DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention.
The following claim languages lack antecedent basis:
Claims 7 and 4: “the initiator service”.
The following claim languages are not clear and indefinite:
As per claims 1, 8 and 15, it is not clear what the “inhibiting cancelation” entails (e.g. cancelation is inhibited as a byproduct of the fact that “participant services” have started executing; or explicit message were sent to the “participant services” to inhibit cancelation).
The dependent claims do not cure the 112(b) issues of their respective parent claims. Therefore, they are rejected for the same reasons as those presented for their respective parent claims.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 103 as being unpatentable over Feilong et al (Transaction Management for Reliable Gid Application; IEEE 2009) in view of Tang et al (U.S. Pub. 2014/0250436).
As per claim 1 Feilong teaches the invention substantially as claimed including a computer-implemented method for managing execution of transactions in cloud-based systems, the method being executed by one or more processors (pg. 432 right col. 1st paragraph, pg. 427: Feilong’s invention is implemented on a computing system for management of transactions in a service Grid that are distributed on different Grid services) and comprising:
processing, by a scheduled transaction manager, a first request for a first global transaction for an application executed within a cloud-based system, the application comprising a set of services where execution of the first global transaction requires a set of participant services from the set of services (pg. 428 right col. last paragraph, pg. 429 Fig. 2, left col. first paragraph, pg. 427 transaction request from a customer contains a plurality of subtransactions to be serviced by different services; GridTS processes transaction requests);
in response to processing the first request for the first global transaction, transmitting, by a scheduled transaction coordinator, a first set of requests for a first set of local transactions to the set of participant services (pg. 429 left col. first paragraph, section 3.2, pg. 430 Fig. 4a subtransactions of a transaction request are determined and they are sent to corresponding participant services by a coordinator of the GridTS via send Prepare to all Participants);
receiving, by the scheduled transaction coordinator, indications of reserved resources from participant services (pg. 430 Fig. 4b lines success:=reserves resources; if (success) { send Prepared to the Coordinator…; left col section 4.1 paragraph 1 Participants that can reserve necessary resources within timeout return Prepared message to denote that it can commit); and
determining that received indication of reserved resources have been received from all participant services in the set of participant services (pg. 430 Fig 4a lines if (n=N) and (n messages are Prepared){ record commit in log…} when all participants are Prepared, the Coordinator sends Commit to all the participants), and
in response: inhibiting cancelation of resource reservations for each of the participant services in the set of participant services (pg. 430 Fig. 4b lines if (message is Commit) { allocate reserved resources; record commit in log; commit sub-transaction;… }; left col. section 4.1 paragraph 1: when Commit is received from Coordinator, the local transaction manager associated with a service, of a corresponding participant, can successfully request lock manager to lock reserved resources; the locking of resources would inhibit cancelation of resource reservation), and
receiving one or more results of local transactions in the set of local transactions (pg. 430 Fig. 4b lines commit sub-transaction; send Committed to Coordinator; participants executes sub-transactions and transmit messages to Coordinator after completion of execution).
Feilong does not explicitly teach that the processing, by a scheduled transaction manager, a first request for a first global transaction for an application executed within a cloud-based system involves receiving the first request for a global transaction.
However, Tang explicitly teach that the processing, by a scheduled transaction manager, a first request for a first global transaction for an application executed within a cloud-based system involves receiving the first request for a global transaction ([0025]-[0027], [0030], [0033], [0080]-[0082] after receiving service request, global transaction is created and processed).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the prior to the effective filling date of the invention to combine the teachings of Tang and Feilong because both are directed towards transaction based service processing. One with ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate the teachings of Tang into that of Feilong because Tang further improves adoptability of transaction based service processing ([0005], [0006]).
As per claim 2 Feilong teaches further comprising repeatedly reserving resources for at least one participant service prior to determining that received indication of reserved resources have been received from all participant services in the set of participant services (pg. 430 left col section 4.1 second paragraph since each participant has until time Tp to reserve it resources, a participant could obviously try to repeatedly reserve resources until the time is up).
As per claim 3 Feilong teaches wherein in response to determining that received indication of reserved resources have been received from all participant services in the set of participant services, transitioning a transaction state of each local transaction to a confirmed state indicating that the respective local transaction is confirmed (pg. 430 Fig. 4a lines if (n=N) and (n messages are Prepared){ record commit in log; send Commit to all Participants; Fig. 4b lines if (message is Commit( { allocate reserved resources; ).
As per claim 4 Feilong teaches wherein in response to determining that a local transaction has been executed, transitioning a transaction state of the local transaction to committed indicating commitment of a result of the local transaction to resources in a respective participant service (pg. 430 Fig. 4b lines record commit in log; commit sub-transaction).
As per claim 5 Feilong teaches wherein determining that received indication of reserved resources have been received from all participant services in the set of participant services occurs prior to expiration of a global transaction timeout (pg. 430 Fig. 4a lines while (t<=Tp) and (n<N), left col section 4.1 paragraph 2).
As per claim 6 Feilong as modified by Tang teaches further comprising: receiving, by the scheduled transaction manager, a second request for a second global transaction for the application (Tang [0032], [0033] client can submit multiple requests for resources for executing services, so there obviously can be a second request); in response to receiving the request for the second global transaction, transmitting, by the scheduled transaction coordinator, a second set of requests for a second set of local transactions to the set of participant services (Feilong pg. 429 left col. first paragraph, section 3.2, pg. 430 Fig. 4a subtransactions of a transaction request are determined and they are sent to corresponding participant services by a coordinator of the GridTS via send Prepare to all Participants); and determining that an intersected reservation period is not achieved before a global transaction timeout has expired, and in response, cancelling resource reservations of one or more participant services (pg. 430 Fig. 4a lines if (n=N) and (n messages are Prepared) { } else { send Abort to prepared Participants; }; left col paragraph 2 if not all participants can reserve its corresponding resources in Tp time, then abort is sent to participants that have completed its reservation thus cancelling their reservations).
As per claim 7 Feilong teaches wherein the set of participant services are services in the set of services and the initiator service is a service in the set of services (pg. 429 section 3.2).
As per claims 8-14 they are product versions of method claims 1-7. Therefore, they are rejected for the same reasons, mutatis mutandis, as those presented for claims 1-7, respectively.
As per claims 15-20 they are system versions of method claims 1-6. Therefore, they are rejected for the same reasons, mutatis mutandis, as those presented for claims 1-6, respectively.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BING ZHAO whose telephone number is (571)270-1745. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am - 6pm.
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, James Trujillo can be reached on (571) 272-3677. 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.
/BING ZHAO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2151