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 .
This is a Non Final Office Action responsive to Applicants Request for Continued Examination filed 7/29/2026.
Claims 1-9, 11-25 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.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bernat et al. (US 2020/0285523) in view of Gupta et al. (US 2016/0057041)
With respect to claim 1, Bernat discloses: receiving, from another networked processing unit, workload information for a workload, the workload including respective tasks to be processed among distributed computing entities (Fig. 10, 1002, Fig. 3, [0106]), wherein the workload information is received via the network interface from another networked processing unit located at a base station, on-premises server, or data center server (Fig. 3-5);
performing an analysis of network conditions for a predicted execution of the workload, based on the workload information, to analyze network availability among the distributed computing entities (Fig. 3, 324, 326);
performing an analysis of compute conditions for the predicted execution of the workload, based on the workload information, to analyze processing availability among the distributed computing entities (Fig. 4, 348, 350); and
identifying locations of the distributed computing entities to deploy the workload, based on the analysis of network conditions and the analysis of compute conditions (Fig. 5).
Bernat does not specifically disclose: wherein the another networked processing unit is discrete from a central processing unit of the base station, on-premise server, or data center server.
However, Gupta discloses: wherein the another networked processing unit is discrete from a central processing unit of the base station, on-premise server, or data center server (0032, “clients” correspond to the “networked processing unit”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to incorporate the teachings of Gupta to ensure poorly performing virtual machines are detected and remediated to ensure meeting SLAs.
With respect to claim 2, Bernat discloses: causing activation of the identified locations of the distributed computing entities to enable execution of the workload (Figs. 3-5, if nodes need to be augmented the orchestrator provides connection data usable to couple to other resources, therefore, they must be activated prior to communication).
With respect to claim 3, Bernat discloses: wherein the network availability relates to a measurement of congestion, priority, and latency of network connections used among the distributed computing entities (Fig. 3, 324, 326).
With respect to claim 4, Bernat discloses: wherein the processing availability relates to a measurement of compute resources located among the distributed computing entities (Fig. 3, 310, 312, 314, 316).
With respect to claim 5, Bernat discloses: wherein the compute resources include: at least a first plurality of central processing unit (CPU) cores located at a first computing node and at least a second plurality of CPU cores located at a second computing node (Fig. 5, 366, 368, Fig. 7, 702, 704).
With respect to claim 6, Bernat discloses: wherein the compute resources include: at least a first plurality of accelerators located at a first computing node and at least a second plurality of accelerators located at a second computing node (id.).
With respect to claim 7, Bernat discloses: performing an analysis of power usage and power availability among the distributed computing entities; wherein identifying the locations in the distributed computing entities to deploy the workload is further based on the analysis of power usage and power availability (Figs. 3-5).
With respect to claim 8, Bernat discloses: causing a change to at least one power state at the identified locations of the distributed computing entities during deployment of the workload ([0129],[0130]).
With respect to claim 9, Bernat discloses: wherein the analysis of network conditions and the analysis of compute conditions each include evaluation of at least one priority of the workload and evaluation of at least one characteristic of a service level agreement for the workload ([0022], [0051], [0084]).
With respect to claim 11, Bernat discloses: providing commands to cause a network switch or gateway to control network traffic to the identified locations of the distributed computing entities during deployment of the workload (Fig. 3-5, [0136]).
With respect to the remaining claims, they recite similar limitations as claims 1-9, and 11, and are therefore rejected under the same citations and rationale.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments 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 WISSAM RASHID whose telephone number is (571)270-3758. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 am-5:00 pm.
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 at (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.
/WISSAM RASHID/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2195
Prosecution Insights