit 2199
/LEWIS A BULLOCK JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2199
Prosecution Insights