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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 12, 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Rangasamy et al. (hereinafter Rangasamy, US 2017/0244787) in view of Qian et al. (hereinafter Qian, US 221/0168036).
Regarding claim 1, Rangasamy discloses:
a method comprising:
executing, in a first cloud environment, a service provided by the first cloud environment, the service being executed for a customer of a second cloud environment (see at least Fig. 1 for any number of clouds (including examples of a first and second cloud environments) where these clouds use a cloud exchange and where at least ph. [0009] discloses that customers of such a cloud, including a second such cloud may utilize the services of the cloud it is interacting with, and then be supplemented with the services of the other cloud(s) via the services of the cloud exchange that facilitates the supplemented services and resources to be accessed among the different cloud(s) that utilize the cloud exchange);
collecting, in the first cloud environment, observability data associated with execution of the service in the first cloud environment for the customer of the second cloud environment, the observability data comprising one or more metrics associated with the execution (see at least ph. [0013] that discloses that the system monitors gathered/collected traffic data for traffic among the cloud services that the system is servicing through the cloud exchange and how it will reroute data traffic from one cloud to another, and as the system is aware of this data it is capable of being observed by the system and therefore is properly considered as gathered / collected observability data); and
communicating the observability data collected from the first cloud environment to the second cloud environment (see at least ph. [0013] that discloses that the system monitors gathered/collected traffic data for traffic among the cloud services that the system is servicing through the cloud exchange and how it will reroute data traffic from one cloud to another, and as the system is aware of this data it is capable of being observed by the system and therefore is properly considered as gathered / collected observability data).
Rangasamy does not disclose, however, Qian discloses:
enable a user associated with the customer of a cloud environment to access observability data (see at least ph. [0067] that discloses the user of a networked system to metric data, which equates to user observability of such data).
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Rangasamy, by the teachings of Qian in order to allow user access via a single location rather than from accessing multiple networks individually, thereby increasing user efficiency. (Qian ph. [0067]).
Claim 12 is a computer readable non-transitory media storing computer-executable instructions version of claim 1, where Rangasamy utilizes such media with instructions executed on one or more processors throughout the reference to facilitate the features disclosed therein.
Claim 20 is a computing device version of claim 1, where Rangasamy utilizes such memory including instructions executed on one or more processors throughout the reference to facilitate the features disclosed therein.
Regarding claims 2 and 13, the rejections of claims 1 and 12 are incorporated and Rangasamy discloses:
the service provided by the first cloud environment corresponds to a database service, and executing the service corresponds to instantiating a type of database in a tenancy of the customer in the first cloud environment (see at least ph. [0050] for the database of the cloud exchange service system that assists in the facilitating of the services provided as part of the cloud exchange services, and note, as the database is present, that system then had it previously instantiated, and as this is allowing the client cloud(s) usage of this database service they are users/tenants of this service and its database while this relationship is in effect).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Rangasamy in view of Qian and further in view of Arya (US 2021/0301690)
Regarding claim 10, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and Rangasamy discloses:
the observability data (see at least ph. [0013] that discloses that the system monitors gathered/collected traffic data for traffic among the cloud services that the system is servicing through the cloud exchange and as the system is aware of this data it is capable of being observed by the system and therefore is properly considered as gathered / collected observability data) [further includes audit logs (see Qian and Arya below)] or one or more events occurring in a data-plane of the first cloud environment, the one or more events including a fail over of a resource associated with the service, a backup resource being deployed in the first cloud environment, or a critical event associated with a capacity of the resource.
Rangasamy does not expressly disclose, however, Qian discloses:
the data further includes [audit (see Arya below)] logs (see at least see at least ph. [0067] discloses logs and metrics of collected data).
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Rangasamy, by the teachings of Qian in order to allow user access via a single location rather than from accessing multiple networks individually, thereby increasing user efficiency. (Qian ph. [0067]).
Rangasamy and Qian do not expressly disclose, however, Arya discloses:
audit logs (see at least ph. [0038]).
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the teachings of Rangasamy, as modified by Qian, by the teachings of Arya in order to allow user a known file location where to access this needed data, thereby providing more user support. (Arya ph. [0038]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 – 9, 11, 14 – 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Other References Cited Not Relied Upon
Wuehler et al. (US 2021/0075681) discloses network interfaces that facilitate the exchange of data over a first network and or second network.
Horvitz et al. (US 2020/0332262) discloses a server capacity block form a first cloud provider with a data storage and retrieval capability block from a second cloud provider.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CRAIG C DORAIS whose telephone number is (571)270-3371. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am - 6:00pm.
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, Pierre Vital can be reached at 5712766799. 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.
/CRAIG C DORAIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2198