DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
This final action is in response to the Claims on 4/13/26 and the IDS submissions on 4/24/26 and 4/30/26. Applicant’s arguments regarding non-statutory double patenting were fully considered but were not found to be persuasive.
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.
Instant claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,876,689 B1, respectively. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because as shown in independent claims 1, 10, and 17, they only differ in that the claims 1, 10, and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 11,876,689 B1 utilizes the terms “service level agreement,” “SLA,” or “SLA adherence,” whereas the instant claims uses the term “compliance” as illustrated below in the following table:
CLAIM
INSTANT APPLICATION
US 11,876,689 B2
1
A method for managing virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) environments, the method comprising:
obtaining, by an orchestrator, a resource related parameter (RRP) for a resource and a compliance related parameter from a database;
assembling, by the orchestrator, an application programming interface (API) combination to generate a VDI environment based on a plurality of vendor-provided APIs;
testing, by the orchestrator and for a compliance result, the VDI environment across a range of users based on the RRP and the compliance related parameter, wherein the compliance result is stored in the database;
providing, by the orchestrator, the range of users and the VDI environment to an analyzer, wherein the analyzer is instructed by the orchestrator to generate a model that maximizes the compliance result of the VDI environment;
generating, by the analyzer, a trained model by training the model using at least the range of users, the VDI environment, the compliance related parameter, the RRP, and the compliance result, wherein the RRP, the compliance related parameter, and the compliance result are obtained from the database;
providing, by the orchestrator, a customer-specific compliance related parameter to the analyzer, wherein the customer-specific compliance related parameter is received from a customer;
inferring, by the analyzer and using the trained model, a second API combination that provides the highest compliance result among a plurality of API combinations based on the customer-specific compliance related parameter, wherein the plurality of API combinations comprises at least the API combination and the second API combination; and
initiating, by the orchestrator, deployment of a second VDI environment that is generated based on the second API combination, wherein the second API combination is received from the analyzer.
A method for managing virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) environments, the method comprising:
obtaining, by an orchestrator, a resource related parameter (RRP) for a resource and a service level agreement (SLA) related parameter from a database;
assembling, by the orchestrator, an application programming interface (API) combination to generate a VDI environment based on a plurality of vendor-provided APIs;
testing, by the orchestrator and for an SLA adherence result, the VDI environment across a range of users based on the RRP and the SLA related parameter, wherein the SLA adherence result is stored in the database;
providing, by the orchestrator, the range of users and the VDI environment to an analyzer, wherein the analyzer is instructed by the orchestrator to generate a model that maximizes the SLA adherence result of the VDI environment;
generating, by the analyzer, a trained model by training the model using at least the range of users, the VDI environment, the SLA related parameter, the RRP, and the SLA adherence result, wherein the RRP, the SLA related parameter, and the SLA adherence result are obtained from the database;
providing, by the orchestrator, a customer-specific SLA related parameter to the analyzer, wherein the customer-specific SLA related parameter is received from a customer;
inferring, by the analyzer and using the trained model, a second API combination that provides the highest SLA adherence result among a plurality of API combinations based on the customer-specific SLA related parameter, wherein the plurality of API combinations comprises at least the API combination and the second API combination; and
initiating, by the orchestrator, deployment of a second VDI environment that is generated based on the second API combination, wherein the second API combination is received from the analyzer.
10
A method for managing virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) environments, the method comprising:
obtaining, by an orchestrator, a resource related parameter (RRP) for a resource and a compliance related parameter from a database;
assembling, by the orchestrator, an application programming interface (API) combination to generate a VDI environment based on a plurality of vendor-provided APIs;
testing, by the orchestrator and for a compliance result, the VDI environment across a range of users based on the RRP and the compliance related parameter, wherein the compliance result is stored in the database;
providing, by the orchestrator, the range of users and the VDI environment to an analyzer, wherein the analyzer is instructed by the orchestrator to generate a model that maximizes the compliance result of the VDI environment;
generating, by the analyzer, a trained model by training the model using at least the range of users, the VDI environment, the compliance related parameter, the RRP, and the compliance result, wherein the RRP, the compliance related parameter, and the compliance result are obtained from the database; and
initiating, by the analyzer, notification of an administrator about the trained model.
A method for managing virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) environments, the method comprising:
obtaining, by an orchestrator, a resource related parameter (RRP) for a resource and a service level agreement (SLA) related parameter from a database;
assembling, by the orchestrator, an application programming interface (API) combination to generate a VDI environment based on a plurality of vendor-provided APIs;
testing, by the orchestrator and for an SLA adherence result, the VDI environment across a range of users based on the RRP and the SLA related parameter, wherein the SLA adherence result is stored in the database;
providing, by the orchestrator, the range of users and the VDI environment to an analyzer, wherein the analyzer is instructed by the orchestrator to generate a model that maximizes the SLA adherence result of the VDI environment;
generating, by the analyzer, a trained model by training the model using at least the range of users, the VDI environment, the SLA related parameter, the RRP, and the SLA adherence result, wherein the RRP, the SLA related parameter, and the SLA adherence result are obtained from the database; and
initiating, by the analyzer, notification of an administrator about the trained model.
The substitution of a “compliance-related parameter” and “compliance result” in the instant claims for the “SLA related parameter” and “SLA adherence result” recited in U.S. Patent No. 11,876,689 B1 represents an obvious variation. All of these types of data are well-known, result-oriented constraints used to evaluate, compare, and optimize virtual desktop infrastructure environments, and both are applied in the same manner with an identical system and method.
As to claim 17, it is rejected for the same reasons as stated in the rejection of claim 1.
In addition, instant dependent claims 2-9, 11-16, and 18-20 contain the same limitations as dependent claims 2-9, 11-16, and 18-20, respectively, of U.S. Patent No. 11,876,689 B1.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding non-statutory double patenting were fully considered but were not found to be persuasive.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowed over prior art, and the application would be in condition for allowance upon overcoming rejections to non-statutory double patenting rejections with a terminal disclaimer.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 KENNETH TANG whose telephone number is (571)272-3772. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7AM-3PM.
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, Bradley Teets can be reached at 571-272-3338. 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.
/KENNETH TANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2197
Prosecution Insights