FINAL REJECTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
1. Claims 1-21, 27, and 29-30 are presented for examination.
2. The text of those applicable section of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in the prior Office Action.
3. The rejections are respectfully maintained that is applicable to the amended claims for applicant's convenience.
4. Claims 1-10, 12-21, 27 and 29-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Imwalle et al. (Imwalle), US publication no. 2013/0233532 A1.
As per claim 1, Imwalle discloses an apparatus [figure 1A] comprising:
memory; machine readable instructions; and at least one processor circuit to at least one of instantiate or execute the machine readable instructions [figures 7, 8; para 74] to:
determine an environmental conditions setpoint based on information related to operation of devices within a data center, the information including at least one of a future workload status or a current workload status of the devices [para 38, 54, 73, 175]; and
output the environmental conditions setpoint to facilitate control of an environmental condition in the data center [figures 7, 8; para 74, 75, 176, 180, 183], the control of the environmental conditions in the data center being independent of a control of a local cooling system for ones of the devices [para 71,75, 118, 171].
Imwalle teaches:
[0074] In some embodiments, the approach control may be dynamic ( e.g., approach temperature set point for one or more cooling units 16 may vary over time). For example, a dynamic approach control may allow for variance of a desired approach control set point spatially and temporally. The result may be that all (or most) of the available capacity of cooling fluid from a central cooling plant ( e.g., a chiller plant, free
cooling facility, and/or both) can be more optimally deployed. By dynamically varying the approach temperature set point in response to such factors as, for example, the types of electronic devices ( e.g., servers, processors, memory components, etc.) deployed at various locations on the data center floor; the types of services executed by such devices (e.g., web searching, electronic mail, and other web based services);
an actual aggregate heat load on the data center floor; an actual cooling system capacity under current weather conditions, data center air temperatures ( e.g., for airflows 18, 24, 26, and/or 28) can be moderated. Further, by dynamically varying the approach temperature, oversubscription ( e.g., design of a cooling system with more cooling fluid available than used) of the cooling fluid supply 32 may be diminished.
[0118] The illustrated circulation system 200 also includes a controller 224 in communication with the control valve 218. In some embodiments, the controller 224 may modulate the control valve 218 according to an approach temperature set
point ( e.g., a predetermined value defined by a difference between a leaving air temperature of the cooling apparatus 202 and an entering fluid temperature to the cooling coils 210). In some embodiments, as described above, the controller
224 may adjust the approach temperature set point according to a variety of factors. Further, in some embodiments, the controller 224 may be an individual ( e.g., slave) controller that receives commands (e.g., approach temperature set point) from a master or main controller of the air circulation system 200 and/or data center.
[0171] In step 712, the flow rate of the cooling fluid circulated to the cooling unit is modulated based on a change in the approach temperature set point. For example, in some embodiments (some of which are described more fully with reference to FIGS. 8-9), the approach temperature to the cooling unit may be adjusted according to, for example, outside weather temperature, data center environmental conditions, and/or available or instantaneous cooling requirements/capacity, to name but a few. For example, in some embodiments, a controller ( e.g., a main controller communicably
coupled to individual controllers coupled to control valves of the cooling units) may monitor a percentage open position of the control valves of respective cooling units in the data center.
[0180] In step 812, a determination is made whether the determined approach temperature set point varies from, for example, a current approach temperature set point. As another example, it may be determined whether the determined approach temperature set point varies from a predetermined approach temperature set point. If the determination is made that the determined approach temperature set point does not vary from the current approach temperature set point and/or predetermined temperature set point, then the process 800 returns to step 800. If the determination is made that the determined approach temperature set point does vary from the current approach temperature set point and/or predetermined temperature set point, then at step 814, the approach temperature set point on one or more cooling units in the data
center is updated ( e.g., through a main controller coupled to controllers of control valves associated with respective cooling units). Process 800 may return to step 802.
As per claim 2, Imwalle discloses the environmental conditions setpoint includes a temperature setpoint [para 171, 179].
As per claim 3, Imwalle discloses the environmental conditions setpoint includes a humidity setpoint [para 100, 171, 176].
As per claim 4, Imwalle discloses the information includes computing performance parameters of the devices [para 6, 175].
As per claim 5, Imwalle discloses the information includes a cooling status of the devices within the data center [para 177, 178].
As per claim 6, Imwalle discloses the cooling status includes at least one of a device temperature, a temperature limit, a location of the device within the data center [para 177, 178], or cooling headroom availability [para 160].
As per claim 7, Imwalle discloses one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to obtain a current environment temperature of a plot of the data center [para 66, 175].
As per claim 8, Imwalle discloses one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to obtain a current humidity value of a plot of the data center [para 97, 100, 175-176].
As per claim 9, Imwalle discloses the environmental conditions setpoint is one of a plurality of setpoints and the data center includes a plurality of plots, respective ones of the plots including a subset of the devices within the data center, one or more of the at least one processor circuit to output different ones of the plurality of setpoints for different ones of the plots [figure 1A; para 66, 175, 180].
As per claim 10, Imwalle discloses one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to output the environmental conditions setpoint to automatically cause a change to the environmental conditions [figure 8; para 179-180].
As per claim 12, Imwalle discloses one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to limit the environmental conditions setpoint based on a bi-directional guard band to at least one of protect the devices in the data center or maintain a performance level for the devices. [figure 8; para 170, 180, 183].
As per claim 13, Imwalle discloses one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to: execute a parameterization function based on the information to determine the environmental conditions setpoint; and update the environmental conditions setpoint using a bi-directional guard band [figure 8; para 175-180].
As to claims 14-20, directed to a machine readable recording medium
storing the instructions to perform the method of steps executed by the system as set forth in claims 1-10 and 12-13. Therefore, it is rejected on the same basis as set forth
hereinabove.
As to claims 21, 27 and 29-31, claims 1-10 and 12-13 basically are the corresponding elements that are carried out the method of operating step in claims 21, 27 and 29-31. Accordingly, claims 21, 27 and 29-31 are rejected for the same reason as set forth in claims 1-10 and 12-13.
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 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.
5. 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.
6. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Imwalle et al. (Imwalle) US publication no. 2013/0233532 A1 in view of Hyser et al. (Hyser), US patent no. 9003003.
As per claim 11, Imwalle fails to disclose one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to output the environmental conditions setpoint to a display.
Hyser discloses one or more of the at least one processor circuit is to output the environmental conditions setpoint to a display [figure 5A; col. 10, lines 47-55].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time the invention to combine the teachings of Imwalle and Hyser because they both disclose an cooling data center system, the specify teachings of Hyser stated above would have further enhanced the performance and functionality of Imwalle system to obtain predictable results to display for user.
7. Examiner's note: Examiner has cited particular paragraphs and columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims above for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. MPEP 2141.02 VI: “PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS."
Response to Arguments
8. Applicant's arguments filed 05/24/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
9. In the remarks, applicants argued in substance that Imwalle fails to disclose the control of the environmental conditions data center being independent of a control of a local cooling system for ones of the devices.
10. In response to applicant’s argument, Imwalle discloses the claimed limitation of the control of the environmental conditions data center being independent of a control of a local cooling system for ones of the devices [para 71,75, 118, 171].
Also see detailed action above.
Conclusion
11. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHUN CAO whose telephone number is (571)272-3664. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:30 am-4:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kamini Shah can be reached on 571-272-2279. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/CHUN CAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115
Prosecution Insights