Response to Amendment
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 action is responsive to application filed on 8/5/26. Claims 1, 3, 5, 6 and 8-16 are pending.
Abstract analysis: Synchronization is performed between two distinct servers using generated update log information. Claims are statutory and compliant.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 6 and 8-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novakovic et al (USPN. 2018/0025043) in view of Hoffmann et al (USPN. 11,120,047).off
Regarding claims 1 and 16, Novakovic discloses an information processing apparatus and medium establishing data synchronization with a second information processing apparatus, the information processing apparatus comprising (figs. 1-3):
a processor configured to: register, in information processing apparatus update log information, identification information on groups each including related data among data updated in the information processing apparatus (figs. 1, 3 and 4, Servers 201 and 202, par. 30, update logs, graph update log is generated by server 201 comprising related updated data, see processor);
in response to reception of second information processing apparatus update log information including identification information on a group including related data among data updated in the second information processing apparatus (figs. 2 and 3, pars. 29-30, server 202 retrieves graph update log 231 and utilizes the updated values in computing the graph update for graph portion 226), perform a synchronization process by checking the second information processing apparatus update log information against the information processing apparatus update log information (pars. 29-30, synchronization is performed during the computing the graph update), the synchronization process establishing synchronization on data forming each synchronization target group, the synchronization target group being one of the groups and as a synchronization target by the identification information thereof (figs. 4 and 5, server 201 receives graph update logs from other server generated specifically for server 201 via notifications between the servers, see item 508 wherein the graph update logs generated between the servers are updated to shared memory);
and delete the identification information on the synchronization target group from the information processing apparatus update log information if synchronization is established on all data forming the synchronization target group and the identification information on the synchronization target group is included in the information processing apparatus update log information (figs. 4, 5 and 6, items 508, 510 and 622, and par. 41, graph processing instructions cause notifications to other servers that graph update log has been flushed among each server),
wherein the synchronization process includes:
when the synchronization target group is included in both the information processing apparatus update log information and the second information processing apparatus update log information (fig. 2, graph portions 225 and 226, Server 1 and Server 2), establishing synchronization by exchanging the data forming the synchronization target group (fig. 5, items 504 and 506, pars. 34-36, generate a graph update log by batching the vertex updates of the two servers).
when the synchronization target group is included in the information processing apparatus update log information but not included in the second information processing apparatus update log information, establishing synchronization by transmitting the data forming the synchronization target group to the second information processing apparatus (fig. 2, par. 30, server includes a computation phase, flush phase and retrieval phase, relevant vertex updates other graph server processing graph portions and send notifications. Note that dependent on the graph portion processed relative vertex updates are performed); and
when the synchronization target group is included in the second information processing apparatus update log information but not the information processing apparatus update log information, establishing synchronization by receiving the data forming the synchronization target group from the second information processing apparatus (fig. 2, par. 30, server includes a computation phase, flush phase and retrieval phase, relevant vertex updates other graph server processing graph portions and send notifications. Note that dependent on the graph portion processed relative vertex updates are performed between the server 1 and server 2). To the degree that Novakovic does not explicitly teach the update logs being compared on both local and target side as claimed, Hoffmann teaches comparing change log chunks on source and target databases continuously and in any order (fig. 4, col. 10, line 42 to col. 12, line 20, the change logs are out of order on either the source or target database and can be continuously compared, Hoffmann). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to integrate Hoffmann change log handling into Novakovic synchronization using update/change logs with graph portions. One would have been motivated to integrate the systems to handle correction during synchronization based on change logs/graphs comparisons (fig. 14, step 14/03, “corrective action”, Hoffmann).
3. Novakovic in view of Hoffmann teach, wherein the processor is configured to, if data of a specific data item is included in but has different contents in the information processing apparatus update log information and in the second information processing apparatus update log information, make an adjustment to establish synchronization on the data of the specific data item in accordance with a predetermined rule (fig. 5, items 504 and 506, pars. 34-36, generate a graph update log by batching the vertex updates of the two servers, see par. 29, rules followed for specific graph portions of two different servers, Novakovic).
5. Novakovic in view of Hoffmann teach, wherein the synchronization target group is included in both the information processing apparatus update log information and the second information processing apparatus update log information, and the processor is configured to, after receiving from the second information processing apparatus a notification that synchronization of all data forming the synchronization target group has been normally established, delete the identification information on the synchronization target group from the information processing apparatus update log information (figs. 5 and 6, par. 40, flushing update graph to a predetermined memory location of the shared memory, Novakovic).
6. Novakovic in view of Hoffmann teach, wherein the synchronization target group is included in the second information processing apparatus update log information but not the information processing apparatus update log information and the processor is configured to, after receiving from the second information processing apparatus a notification that synchronization of all data forming the synchronization target group has been normally established, delete the identification information on the synchronization target group from the information processing apparatus update log information (fig. 2 and 3, par. 30-31, server includes a computation phase, flush phase and retrieval phase, relevant vertex updates other graph server processing graph portions and send notifications. Figure 4 shows flushing a graph update log to alternating location in shared memory, Novakovic).
8. Novakovic in view of Hoffmann teach wherein the synchronization target group is included in both the information processing apparatus update log information and the second information processing apparatus update log information the processor is configured to transmit to the second information processing apparatus a notification that synchronization of all the data forming the synchronization target group has been normally established (fig. 5, item 510, notify server about respective updates and flushed data, Novakovic).
9. Novakovic in view of Hoffmann teach, wherein when the synchronization target group is included in the information processing apparatus update log information but not included in the second information processing apparatus update log information the processor is configured to transmit to the second information processing apparatus a notification that synchronization of all the data forming the synchronization target group has been normally established (fig. 5, item 510, notify second graph processing server that update log has been flushed, Novakovic).
10. Novakovic in view of Hoffmann teach, wherein the processor is configured to, if data to be included in the synchronization target group is updated in the information processing apparatus with the synchronization target group being in a present synchronization process, determine whether to establish synchronization on the updated data in the present synchronization process in accordance with a predetermined condition (figs. 2 and 6, graph processing item 622, par. 30, server includes a computation phase, flush phase and retrieval phase, relevant vertex updates other graph server processing graph portions and send notifications. Note that dependent on the graph portion processed relative vertex updates are performed between the server 1 and server 2. Also, the retrieval phase and computational phase consider relevant graph portions to a number of servers and use shared memory, Novakovic).
11. Novakovic discloses information processing apparatus establishing data synchronization with a second information processing apparatus, comprising: a processor configured to (fig. 1, par. 9, processing logic and device):
register, in update log information, identification information on groups each including related data among data updated in the information processing apparatus (figs. 3 and 4, Servers 201 and 202, par. 30, update logs, graph update log is generated by server 201 comprising related updated data);
transmit the update log information to the second information processing apparatus at a start of a synchronization process of the data (figs. 2 and 3, pars. 23 and 24, server 201 flushes graph update log 231 to for server 202); and
perform in response to the transmission of the update log information the synchronization process on each synchronization target group specified by the second information processing apparatus to establish synchronization on data forming the synchronization group, the synchronization target group being one of the groups (figs. 4 and 5, server 201 receives graph update logs from other server generated specifically for server 201 via notifications between the servers, see item 508 wherein the graph update logs generated between the servers are updated to shared memory, note that synchronization is performed during the computing the graph update, pars. 29-30),
wherein the synchronization process includes:
when the synchronization target group is included in both the information processing apparatus update log information and the second information processing apparatus update log information (fig. 2, graph portions 225 and 226, Server 1 and Server 2), establishing synchronization by exchanging the data forming the synchronization target group (fig. 5, items 504 and 506, pars. 34-36, generate a graph update log by batching the vertex updates of the two servers).
when the synchronization target group is included in the information processing apparatus update log information but not included in the second information processing apparatus update log information, establishing synchronization by transmitting the data forming the synchronization target group to the second information processing apparatus (fig. 2, par. 30, server includes a computation phase, flush phase and retrieval phase, relevant vertex updates other graph server processing graph portions and send notifications. Note that dependent on the graph portion processed relative vertex updates are performed); and
when the synchronization target group is included in the second information processing apparatus update log information but not the information processing apparatus update log information, establishing synchronization by receiving the data forming the synchronization target group from the second information processing apparatus (fig. 2, par. 30, server includes a computation phase, flush phase and retrieval phase, relevant vertex updates other graph server processing graph portions and send notifications. Note that dependent on the graph portion processed relative vertex updates are performed between the server 1 and server 2). To the degree that Novakovic does not explicitly teach the update logs being compared on both local and target side as claimed, Hoffmann teaches comparing change log chunks on source and target databases continuously and in any order (fig. 4, col. 10, line 42 to col. 12, line 20, the change logs are out of order on either the source or target database and can be continuously compared, Hoffmann). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to integrate Hoffmann change log handling into Novakovic synchronization using update/change logs with graph portions. One would have been motivated to integrate the systems to handle correction during synchronization between source and target databases based on change logs/graphs comparisons (fig. 14, step 14/03, “corrective action”, Hoffmann).
12. Novakovic in view of Hoffmann teach, wherein the processor is configured to, if the identification information on the synchronization target group has been registered in the update log information, delete the identification information on the synchronization target group from the update log information after the synchronization process is normally completed (figs. 5 and 6, par. 40, flushing update graph to a predetermined memory location of the shared memory, Novakovic).
13. Novakovic in view of Hoffmann teach wherein the processor is configured to, if the synchronization process is normally completed, transmit a notification of a normal completion to the second information processing apparatus (fig. 5, item 510, notifications sent, Novakovic).
14 and 15. Novakovic in view of Hoffmann teach information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the second information processing apparatus is formed on a cloud (par. 9, servers comprising a data center, Novakovic).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/5/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive because a new grounds of rejection is filed.
Applicant alleges the three way synchronization as now claimed is not taught by Novakovic.
Examiner has issued a new ground of rejection to address the amended concept in the present claims. Novakovic in view of Hoffmann now teach three way synchronization by teaching comparing both source database update log with target database update log in any order of steps. This way errors in synchronization may be detected or avoided as presented in the updated office action. Please the office action for details.
Previous remarks:
Applicant alleges the registration on groups in update log are not taught by the prior art.
Examiner disagrees.
The relevant portion of the office action reads,
“a processor configured to: register, in information processing apparatus update log information, identification information on groups each including related data among data updated in the information processing apparatus (figs. 1, 3 and 4, Servers 201 and 202, par. 30, update logs, graph update log is generated by server 201 comprising related updated data, see processor)”.
Novakovic discloses “flush specifically generated graph update logs respectively including relevant vertex updates for other graph processing servers processing adjacent graph portions” (par. 30) and “the graph processing server 201 may batch updated vertex values (or other graph updates) computed for the graph portion 225 and affecting the adjacent graph portion 226 (par. 23). The log whether it’s built with “batch updated vertex values” or updated with “flush… generated graph update logs… for other graph processing servers” comprises updating storage/or registering in the information log identifying information regarding different graph processing servers comprising relevant/updated (vertex) values, which reads on the present set of claims.
Applicant alleges the prior art does not perform a sync process by checking received update log information against update log information.
Examiner disagrees.
The relevant portion of the office action reads,
“perform a synchronization process by checking the second information processing apparatus update log information against the information processing apparatus update log information (pars. 29-30, synchronization is performed during the computing the graph update), the synchronization process establishing synchronization on data forming each synchronization target group, the synchronization target group being one of the groups and as a synchronization target by the identification information thereof (figs. 4 and 5, server 201 receives graph update logs from other server generated specifically for server 201 via notifications between the servers, see item 508 wherein the graph update logs generated between the servers are updated to shared memory)”.
Sharing log updates between the different servers comprises synchronizing data when the computing of the graph updates is performed and shared among the servers.
All allegations are believed moot.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure in the field of data synchronizing:
USPN. 2023/0008732 par. 43 updating log files.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCIN R FILIPCZYK whose telephone number is (571)272-4019. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-4 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, Kavita Stanley can be reached at 571-272-8352. 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.
September 14, 2026
/MARCIN R FILIPCZYK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2153
Prosecution Insights