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 with respect to claim(s) 1, 2, 4-9, 11-16, and 18-23 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.
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.
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, 2, 4-9, 11-16, and 18-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dolan (US 10,171,292) and further in view of Bell (US 10,353,729).
Regarding claim 1, Dolan teaches: A method, comprising:
generating, by a distributed computing system of a cloud service provider, a virtual cloud network in a host region (col. 7:2-6, “a VPC of an Infrastructure Staging Region (ISR). For example, the ISS 118 may deploy (or install) configuration services 114, . . . , 116 (including 302, . . . , 308) in the ISR 108, and the ISR 108 may be configured inside a VPC 106”) (col. 6:63-67, “at 402, network equipment can be racked and cabled in a new region, such as region 104. More specifically, routers 144-145, switches 146 and hosts 147 can be connected in racks 148, forming one or more data centers 160”);
implementing, by the distributed computing system, a virtual bootstrap environment in the virtual cloud network (col. 6:36-40, “the ISR 108 may be configured with one or more core configuration tools (or services) 114, . . . , 116 for deploying and configuring cloud infrastructure (including network infrastructure and compute services) in the new region 104”);
deploying, by the distributed computing system using a cloud infrastructure orchestration service in the host region, a deployment orchestrations service in the virtual bootstrap environment (col. 7:19-22, “The server building tool 304 may generate server configuration data 314 for establishing server names, IP addresses, initial host software image and other configuration of servers/hosts 147”);
deploying, by the distributed computing system using the cloud infrastructure orchestration service, a first service in the virtual bootstrap environment (col. 4:48-50, “The ISS 118 can install (or launch) the configuration services 114, . . . , 116 on server computers 110, . . . , 112 in a separate infrastructure staging region (ISR) 108”);
establishing, by the distributed computing system, a network connection between the virtual cloud network and a target region (col. 7:48-49, “At 506, a connection can be established between the VPC and the new region”); and
deploying, by the distributed computing system and using the deployment orchestration service, an instance of the first service to the target region, the instance of the first service deployed over the network connection (col. 7:51-54, “At 508, the ISS 118 can configure over the established connection the one or more network resources in the new region using at least one of the core configuration services” and col. 7:23-27, “the software deployment tool 308 may deploy and install one or more compute service software packages 310 at the hosts 147, which can include software used for configuring components of the data center 160 or essential management services 309”).
Dolan does not teach; however, Bell more expressly discloses: the instance of the first service in the target regions is characterized by a dependency on a second service in the [first environment] (col. 14:7-10, “At step 420, service orchestration manager 134 determines whether the service dependency is an external service (e.g., a service not managed within dispatcher virtual machine 130)” and col. 14:23-25, “At step 450, service orchestration manager 134 can connect the external service to the service being instantiated”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, at the effective filing date of the invention, to have applied the known technique of the instance of the first service in the target regions is characterized by a dependency on a second service in the [first environment], as taught by Bell, in the same way to the target and virtual bootstrap environment, as taught by Dolan. Both inventions are in the field of deploying services in computing environments, and combining them would have predictably resulted in “managing service dependencies in a virtual machine-based development environment,” as indicated by Bell (col. 4:16-17).
Regarding claim 2, Dolan teaches: The method of claim 1, further comprising: deploying, by the distributed computing system using the cloud infrastructure orchestration service, a second service in the virtual bootstrap environment (col. 1:59-62, “The infrastructure staging region may be deployed in a virtual private cloud (VPC), and the VPC may be configured with network configuration services (or build tools)”); and provisioning, by the distributed computing system using the second service, computing infrastructure in the target region (col. 7:12-19, “At 410, new region configuration data (e.g., 150) is received. For example, the cable validation tool 306 can provide validation data 312 to validate the cable connections in the data center 160. The switch building tool 302 may generate switch configuration data 316 for establishing switch names, IP addresses and other configuration of switches 146”); wherein deploying the instance of the first service comprises deploying the instance of the first service to the provisioned computing infrastructure (col. 7:22-25, “After the servers are configured, at 412, the software deployment tool 308 may deploy and install one or more compute service software packages 310 at the hosts 147”).
Regarding claim 4, Dolan teaches: The method of claim 1, wherein the host region comprises a host data center (col. 3:37-40, “each region could represent a cluster (e.g., a group of hosts in a particular data center, such as data center 160 in region 104) or another type of geographical area (e.g., state or country)”).
Regarding claim 5, Dolan teaches: The method of claim 1, wherein the target region comprises a target data center (col. 3:58-62, “the specification data 119 may specify a number and type of network routers, switches, racks and hosts that will form a network infrastructure associated with the cloud infrastructure (e.g., data center 160) in the new region 104.”).
Regarding claim 6, Dolan teaches: The method of claim 1, wherein the network connection comprises a virtual private network connection (col. 5:24-28, “The ISR 220 may also be configured to enable secure private access from one or more other regions (e.g., new region network 230) over the public network 200 (e.g., via VPN connections established over interconnections 200a and 200b)”).
Regarding claim 7, Dolan teaches: The method of claim 6, further comprising establishing an IPSec tunnel via the virtual private network connection (col. 6:16-21, “After VPN access has been appropriately enabled and/or configured, a VPN connection may be established between the ISR network 220 and the new region network 230, such as initiated by using IPsec (“Internet Protocol Security”) or other appropriate communication technologies”).
Regarding claim 21, Dolan teaches: The method of claim 1, wherein the deployment orchestration service is deployed to the virtual bootstrap environment after the first service (col. 4:48-50, “The ISS 118 can install (or launch) the configuration services 114, . . . , 116 on server computers 110, . . . , 112 in a separate infrastructure staging region (ISR) 108” and col. 9:43-62, “Although the operations of some of the disclosed methods are described in a particular, sequential order for convenient presentation, it should be understood that this manner of description encompasses rearrangement, unless a particular ordering is required by specific language set forth below”).
Claims 8, 9, 11-16, 18-20, 22, and 23 recite commensurate subject matter as claims 1, 2, 4-7, and 21. Therefore, they are rejected for the same reasons.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 2, 4-9, 11-16, and 18-23 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 18/122,674 (reference application) and further in view of Dolan (US 10,171,292). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference application teaches or at least suggests each and every limitation of the instant application, except potentially for certain limitations regarding the “a deployment orchestration service,” which is taught by Dolan (see rejection above). See claim correspondence below.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Instant Application
Reference Application
1. (Currently Amended) A method, comprising: generating, by a distributed computing system of a cloud service provider, a virtual cloud network in a host region; implementing, by the distributed computing system, a virtual bootstrap environment in the virtual cloud network; deploying, by the distributed computing system using a cloud infrastructure orchestration service in the host region, a deployment orchestration service in the virtual bootstrap environment deploying, by the distributed computing system using the cloud infrastructure orchestration service, a first service in the virtual bootstrap environment; establishing, by the distributed computing system, a network connection between the virtual cloud network and a target region; and deploying, by the distributed computing system and using the deployment orchestration service, of the virtual bootstrap environment an instance of the first service to the target region, the resources instance of the first service deployed over the network connection, and the instance of the first service in the target region is characterized by a dependency on a second service in the virtual bootstrap environment.
1. A method, comprising: receiving, at a manager service, a build request; generating, by the manager service and based at least in part on the build request, a physical build request for building physical resources within a first data center; upon receiving an indication that the physical resources corresponding to the physical build request have been built, implementing, by the manager service, a virtual bootstrap environment at a second data center communicatively connected to the first data center; deploying, by the manager service using the virtual bootstrap environment, software resources to the physical resources, the software resources associated with cloud services executed on the physical resources; and configuring, by the manager service, the physical resources for transmitting to a destination site by at least: generating an inventory of the physical resources; and generating, using the inventory, a network configuration corresponding to a network topology of the physical resources in the first data center, the network configuration comprising an identifier for at least one physical resource in the inventory and information associating the at least one physical resource with neighboring physical resources according to the network topology.
Claims 1, 2, 4-9, 11-16, and 18-23 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,204,916 and further in view of Dolan (US 10,171,292). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because U.S. Patent No. 12,204,916 teaches or at least suggests each and every limitation of the instant application, except potentially for certain limitations regarding the “a deployment orchestration service,” which is taught by Dolan (see rejection above). See claim correspondence below.
Instant Application
U.S. Patent No. 12,204,916
1. (Currently Amended) A method, comprising: generating, by a distributed computing system of a cloud service provider, a virtual cloud network in a host region; implementing, by the distributed computing system, a virtual bootstrap environment in the virtual cloud network; deploying, by the distributed computing system using a cloud infrastructure orchestration service in the host region, a deployment orchestration service in the virtual bootstrap environment deploying, by the distributed computing system using the cloud infrastructure orchestration service, a first service in the virtual bootstrap environment; establishing, by the distributed computing system, a network connection between the virtual cloud network and a target region; and deploying, by the distributed computing system and using the deployment orchestration service, of the virtual bootstrap environment an instance of the first service to the target region, the resources instance of the first service deployed over the network connection, and the instance of the first service in the target region is characterized by a dependency on a second service in the virtual bootstrap environment.
1. A method, comprising: generating, by a distributed computing system of a cloud service provider, a virtual cloud network in a data center of a host region; implementing, by the distributed computing system, a virtual bootstrap environment in the virtual cloud network, the virtual bootstrap environment comprising a plurality of services; deploying, by the distributed computing system, an instance of one of the plurality of services of the virtual bootstrap environment to a target region data center; receiving, from the instance of the service in the target region data center, an indication that the instance was successfully deployed; migrating data resources from the virtual bootstrap environment to the target region data center, the data resources associated with the instance of the service deployed to the target region, and the data resources identified using a resource hunter service executing in the distributed computing system; identifying, responsive to the indication and after migrating the data resources, a resource associated with the instance of the service; and updating, by the distributed computing system, a second service of the plurality of services with the resource.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JACOB D DASCOMB whose telephone number is (571)272-9993. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00.
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 (571) 272-4215. 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.
/JACOB D DASCOMB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2198