DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the communication filed on September 06, 2025. Claims 21, 23-25, 27-30, 32-34, and 36-38 are currently pending.
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 filed on September 06, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for the following reasons:
Applicant in Pages 1-3 of the Remarks argues that the embedding, indexing, and automatically deleting operations in the independent claims cannot be performed in the human mind or with pen and paper.
Applicant further argues that even if the claim were found to recite an abstract idea, the amended limitations integrated the alleged exception into a practical application, because it recites an improvement that limits the claims to a specific technological environment and provide a practical application.
Applicant further argues that the amended limitations are not conventional, and the claim elements, individually and in combination, amount to significantly more that the alleged judicial exception and improve the functioning of computer storage technology itself.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. It is important to note, the judicial exception alone cannot provide the improvement. The improvement can be provided by one or more additional elements. (MPEP 2106.05(a)).
Independent claims 21 and 30 covers several steps, such as the parsing, determining, and identifying steps, that recite an abstract idea within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas, because a person can mentally or using a pen and paper perform the limitations recited in said steps, which is discussed in detail in the current 101 rejection below.
The remaining steps in the claims that are identified as reciting additional elements, are only adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, and are recognized as a well understood, routine, and conventional activity within the field of computer functions, which is not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception and are not directed to any specific improvement in computer technology.
Accordingly, the additional elements, individually or in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, even viewing the claims a whole, because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Applicant in Pages 3-4 of the Remarks argues that Ohr, Gokhale, and Mityagin alone or in combination do not teach or suggest does not teach or even suggest metadata being persistently embedded in secondary copies and tracked in a temporary copy index maintained by a data agent.
Examiner respectfully disagrees, the cited prior art alone and/or in combination discloses the argued feature.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Gokhale in [0034] discloses applying one or more rules or criteria based on any combination of data object type, metadata, such as a flag or tag indicating importance, and/or other factors.
Gokhale in [0007], [0062], and [0071] discloses tracking secondary copy of data using an index, moved data tracked withing the system by using updated indexes.
Gokhale in [0042], [0052], and [0053] discloses storing secondary copy for a period of time, secondary copy deleted after timer has expired, storage operations performed according to user preferences, storage policy and/or retention policy, retention policy specifying how long data is to be retained at a storage or what criteria must be met before data can be pruned or moved from the storage, policies stored in a database of a storage manager to archive media as metadata for use in operations.
Gokhale in [0042], [0062], and [0071] discloses determine data type by content indexing the data objects, any data moved is tracked by updating indexes associated with appropriate storage managers, each secondary storage device maintains an index, index stored along with backed up data, data agents arrange or pack data to be copied or migrated into a certain format, such as an archive file, archive file includes metadata, a list of files or data objects copied, the file, and data objects themselves.
Therefore, Gokhale discloses metadata being persistently embedded in secondary copies and tracked in a temporary copy index maintained by a data agent.
For the above reasons, Examiner states that rejection of the current Office action is proper.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 21, 23-25, 27-30, 32-34, and 36-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
At step 1:
Independent claims 21 and 30 respectively recite a method and a system, which is directed to a statutory category such as a process, machine, or an article of manufacture.
At step 2A, prong one:
Independent claim 21 and similarly independent claim 30 recites the limitations:
“parsing…the user-supplied expiry timeframe from the expiry- marked data object”;
A person can mentally or using a pen and paper analyze an expiry-marked data object and parse an user-supplied expiry timeframe from the expiry-marked data object.
“determining, based on the parsed user-supplied expiry timeframe, whether the expiry-marked data object has expired”;
A person can mentally or using a pen and paper determine whether an expiry-marked data object has expired based on analyzing a parsed user-supplied expiry timeframe.
“in response to determining that the expiry-marked data object has expired:…
identifying expired temporary secondary copies by at least one of: (i) querying the temporary-copy index, and (ii) parsing expiry metadata embedded within the one or more temporary secondary copies”;
A person can mentally or using a pen and paper determine whether an expiry-marked data object has expired by mentally or using a pen and paper identify expired temporary secondary copies by at least one of: (i) querying the temporary-copy index, and (ii) parsing expiry metadata embedded within the one or more temporary secondary copies.
The limitations, as recited above in claims 21 and 30, are processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover steps that can be performed in the human mind or by a human using a pen and paper, but for recitation of generic computer components.
If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
At step 2A, prong two:
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
Independent claim 1 and similarly independent claim 11 recites the limitations:
“receiving, at a data agent, an expiry-marked data object having a user-supplied expiry timeframe”, which is a step of receiving data. The step is recited at a high level of generality, and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
“in response to determining that the expiry-marked data object has not yet expired:
generating, by the data agent, one or more temporary secondary copies of the expiry-marked data object”, which is a step of generating a copy of data. The step is recited at a high level of generality, and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
“in response to determining that the expiry-marked data object has not yet expired:…
embedding the user-supplied expiry timeframe as persistent metadata within each temporary secondary copy”, which is a step of storing data. The step is recited at a high level of generality, and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
“in response to determining that the expiry-marked data object has not yet expired:…
transmitting the one or more temporary secondary copies to a media agent for processing and storage”, which is a step of transmitting data. The step is recited at a high level of generality, and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
“in response to determining that the expiry-marked data object has not yet expired:…
indexing the one or more temporary secondary copies into a temporary-copy index specifying expiry timeframe, storage location, and object identity, wherein the temporary-copy index is stored within the data agent”, which is a step of storing data. The step is recited at a high level of generality, and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
“in response to determining that the expiry-marked data object has expired:
automatically deleting the expired temporary secondary copies from secondary storage devices regardless of whether associated primary copy has already been deleted”, which is a step for deleting data. The steps are recited at a high level of generality, and amounts to mere data manipulation, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
The additional elements “a computer-implemented method”, “a data storage system”, “at a data agent”, “by the data agent”, “secondary storage devices of the data storage system”, and “a media agent” in the steps in claim 21 are recited at a high-level of generality, such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components.
The additional elements “a computer-implemented system”, “a data storage system”, “at a data agent”, “by the data agent”, “secondary storage devices of the data storage system”, and “a media agent” in the steps in claim 30 are recited at a high-level of generality, such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components.
Accordingly, the additional elements, individually or in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, even viewing the claims a whole, because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
At step 2B:
Independent claims 21 and 30 recite the same additional elements as identified in step 2A prong two above. These additional elements are not sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception.
Independent claim 21 and similarly independent claim 30 recite the limitations:
“receiving, at a data agent, an expiry-marked data object having a user-supplied expiry timeframe”, which is a step of receiving data, and is recognized as a well understood, routine, and conventional activity within the field of computer functions as an element of receiving or transmitting data over a network (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(i)).
“in response to determining that the expiry-marked data object has not yet expired:
generating, by the data agent, one or more temporary secondary copies of the expiry-marked data object”, which is a step of generating a copy of data, and is recognized as a well understood, routine, and conventional activity within the field of computer functions as an element of electronic recordkeeping (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(iii)).
“in response to determining that the expiry-marked data object has not yet expired:…
embedding the user-supplied expiry timeframe as persistent metadata within each temporary secondary copy”, which is a step of storing data, and is recognized as a well understood, routine, and conventional activity within the field of computer functions as an element of storing and retrieving information in memory (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(iv)).
“in response to determining that the expiry-marked data object has not yet expired:…
transmitting the one or more temporary secondary copies to a media agent for processing and storage”, which is a step of transmitting data, and is recognized as a well understood, routine, and conventional activity within the field of computer functions as an element of receiving or transmitting data over a network (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(i)).
“in response to determining that the expiry-marked data object has not yet expired:…
indexing the one or more temporary secondary copies into a temporary-copy index specifying expiry timeframe, storage location, and object identity, wherein the temporary-copy index is stored within the data agent”, which is a step of storing data, and is recognized as a well understood, routine, and conventional activity within the field of computer functions as an element of storing and retrieving information in memory (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(iv)).
“in response to determining that the expiry-marked data object has expired:
automatically deleting the expired temporary secondary copies from secondary storage devices regardless of whether associated primary copy has already been deleted”, which is a step for deleting data, which are steps for causing deletion of data from storage, and is recognized as a well understood, routine, and conventional activity within the field of computer functions as an element of electronic recordkeeping (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(iii)).
Accordingly, the additional limitations are not sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. Therefore, the claims are directed to an abstract idea and are not patent eligible.
Dependent claim 23 and similarly dependent claim 32 recites additional limitation, such as:
“creating a stub in place of a primary copy on primary storage, the stub referencing the one or more temporary secondary copy”, which is a step of creating data.
At step 2A prong two, the step is recited at a high level of generality, and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
At step 2B, the step is recognized as a well understood, routine, and conventional activity within the field of computer functions as an element of electronic recordkeeping (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(iii)).
Accordingly, the additional elements, individually or in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, even viewing the claims a whole, because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Dependent claim 24 and similarly dependent claim 33 recites additional limitation, such as:
“deleting the stub from the primary storage”, which is a step of deleting data.
At step 2A prong two, the step is recited at a high level of generality, and amounts to mere data manipulation, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
At step 2B, the step is recognized as a well understood, routine, and conventional activity within the field of computer functions as an element of electronic recordkeeping (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(iii)).
Accordingly, the additional elements, individually or in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, even viewing the claims a whole, because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Dependent claim 25 and similarly dependent claim 34 recites additional limitation, such as:
“excluding expired data objects from subsequent secondary copy operations based on determining expiry status of the expiry-marked data objects”, which is a step of excluding data from being copied.
At step 2A prong two, the step is recited at a high level of generality, and amounts to mere data manipulation, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
At step 2B, the step is recognized as a well understood, routine, and conventional activity within the field of computer functions as an element of electronic recordkeeping (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(iii)).
Accordingly, the additional elements, individually or in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, even viewing the claims a whole, because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Dependent claim 27 and similarly dependent claim 36 recites additional limitation, such as:
“providing a user interface configured to receive the user-supplied expiry timeframe from a user generating the data object”, which is a step of receiving data.
At step 2A prong two, the step is recited at a high level of generality, and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
At step 2B, the step is recognized as a well understood, routine, and conventional activity within the field of computer functions as an element of receiving or transmitting data over a network (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(i)).
The additional element “providing a user interface configured to receive” is recited at a high-level of generality, such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components.
Accordingly, the additional elements, individually or in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, even viewing the claims a whole, because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Dependent claim 28 and similarly dependent claim 37 recites additional limitation, such as:
“further comprising compressing the one or more secondary copies and transmitting the compressed temporary secondary copies to a media agent for storage”, which is a step of transmitting data.
At step 2A prong two, the step is recited at a high level of generality, and amounts to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
At step 2B, the step is recognized as a well understood, routine, and conventional activity within the field of computer functions as an element of receiving or transmitting data over a network (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)(i)).
Accordingly, the additional elements, individually or in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, even viewing the claims a whole, because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Dependent claim 29 and similarly dependent claim 38 recites additional limitation, such as:
“further comprising parsing expiry timeframes embedded within the one or more temporary secondary copies to confirm expiry”.
This limitation is directed to the same abstract idea under the mental processes grouping as independent claims 21 and 30, because a person can mentally or using a pen and paper parse expiry timeframes embedded within a secondary copy to confirm expiry, and because the limitation does not recite any additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more.
Accordingly, the additional elements, individually or in combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, even viewing the claims a whole, because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Accordingly, dependent claims 22-29 and 31-38 are also directed to abstract idea without significantly more and are not patent eligible.
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) 21-38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohr (US Pat 7,680,830) in view of Gokhale (US Pub 2012/0084524) and in further view of Mityagin (US Pub 2015/0249647).
With respect to Claim 21, Ohr discloses a computer-implemented method for managing expiry-marked data objects in a data storage system (Ohr in Column 28 lines 16-36 and Column 29 lines 15-31 and in Figure 8 discloses a computer implemented method and a data storage system), the computer-implemented method comprising:
receiving, at a data agent, an expiry-marked data object having a user-supplied expiry timeframe (Ohr in Column 4 line 56 – Column 5 line 32 discloses lifecycle management of data by ensuring that all copies of expired data are deleted, automatic deletion of expired documents in a file system, evaluate expiration date for a file to determine if the file has expired and taking actions based on the determination, such as immediate deletion; Ohr in Column 6 lines 9-27 discloses policy management application or utility provides a user interface for specifying and modifying expiration policies for files in the file system; Ohr in Column 11 line 64 - Column 12 line 51 discloses when a file is copied the expiration policy may be copied with the file, implement expiry mechanism for files candidate for copying, if file is expired, prevent attempts to copy the file, if the file is copied before retention period passes, then the file is accessible, insure that all copies of a file are deleted when the retention period for the original file expires);…
determining, based on the…expiry timeframe, whether the expiry-marked data object has expired (Ohr in Column 4 line 56 – Column 5 line 32 discloses lifecycle management of data by ensuring that all copies of expired data are deleted, automatic deletion of expired documents in a file system, evaluate expiration date for a file to determine if the file has expired and taking actions based on the determination, such as immediate deletion; Ohr in Column 6 lines 9-27 discloses policy management application or utility provides a user interface for specifying and modifying expiration policies for files in the file system; Ohr in Column 11 line 64 - Column 12 line 51 discloses when a file is copied the expiration policy may be copied with the file, implement expiry mechanism for files candidate for copying, if file is expired, prevent attempts to copy the file, if the file is copied before retention period passes, then the file is accessible, insure that all copies of a file are deleted when the retention period for the original file expires; here Ohr does not explicitly disclose determining based on parsed expiry timeframe, but the Mityagin reference discloses the feature, as discussed below);
in response to determining that the expiry-marked data object has not yet expired (Ohr in Column 4 line 56 – Column 5 line 32 discloses lifecycle management of data by ensuring that all copies of expired data are deleted, automatic deletion of expired documents in a file system, evaluate expiration date for a file to determine if the file has expired and taking actions based on the determination, such as immediate deletion; Ohr in Column 6 lines 9-27 discloses policy management application or utility provides a user interface for specifying and modifying expiration policies for files in the file system; Ohr in Column 11 line 64 - Column 12 line 51 discloses when a file is copied the expiration policy may be copied with the file, implement expiry mechanism for files candidate for copying, if file is expired, prevent attempts to copy the file, if the file is copied before retention period passes, then the file is accessible, insure that all copies of a file are deleted when the retention period for the original file expires):
generating, by the data agent, one or more temporary secondary copies of the expiry-marked data object (Ohr in Column 4 line 56 – Column 5 line 32 discloses lifecycle management of data by ensuring that all copies of expired data are deleted, automatic deletion of expired documents in a file system, evaluate expiration date for a file to determine if the file has expired and taking actions based on the determination, such as immediate deletion; Ohr in Column 6 lines 9-27 discloses policy management application or utility provides a user interface for specifying and modifying expiration policies for files in the file system; Ohr in Column 11 line 64 - Column 12 line 51 discloses when a file is copied the expiration policy may be copied with the file, implement expiry mechanism for files candidate for copying, if file is expired, prevent attempts to copy the file, if the file is copied before retention period passes, then the file is accessible, insure that all copies of a file are deleted when the retention period for the original file expires);…
in response to determining that the expiry-marked data object has expired (Ohr in Column 4 line 56 – Column 5 line 32 discloses lifecycle management of data by ensuring that all copies of expired data are deleted, automatic deletion of expired documents in a file system, evaluate expiration date for a file to determine if the file has expired and taking actions based on the determination, such as immediate deletion; Ohr in Column 6 lines 9-27 discloses policy management application or utility provides a user interface for specifying and modifying expiration policies for files in the file system; Ohr in Column 11 line 64 - Column 12 line 51 discloses when a file is copied the expiration policy may be copied with the file, implement expiry mechanism for files candidate for copying, if file is expired, prevent attempts to copy the file, if the file is copied before retention period passes, then the file is accessible, insure that all copies of a file are deleted when the retention period for the original file expires):
identify expired temporary secondary copies (Ohr in Column 4 line 56 – Column 5 line 32 discloses lifecycle management of data by ensuring that all copies of expired data are deleted, automatic deletion of expired documents in a file system, evaluate expiration date for a file to determine if the file has expired and taking actions based on the determination, such as immediate deletion; Ohr in Column 6 lines 9-27 discloses policy management application or utility provides a user interface for specifying and modifying expiration policies for files in the file system; Ohr in Column 11 line 64 - Column 12 line 51 discloses when a file is copied the expiration policy may be copied with the file, implement expiry mechanism for files candidate for copying, if file is expired, prevent attempts to copy the file, if the file is copied before retention period passes, then the file is accessible, insure that all copies of a file are deleted when the retention period for the original file expires)…;
automatically deleting the expired temporary secondary copies from secondary storage devices regardless of whether associated primary copy has already been deleted (Ohr in Column 4 line 56 – Column 5 line 32 discloses lifecycle management of data by ensuring that all copies of expired data are deleted, automatic deletion of expired documents in a file system, evaluate expiration date for a file to determine if the file has expired and taking actions based on the determination, such as immediate deletion; Ohr in Column 6 lines 9-27 discloses policy management application or utility provides a user interface for specifying and modifying expiration policies for files in the file system; Ohr in Column 11 line 64 - Column 12 line 51 discloses when a file is copied the expiration policy may be copied with the file, implement expiry mechanism for files candidate for copying, if file is expired, prevent attempts to copy the file, if the file is copied before retention period passes, then the file is accessible, insure that all copies of a file are deleted when the retention period for the original file expires).
Ohr discloses expiry management of secondary copies of files, however, Ohr does not explicitly disclose:
embedding the user-supplied expiry timeframe as persistent metadata within each temporary secondary copy,
transmitting the one or more temporary secondary copies to a media agent for processing and storage, and
indexing the one or more temporary secondary copies into a temporary-copy index specifying expiry timeframe, storage location, and object identity,
wherein the temporary-copy index is stored within the data agent;
identifying expired temporary secondary copies by at least one of: (i) querying the temporary-copy index, and (ii) parsing expiry metadata embedded within the one or more temporary secondary copies;
The Gokhale reference discloses embedding the user-supplied expiry timeframe as persistent metadata within each temporary secondary copy, transmitting the one or more temporary secondary copies to a media agent for processing and storage, and indexing the one or more temporary secondary copies into a temporary-copy index specifying expiry timeframe, storage location, and object identity, wherein the temporary-copy index is stored within a data agent, and identifying expired temporary secondary copies by at least one of: (i) querying the temporary-copy index, and (ii) parsing expiry metadata embedded within the one or more temporary secondary copies (Gokhale in [0034] discloses applying one or more rules or criteria based on any combination of data object type, metadata, such as a flag or tag indicating importance, and/or other factors; Gokhale in [0007], [0062], and [0071] discloses tracking secondary copy of data using an index, moved data tracked withing the system by using updated indexes; Gokhale in [0042], [0052], and [0053] discloses storing secondary copy for a period of time, secondary copy deleted after timer has expired, storage operations performed according to user preferences, storage policy and/or retention policy, retention policy specifying how long data is to be retained at a storage or what criteria must be met before data can be pruned or moved from the storage, policies stored in a database of a storage manager to archive media as metadata for use in operations; Gokhale in [0042], [0062], and [0071] discloses determine data type by content indexing the data objects, any data moved is tracked by updating indexes associated with appropriate storage managers, each secondary storage device maintains an index, index stored along with backed up data, data agents arrange or pack data to be copied or migrated into a certain format, such as an archive file, archive file includes metadata, a list of files or data objects copied, the file, and data objects themselves);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Ohr and Gokhale, to have combined Ohr and Gokhale. The motivation to combined Ohr and Gokhale would be to efficiently copy data in a native format for long-term storage using another format that is optimized for compression (Gokhale: [0002], [0004], and [0006]).
Ohr discloses a data agent receiving expiry marked data object having user-supplied expiry timeframe and determining whether the expiry-marked data object has expired, however, Ohr and Gokhale do not explicitly disclose:
parsing…expiry timeframe from the expiry-marked data object;
determining, based on the parsed expiry timeframe, whether the expiry-marked data object has expired;
The Mityagin reference discloses parsing expiry timeframe from the expiry-marked data object and determining, based on the parsed expiry timeframe, whether the expiry-marked data object has expired (Mityagin in [0121] and [0127] discloses parsing data fields from a message, data entries such as expiration time can be extracted from the message, determine whether the expiration time has passed, ignoring expired message by the client device, parsing a message and separating out individual elements such as expiration time and determining whether the expiration time has passed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Ohr, Gokhale, and Mityagin, to have combined Ohr, Gokhale, and Mityagin. The motivation to combine Ohr, Gokhale, and Mityagin would be to synchronize shared content by broadcasting information about the shared content (Mityagin: [0001]).
With respect to claim 23, Ohr in view of Gokhale and in further view of Mityagin discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 21, further comprising:
creating a stub in place of a primary copy on primary storage, the stub referencing the temporary secondary copy (Gokhale in [0006] discloses archived data is removed from primary copy and a stub is stored in the primary copy to indicate its new location, when a user requests access to the archive data that has been removed or migrated, the stub is used to locate the data and make recovery of the data, archive data stored at a location different from the remaining primary copy data).
With respect to claim 24, Ohr in view of Gokhale and in further view of Mityagin discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 23, further comprising:
deleting the stub from the primary storage (Ohr in Column 11 line 64 - Column 12 line 51 discloses when a file is copied the expiration policy may be copied with the file, implement expiry mechanism for files candidate for copying, if file is expired, prevent attempts to copy the file, if the file is copied before retention period passes, then the file is accessible, insure that all copies of a file are deleted when the retention period for the original file expires; Gokhale in [0006] discloses archived data is removed from primary copy and a stub is stored in the primary copy to indicate its new location, when a user requests access to the archive data that has been removed or migrated, the stub is used to locate the data and make recovery of the data, archive data stored at a location different from the remaining primary copy data; Gokhale in [0042], [0052], and [0053] discloses storing secondary copy for a period of time, secondary copy deleted after timer has expired, storage operations performed according to user preferences, storage policy and/or retention policy, retention policy specifying how long data is to be retained at a storage or what criteria must be met before data can be pruned or moved from the storage).
With respect to claim 25, Ohr in view of Gokhale and in further view of Mityagin discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 21, further comprising:
excluding expired data objects from subsequent secondary copy operations based on determining expiry status of the data objects (Ohr: Column 11 line 64 - Column 12 line 51 - when a file is copied the expiration policy may be copied with the file, implement expiry mechanism for files candidate for copying, if file is expired, prevent attempts to copy the file, if the file is copied before retention period passes, then the file is accessible; Gokhale: Paragraph 42 – detect data object in primary copy data has been deleted, storing the secondary copy of the data object for a period of time past the deletion time of the data object in primary copy data).
With respect to claim 27, Ohr in view of Gokhale and in further view of Mityagin discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 21, further comprising:
providing a user interface configured to receive the user-supplied expiry timeframe from a user generating the data object (Ohr in Column 6 lines 9-27 and 63-67 and in Column 7 lines 1-27 discloses providing a user interface for specifying and modifying expiration policies for files in the file system).
With respect to claim 28, Ohr in view of Gokhale and in further view of Mityagin discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 21, wherein performing the secondary copy operation comprises compressing the expiry-marked data object and transmitting the compressed secondary copy to a media agent for storage (Gokhale in [0047] discloses performing compression when creating secondary copy of data).
With respect to claim 29, Ohr in view of Gokhale and in further view of Mityagin discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 21, wherein identifying secondary copies associated with an expired data object further comprises:
parsing expiry timeframes embedded within the secondary copies to confirm expiry (Mityagin in [0121] and [0127] discloses parsing data fields from a message, data entries such as expiration time can be extracted from the message, determine whether the expiration time has passed, ignoring expired message by the client device, parsing a message and separating out individual elements such as expiration time and determining whether the expiration time has passed).
With respect to claim 30, Ohr discloses a computer-implemented system for managing expiry-marked data objects in a data storage system (Ohr in Column 28 lines 16-36 and Column 29 lines 15-31 and in Figure 8 discloses a computer implemented system and a data storage system), the computer-implemented system configured to:
receive, at a data agent, an expiry-marked data object having a user-supplied expiry timeframe (Ohr in Column 4 line 56 – Column 5 line 32 discloses lifecycle management of data by ensuring that all copies of expired data are deleted, automatic deletion of expired documents in a file system, evaluate expiration date for a file to determine if the file has expired and taking actions based on the determination, such as immediate deletion; Ohr in Column 6 lines 9-27 discloses policy management application or utility provides a user interface for specifying and modifying expiration policies for files in the file system; Ohr in Column 11 line 64 - Column 12 line 51 discloses when a file is copied the expiration policy may be copied with the file, implement expiry mechanism for files candidate for copying, if file is expired, prevent attempts to copy the file, if the file is copied before retention period passes, then the file is accessible, insure that all copies of a file are deleted when the retention period for the original file expires);…
determine, based on the…expiry timeframe, whether the expiry-marked data object has expired (Ohr in Column 4 line 56 – Column 5 line 32 discloses lifecycle management of data by ensuring that all copies of expired data are deleted, automatic deletion of expired documents in a file system, evaluate expiration date for a file to determine if the file has expired and taking actions based on the determination, such as immediate deletion; Ohr in Column 6 lines 9-27 discloses policy management application or utility provides a user interface for specifying and modifying expiration policies for files in the file system; Ohr in Column 11 line 64 - Column 12 line 51 discloses when a file is copied the expiration policy may be copied with the file, implement expiry mechanism for files candidate for copying, if file is expired, prevent attempts to copy the file, if the file is copied before retention period passes, then the file is accessible, insure that all copies of a file are deleted when the retention period for the original file expires; here Ohr does not explicitly disclose determining based on parsed expiry timeframe, but the Mityagin reference discloses the feature, as discussed below);
in response to determining that the expiry-marked data object has not yet expired (Ohr in Column 4 line 56 – Column 5 line 32 discloses lifecycle management of data by ensuring that all copies of expired data are deleted, automatic deletion of expired documents in a file system, evaluate expiration date for a file to determine if the file has expired and taking actions based on the determination, such as immediate deletion; Ohr in Column 6 lines 9-27 discloses policy management application or utility provides a user interface for specifying and modifying expiration policies for files in the file system; Ohr in Column 11 line 64 - Column 12 line 51 discloses when a file is copied the expiration policy may be copied with the file, implement expiry mechanism for files candidate for copying, if file is expired, prevent attempts to copy the file, if the file is copied before retention period passes, then the file is accessible, insure that all copies of a file are deleted when the retention period for the original file expires):
generate, by the data agent, one or more temporary secondary copies of the expiry-marked data object (Ohr in Column 4 line 56 – Column 5 line 32 discloses lifecycle management of data by ensuring that all copies of expired data are deleted, automatic deletion of expired documents in a file system, evaluate expiration date for a file to determine if the file has expired and taking actions based on the determination, such as immediate deletion; Ohr in Column 6 lines 9-27 discloses policy management application or utility provides a user interface for specifying and modifying expiration policies for files in the file system; Ohr in Column 11 line 64 - Column 12 line 51 discloses when a file is copied the expiration policy may be copied with the file, implement expiry mechanism for files candidate for copying, if file is expired, prevent attempts to copy the file, if the file is copied before retention period passes, then the file is accessible, insure that all copies of a file are deleted when the retention period for the original file expires);…
in response to determining that the expiry-marked data object has expired (Ohr in Column 4 line 56 – Column 5 line 32 discloses lifecycle management of data by ensuring that all copies of expired data are deleted, automatic deletion of expired documents in a file system, evaluate expiration date for a file to determine if the file has expired and taking actions based on the determination, such as immediate deletion; Ohr in Column 6 lines 9-27 discloses policy management application or utility provides a user interface for specifying and modifying expiration policies for files in the file system; Ohr in Column 11 line 64 - Column 12 line 51 discloses when a file is copied the expiration policy may be copied with the file, implement expiry mechanism for files candidate for copying, if file is expired, prevent attempts to copy the file, if the file is copied before retention period passes, then the file is accessible, insure that all copies of a file are deleted when the retention period for the original file expires):
identify expired temporary secondary copies (Ohr in Column 4 line 56 – Column 5 line 32 discloses lifecycle management of data by ensuring that all copies of expired data are deleted, automatic deletion of expired documents in a file system, evaluate expiration date for a file to determine if the file has expired and taking actions based on the determination, such as immediate deletion; Ohr in Column 6 lines 9-27 discloses policy management application or utility provides a user interface for specifying and modifying expiration policies for files in the file system; Ohr in Column 11 line 64 - Column 12 line 51 discloses when a file is copied the expiration policy may be copied with the file, implement expiry mechanism for files candidate for copying, if file is expired, prevent attempts to copy the file, if the file is copied before retention period passes, then the file is accessible, insure that all copies of a file are deleted when the retention period for the original file expires)…;
automatically delete the expired temporary secondary copies from secondary storage devices regardless of whether associated primary copy has already been deleted (Ohr in Column 4 line 56 – Column 5 line 32 discloses lifecycle management of data by ensuring that all copies of expired data are deleted, automatic deletion of expired documents in a file system, evaluate expiration date for a file to determine if the file has expired and taking actions based on the determination, such as immediate deletion; Ohr in Column 6 lines 9-27 discloses policy management application or utility provides a user interface for specifying and modifying expiration policies for files in the file system; Ohr in Column 11 line 64 - Column 12 line 51 discloses when a file is copied the expiration policy may be copied with the file, implement expiry mechanism for files candidate for copying, if file is expired, prevent attempts to copy the file, if the file is copied before retention period passes, then the file is accessible, insure that all copies of a file are deleted when the retention period for the original file expires).
Ohr discloses expiry management of secondary copies of files, however, Ohr does not explicitly disclose:
embed the user-supplied expiry timeframe as persistent metadata within each temporary secondary copy,
transmit the one or more temporary secondary copies to a media agent for processing and storage, and
index the one or more temporary secondary copies into a temporary-copy index specifying expiry timeframe, storage location, and object identity,
wherein the temporary-copy index is stored within the data agent;
identifying expired temporary secondary copies by at least one of: (i) querying the temporary-copy index, and (ii) parsing expiry metadata embedded within the one or more temporary secondary copies;
The Gokhale reference discloses embedding the user-supplied expiry timeframe as persistent metadata within each temporary secondary copy, transmitting the one or more temporary secondary copies to a media agent for processing and storage, and indexing the one or more temporary secondary copies into a temporary-copy index specifying expiry timeframe, storage location, and object identity, wherein the temporary-copy index is stored within a data agent, and identifying expired temporary secondary copies by at least one of: (i) querying the temporary-copy index, and (ii) parsing expiry metadata embedded within the one or more temporary secondary copies (Gokhale in [0034] discloses applying one or more rules or criteria based on any combination of data object type, metadata, such as a flag or tag indicating importance, and/or other factors; Gokhale in [0007], [0062], and [0071] discloses tracking secondary copy of data using an index, moved data tracked withing the system by using updated indexes; Gokhale in [0042], [0052], and [0053] discloses storing secondary copy for a period of time, secondary copy deleted after timer has expired, storage operations performed according to user preferences, storage policy and/or retention policy, retention policy specifying how long data is to be retained at a storage or what criteria must be met before data can be pruned or moved from the storage, policies stored in a database of a storage manager to archive media as metadata for use in operations; Gokhale in [0042], [0062], and [0071] discloses determine data type by content indexing the data objects, any data moved is tracked by updating indexes associated with appropriate storage managers, each secondary storage device maintains an index, index stored along with backed up data, data agents arrange or pack data to be copied or migrated into a certain format, such as an archive file, archive file includes metadata, a list of files or data objects copied, the file, and data objects themselves);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Ohr and Gokhale, to have combined Ohr and Gokhale. The motivation to combined Ohr and Gokhale would be to efficiently copy data in a native format for long-term storage using another format that is optimized for compression (Gokhale: [0002], [0004], and [0006]).
Ohr discloses a data agent receiving expiry marked data object having user-supplied expiry timeframe and determining whether the expiry-marked data object has expired, however, Ohr and Gokhale do not explicitly disclose:
parse…expiry timeframe from the expiry-marked data object;
determine, based on the parsed expiry timeframe, whether the expiry-marked data object has expired;
The Mityagin reference discloses parsing expiry timeframe from the expiry-marked data object and determining, based on the parsed expiry timeframe, whether the expiry-marked data object has expired (Mityagin in [0121] and [0127] discloses parsing data fields from a message, data entries such as expiration time can be extracted from the message, determine whether the expiration time has passed, ignoring expired message by the client device, parsing a message and separating out individual elements such as expiration time and determining whether the expiration time has passed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date o