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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action Is responsive to Restriction Requirement received on 3/16/2026. Applicant elected without traverse Group II (claims 10-15) for examination. The applicant is requested to cancel the non-elected claims in the next communication. This election is made final.
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 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 2A Prong One.
Claim 10 recites, requesting permission to use metadata; determining whether permission is available; requesting permission from another entity (metadata server); obtaining permission and assigning permission to a process. These steps describe managing permissions and access to data. This is an abstract idea because it is similar to organizing and controlling to access information and permission management (who can read/write data). These activities can be performed mentally or using basic rules (e.g. asking for permission, granting permission), and is therefore considered a mental process/data management activity.
Step 2 A Prong Two.
The additional elements include a processor, memory, a network interface card (NIC) and a metadata server. These elements are generic computer components performing their normal functions. The claim does not improve how a computer operates, nor improve network technology and does not provide a new type of hardware. Instead, the claim simply uses a computer system to carry out permission management. The computational NIC is described functionally and is used as a tool to perform the abstract idea, rather than providing a technical improvement.
Step 2B.
The claim does not include additional elements that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The steps of the claim are well understood, routine and conventional, the components of the claims such as, processor, memory, NIC and server, perform only their expected functions. The claim does not include a new protocol, a new hardware and no specific improvement to distributed file systems. It merely applies standard permission management using generic computing components.
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.
Claims 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Starr et al. U.S. Patent No. 8,621,101 (referred to herein after as Starr) and further in view of Muntz U.S. Patent No. 6,842,754.
As to claim10, Starr teaches an electronic device, comprising:
a memory comprising instructions;
a processor electrically connected to the memory and configured to execute the instructions (see at least fig.1 col. 4 line 63- col.5 line 27, processor”30” and memory”33”); and
a computational network interface card (NIC) configured to manage distributed filesystem (DFS) metadata work permissions for DFS metadata in a local distributed file system (DFS) metadata cache of the computational NIC (see at least col. 6 lines 4-27, The INIC maintains its own local metadata cache (INIC file cache 80) separate from the host, which is the “local DFS metadata cache of the computational NIC”. The NIC manages which file streams and metadata are cached and accessible, which is corresponding to “managing DFS meta data work permissions”), wherein the DFS metadata is metadata for a DFS, wherein the instructions are configured to cause the processor and/or the computation al NIC to perform operations (see at least paragraph 3 lines 23-36, The INIC manages the local file/metadata cache on behalf of the host file system , which corresponds to “computational NIC configured to manage DFS metadata) comprising:
requesting, to the computational NIC, by the processor, metadata work permission for a piece of DFS metadata required by a first process executing on the processor (see at least col. 6 lines 29-45, an application process executing on host CPU triggers file access request and the host processor requests from the INIC “via the INIC file cache index” whether the required metadata is available. This is the processor requesting metadata work permission from the computational NIC);
based on determining that the computational NIC does not have metadata management permission for the piece of DFS metadata, requesting, by the computational NIC, to a metadata server of the DFS, metadata management permission for the piece of DFS metadata (see col. 6, line 29-45, If the file stream is not found in the file caches 24 or 80, then a request for that block is sent to the appropriate storage unit address denoted by the metadata);
Starr teaches the invention as mentioned above. Starr does not but Muntz teaches obtaining, by the computational NIC, from the metadata server, metadata management permission for the piece of DFS metadata, and based thereon, assigning metadata work permission to the first process (see MUNTZ at least col. 2 line 55- col. 6, line 4, when the client side DFS interface “NIC analog” lacks a current lease for the metadata object, it issues a lease request to the metadata server).
it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have known to combine the teachings of Muntz with those of Starr to make the system more efficient by making a NIC to autonomously manages both the physical presence of metadata in its local cache and the legal authority to grant access to that metadata to processes executing on the host processor, thereby saving network resources.
As to claim11, Starr-Muntz teaches the electronic device of claim 10, wherein the metadata work permission is a metadata read permission or a metadata write permission, and the metadata management permission from the metadata server grants permission to assign DFS metadata read permission or write permission to the process executed by the processor (see at least Muntz col. 4 lines 32-47, the lease request includes an object identifier so that the meta data sever knows which object to lease, along with the type of lease, read or write).
As to claim12, Starr-Muntz teaches the electronic device of claim 10, wherein the metadata server is configured to manage the metadata work permission for all metadata of at least a portion of the DFS, and the computational NIC is configured to be entrusted, by the metadata server, with metadata management permission for at least some of the DFS metadata in the local DFS metadata cache (see at least abstract of Muntz, a meta data server is employed to manage to the objects in the distributed file system , and a plurality of storage servers provide data storage for the objects. The metadata server grants leases for objects to the clients).
As to claim13, Starr-Muntz teaches the electronic device of claim 10, wherein the computational NIC is configured to: based on obtained metadata management permission, assign the metadata read permission to both the first process and a second process executing on the processor (see Muntz col.4 line 62- col. 5 line 7, a single upstream management permission from the metadata server enables the DFS interface “NIC analog” to issue concurrent read permission to both first and second process).
As to claim14, Starr-Muntz teaches the electronic device of claim 10, when another electronic device different from the electronic device obtains the metadata write permission for the piece of DFS metadata, the metadata work permission for the piece of DFS metadata is surrendered by the electronic device (see at least Muntz col. 4 line 62- col. 5 line 7, For a write lease request, the request could be rejected if there are outstanding leases, the request could be blocked to wait for other leases to expire while rejecting new lease requests, or the request could trigger a recall of outstanding leases).
As to claim15, Starr-Muntz teaches the electronic device of claim 10, wherein the computational NIC comprises: a NIC memory comprising instructions; a NIC processor comprising a cache and electrically connected to the NIC memory; and a NIC configured to transmit data stored in the NIC memory or the cache to a network connected to the NIC (see at least Starr fig. 16 a diagram of trio of pipelined microprocessors included in the INIC of fig. 15, including three phases with a processor in each phase. Fig. 18, diagram is a diagram of a plurality of queue storage units that interact with microprocessor of Fig. 16 and include SRM and DRAM).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Maeda U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2018/0004672, Cache Unit and Processor, discloses an address tag to be stored in a particular data tag without storing the data by providing the particular data register and the particular data tag such that the data can be temporarily held by storing management information into the particular data tag when cache data is particular data and a need to store the data is avoided, thus suppressing an amount of use of the cache memory.
Miyazaki U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2007/0016717, Cache System, discloses A management data storage stores the relation between the identification (ID) numbers and the address of data items. A refill -processing unit designates a memory region in which the data of new address supplied from a processor is stored. An inspection unit receives the ID number of the memory region designated, determines whether the validation information about the ID number of the memory region designated is valid, and requests the data storage to output the data stored in the memory region designated when the validation information is valid.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARGON N NANO whose telephone number is (571)272-4007. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM-3:30 PM. M.S.T..
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, Nicholas Taylor can be reached at 571 272 3889. 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.
/SARGON N NANO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights