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 Objections
Claim(s) 9 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 9 recites “wherein the server is located at of a”. The examiner believes this is a typo. A suggested amendment to the claim is “wherein the server is located at
Claim 12 recites “wherein the server includes a cooling system and the determination the health of the server includes”. The examiner believes this is a typo. A suggested amendment to the claim is “wherein the server includes a cooling system and the determining the health of the server includes”. For examination purposes, the claim will be interpreted as suggested.
Appropriate correction is required.
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, 3, 8, 10, 14, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 20140173130 (“Uluderya”) in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 20200097352 (“Mahindru”).
Regarding claim 1, Uluderya teaches
An apparatus comprising: memory; machine-readable instructions; and processor circuitry to execute the machine-readable instructions to: ([0083]: processor that executes instructions in memory to perform the methods)
determine a health of a server; ([0037]-[0039]: determine the health of servers)
determine a threshold…associated with the server; and ([0050]: determine a health threshold from throttling rules for servers)
in response to determining the health does not a satisfy the threshold, throttle a workload on the server. ([0039], [0052], [0058]: do not route requests to a server if the server does not satisfy the health threshold)
Uluderya does not teach a threshold based on a workload service level agreement.
Mahindru teaches
a threshold based on a workload service level agreement ([0091], [0092]: health threshold based on a workload SLA)
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine Mahindru’s SLA-defined health threshold with Uluderya’s health threshold.
One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date would have been motivated to make the combination to improve the efficiency of failure handling while ensuring quality of service based on user preferences (Mahindru, [0023], [0025], [0091]).
Regarding claim 3, Uluderya in view of Mahindru further teaches
wherein the server is a first server, the threshold is a first threshold, and the processor circuitry is to execute the machine-readable instructions to: (Uluderya, [0037]-[0039], [0050], [0052]: first server of servers, selected threshold of thresholds)
determine a second threshold based on the workload service level agreement; and (Uluderya, [0050], [0052]: multiple thresholds; Mahindru, [0091], [0092]: different health thresholds based on workload SLA)
migrate the workload to a second server different than the first server. (Uluderya, [0039]: requests are not sent to the sick server and instead are sent to healthy servers)
Claim(s) 8, 10, the methods(s) implemented by the apparatus(s) of claim(s) 1, 3, respectively, is/are rejected on the same grounds as claim(s) 1, 3, respectively.
Claim(s) 14, 16, the medium(s) that implement(s) the apparatus(s) of claim(s) 1, 3, respectively, is/are rejected on the same grounds as claim(s) 1, 3, respectively.
Regarding claim 14, Uluderya in view of Mahindru further teaches
A non-transitory computer readable storage medium comprising machine-readable instructions, which when executed, caused one or more processors to ([0083]: processor that executes instructions in memory to perform the methods)
Claim(s) 2, 9, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 20140173130 (“Uluderya”) in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 20200097352 (“Mahindru”) and US Patent Application Publication No. 20220206485 (“Qadri”).
Regarding claim 2, Uluderya in view of Mahindru does not further teach the remaining limitations.
Qadri teaches
wherein the server is disposed in a marine environment ([0026]: on premise server on a ship), a deep Earth environment, or a high altitude environment.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine Qadri’s environment with Uluderya in view of Mahindru’s health monitoring.
One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date would have been motivated to make the combination to allow users to have continuous access to services while maintaining server health in an efficient manner (Qadri, [0002], [0022]).
Claim(s) 9 the methods(s) implemented by the apparatus(s) of claim(s) 2 respectively, is/are rejected on the same grounds as claim(s) 2 respectively.
Claim(s) 15, the medium(s) that implement(s) the apparatus(s) of claim(s) 2, respectively, is/are rejected on the same grounds as claim(s) 2, respectively.
Claim(s) 4, 11, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 20140173130 (“Uluderya”) in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 20200097352 (“Mahindru”) and US Patent Application Publication No. 20240126352 (“Manousakis”).
Regarding claim 4, Uluderya in view of Mahindru does not further teach the remaining limitations.
Manousakis teaches
wherein the first server includes a liquid-based cooling system and the second server includes an air-based cooling system. ([0012], [0047], [0057]: migration between liquid cooled servers)
As noted in Manousakis, [0012], the disclosed liquid-based cooling systems are also air-based. Therefore, migration between liquid cooled servers discloses the migration from a first server including a liquid-based cooling system and a second server including an air-based cooling system.
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine Manousakis’ environment with Uluderya in view of Mahindru’s migration.
One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date would have been motivated to make the combination to mitigate the impacts on workloads caused by thermal management loss (Manousakis [0001], [0036])
Claim(s) 11, the methods(s) implemented by the apparatus(s) of claim(s) 4, respectively, is/are rejected on the same grounds as claim(s) 4, respectively.
Claim(s) 17, the medium(s) that implement(s) the apparatus(s) of claim(s) 4, respectively, is/are rejected on the same grounds as claim(s) 4, respectively.
Claim(s) 5, 12, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 20140173130 (“Uluderya”) in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 20200097352 (“Mahindru”) and US Patent No. 10120790 (“Varteresian”).
Regarding claim 5, Uluderya in view of Mahindru does not further teach the remaining limitations.
Varteresian teaches
wherein the server includes a cooling system and the processor circuitry is to execute the machine-readable instructions to determine the health of the server by: (Col. 10, Lines 50-67: determine the health of a system that contains cooling)
determining a first component health of a compute component of the server; (Col. 11, Lines 10-20, 30-35: subsystem health score of components such as compute)
determining a second component health of a cooling component of the cooling system; and (Col. 10, Lines 60-67, Col. 11, Lines 10-20: subsystem health score of components such as cooling)
determining the health of the server based on the first component health and the second component health. (Col. 11, Lines 10-20: system health score based on the subsystem health scores of components)
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine Varteresian’s health scoring with Uluderya in view of Mahindru’s health monitoring.
One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date would have been motivated to make the combination to improve the granularity and flexibility of health analysis (Varteresian, Col. 11, Lines 20-50).
Claim(s) 12, the methods(s) implemented by the apparatus(s) of claim(s) 5, respectively, is/are rejected on the same grounds as claim(s) 5, respectively.
Claim(s) 18, the medium(s) that implement(s) the apparatus(s) of claim(s) 5, respectively, is/are rejected on the same grounds as claim(s) 5, respectively.
Claim(s) 6, 7, 13, 19, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 20140173130 (“Uluderya”) in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 20200097352 (“Mahindru”), US Patent No. 10120790 (“Varteresian”), and US Patent Application Publication No. 20160359683 (“Bartfai-Walcott”).
Regarding claim 6, Uluderya in view of Mahindru and Varteresian teaches
in response to determining the health of the server does not satisfy the threshold, the processor circuitry is to execute the machine-readable instructions to: (Uluderya, [0052]: the server does not satisfy the health threshold)
Uluderya in view of Mahindru and Varteresian does not further teach the remaining limitations.
Bartfai-Walcott teaches
in response to determining the health of the server does not satisfy the [criteria] ([0051], [0052]: the lifespan of a machine based on the machine’s components indicates a machine is not healthy enough)
determine a first maintenance window of the compute component based on the first component health; ([0022], [0054]: schedule the maintenance of components such as compute components based on lifespan)
determine a second maintenance window of the cooling component based on the second component health; and ([0022], [0054]: schedule the maintenance of components such as cooling components based on lifespan)
schedule a maintenance period of the server, the maintenance period scheduled to be within the first maintenance window and the second maintenance window. ([0054]: schedule the maintenance of a machine with multiple components having similar lifespans to be within the same maintenance session)
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine Bartfai-Walcott’s maintenance scheduling with Uluderya in view of Mahindru and Varteresian’s health monitoring.
One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date would have been motivated to make the combination to avoid failure while improving quality of service by reducing repeated maintenance sessions (Bartfai-Walcott, [0052], [0054]).
Regarding claim 7, Uluderya in view of Mahindru, Varteresian, and Bartfai-Walcott teaches
wherein the processor circuitry is to execute the machine-readable instructions to determine the health of the server as a lesser one of the first component health and the second component health. (Bartfai-Walcott, [0022], [0051], [0052]: the lifespan of a machine is based on the minimum lifespan of the components of the machine such as compute components and cooling components).
Claim(s) 13, the methods(s) implemented by the apparatus(s) of claim(s) 6, respectively, is/are rejected on the same grounds as claim(s) 6, respectively.
Claim(s) 19, 20 the medium(s) that implement(s) the apparatus(s) of claim(s) 6, 7, respectively, is/are rejected on the same grounds as claim(s) 6, 7, respectively.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US Patent Application Publication No. 20170286176: scheduling workloads based on the lifespan of components
US Patent Application Publication No. 20210349759: setting throttling thresholds based on health metrics
US Patent Application Publication No. 20240111643: throttling and balancing workloads of components based on health thresholds
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBERT LI whose telephone number is (571)272-5721. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00AM-3:00PM PT.
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, Bryce Bonzo can be reached at (571)272-3655. 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.
/A.L./Examiner, Art Unit 2113
/MARC DUNCAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2113