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
In amendments dated 8/4/26, Applicant amended claims 4-6, 8, 14-15, and 18, canceled claims 1-3, 7, 11-13, 17, and 20-21, and added new claims 22-27. Claims 4-6, 8-9, 14-15, 18, and 22-27 are presented for examination.
Objections
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: figure 5 shows steps 502, 204, and 206 but specification pages 10-11 lines 29-26 describe the steps in figure 5 as being 502, 504, and 506.
Appropriate correction is required.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 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 4-6, 8-9, 14-15, 18, and 22-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to mental processes without significantly more. Independent claims 22, 24, and 26 each recites monitoring a first number of consumed storage resource objects in a first storage system of a storage cluster, the first number of consumed storage resource objects including a system file and/or a volume and at least one snapshot of the system file and/or the volume, obtaining a third number of snapshots to be created in the first storage system based on setting information of a snapshot scheduler, wherein the setting information includes at least a life cycle (K) of a snapshot from among the third number of snapshots to be created, and a creation interval (D) of the snapshot from among the third number of snapshots to be created, wherein the third number of snapshots to be created is equal to a product of a ratio (K/D) of the life cycle (K) to the creation interval (D) and a positive integer (N) greater than or equal to one (1); conditional on a sum of the first number of consumed storage resource objects and the third number of snapshots to be created being less than or equal to a quota number of storage resource objects, creating, by the snapshot scheduler, the at least one snapshot of the system file and/or the volume based on the setting information; and conditional on the sum of the first number of consumed storage resource objects and the third number of snapshots to be created being greater than the quota number of storage resource objects: reducing the third number of snapshots to be created by performing one of reducing the life cycle (K) and increasing the creation interval (D), wherein the sum of the first number of consumed storage resource objects and the reduced third number of snapshots to be created is less than or equal to the quota number of storage resource objects; and having reduced the third number of snapshots to be created, creating, by the snapshot scheduler, the at least one snapshot of the system file and/or the volume based on the setting information. Monitoring a number if storage resource objects involves evaluating and is a mental process. Obtaining a third number of snapshots based on setting information, wherein the setting information includes a life cycle K and creation interval D of a snapshot, and creating a snapshot based on setting information are each recited broadly and a mental process accomplishable in the mental process or on paper. The sum of a the first number of consumed storage resource objects and the third number of snapshots to be created, wherein the third number of snapshots is equal to a product of an ratio of K and D and a positive integer N and reducing a number of snapshots by performing one of reducing the life cycle K or increasing the creation interval D, are each mathematical operations. Each claim recites an additional element of wherein, as the first number of consumed storage resource objects increases, a second number of remaining storage resource objects decreases, and increasing or decreasing the number of consumed storage resource objects is storing data and insignificant extra-solution activity. Claim 24 recites a memory and processing circuitry configured to execute program instructions and claim 26 recites a set of non-transitory, computer-readable media having program instructions, which are each generic components of a computer. Examiner notes specification page 4 states “if a plurality of snapshots have been created for the system file and volume, it may be difficult for the user to calculate the number of storage objects that will be consumed or created next, and the user may not even realize that the number of storage resource objects in the system has been exhausted and no snapshots can be created.” Applicant noted in Remarks page 10 the subject matter recited in the claims is supported in specification page 10, lines 21-23; page 11, lines 3-21 page 12, line 26 to page 13, line 4; and page 15, lines 1-10. The claim steps broadly recite creating a third number of snapshots and actions taken when a sum of the first number of consumed storage resource objects and the third number of snapshots to be created being greater than the quota number of storage resource objects, and thus do not recite a particular improvement in any technology or function of a computer per MPEP 2106.04(d) and do not recite any unconventional steps in the invention per MPEP 2106.05(a). Taking the claims as a whole, saving data is routine and conventional activity per the list of such activities in MPEP 2106.05(d) part II. The memory, processing circuitry configured to execute program instructions, and a set of non-transitory, computer-readable media having program instructions are each still generic components of a computer. The claim steps are recited broadly and amount to mathematical operations and creating snapshots, and the additional element of saving storage resource objects does not limit the mathematical operations of sums or products of snapshots. Therefore, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited mental processes.
Claims 4 and 14 each recites sending the first number and the second number to a user device, the first number and the second number being displayed by the user device, and sending data is recited broadly and amounts to sending data across a network per specification pages 3 and 5 and figure 1, which is routine and conventional activity per the list of such activities in MPEP 2106.05(d) part II; and sending a prompt message to the user device, the prompt message being displayed by the user device when the sum of the first number and the third number is greater than the quota number, and sending data is recited broadly and amounts to sending data across a network per specification pages 3 and 5 and figure 1, which is routine and conventional activity per the list of such activities in MPEP 2106.05(d) part II. Claims 5 and 15 each recites when the sum of the third number and the first number is greater than the quota number, modifying the setting information of the snapshot scheduler in response to an input from a user device, so that the sum is reduced to less than or equal to the quota number, and modifying data is recited broadly and a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper. Claim 6 recites wherein the quota number is less than an upper-limit number of storage resource objects provided by the first storage system, and a quota of storage resource objects storing data is routine and conventional activity per the list of such activities in MPEP 2106.05(d) part II.
Claims 8 and 18 each recites receiving, by the snapshot scheduler via an interface, a deletion identifier set for at least one consumed storage resource object, and receiving data is recited broadly and amounts to receiving data across a network per specification pages 3 and 5 and figure 1, which is routine and conventional activity per the list of such activities in MPEP 2106.05(d) part II; deleting the at least one consumed storage resource object by the snapshot scheduler based on the deletion identifier, and deleting data is a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper; and updating the second number with a number of the at least one consumed storage resource object that was deleted, and updating data is storing data which is routine and conventional activity per the list of such activities in MPEP 2106.05(d) part II. Claim 9 recites receiving, by the snapshot scheduler, the deletion identifier set for the at least one consumed storage resource object via the interface when a frequency of use of the at least one consumed storage resource object is lower than a usage threshold, and receiving data is recited broadly and amounts to receiving data across a network per specification pages 3 and 5 and figure 1, which is routine and conventional activity per the list of such activities in MPEP 2106.05(d) part II. Claims 23, 25, and 27 each recites in response to the first number of consumed storage resource objects having reached the quota number of storage resource objects, migrating one or more of the first number of consumed storage resource objects from the first storage system to a second storage system of the storage cluster, and migrating data is recited broadly, involves evaluating the first number reaching a quota, and uses a computer as a tool, and is a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper.
Relevant Prior Art
During his search for prior art, Examiner found the following references to be relevant to Applicant's claimed invention. Each reference is listed on the Notice of References form included in this office action:
Anwar et al (US 11,934,273) teaches monitoring changes to a storage object and generating a snapshot of the storage object when said storage object has changed beyond a threshold amount, looks at percentage of storage capacity as one of the possible changes, does not teach monitoring a snapshot, determining a number of snapshots based on lifecycle or creation interval and a positive integer, or using a quota of storage objects plus snapshots as a condition for creating a snapshot (columns 1-2 lines 46-12, columns 5-6 lines 33-16, columns 7-8 lines 34-26 figures 2, 6); and
Terei et al (US 20230273864) teaches data management techniques for backup, recovery, archiving and search for applications and platforms, does not teach monitoring a number of storage resources, creating a third number of snapshots to be created, or comparing a sum of a first number of consumed storage resource objects and snapshots to a quota (paragraphs 0023, 0026, 0087-0091 figure 3A).
Responses to Applicant’s Remarks
Regarding rejections of claims 1, 11, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for indefinite terms for “on the order of” or “several,” in view of amendments canceling these claims, these rejections are withdrawn. Regarding rejections of claims 1-9, 11-15, 17-18, and 20-21 under 35 U.S.C. 101 for reciting mental processes without significantly more, Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not persuasive. On page 14 of his Remarks Applicant asserts “the subject matter of new claim 22 is directed to a method of improving the operation of a storage system of a storage cluster by a specific control mechanism, which controls the creation of snapshots in the storage system, as well as the migration of consumed storage resource objects in the storage cluster.” Applicant further asserts the improved storage system operation uses a management control parameter, namely “a quota number of storage resource objects,” and “the specific control mechanism of new claim 22 can advantageously avoid a situation where ‘the number of storage resource objects in the system has been exhausted and no snapshots can be created (see page 4 lines 23-24 of the specification).” Applicant points to the following limitations as reciting said specific control mechanism:
conditional on the sum of the first number of consumed storage resource objects and the third number of snapshots to be created being greater than the quota number of storage resource objects:
reducing the third number of snapshots to be created by performing one of reducing the life cycle (K) and increasing the creation interval (D),
wherein the sum of the first number of consumed storage resource objects and the reduced third number of snapshots to be created is less than or equal to the quota number of storage resource objects; and
having reduced the third number of snapshots to be created, creating, by the snapshot scheduler, the at least one snapshot of the system file and/or the volume based on the setting information.
Examiner disagrees that this is a specific control mechanism. The quota number of storage resource objects is not calculated or measured by the invention but is provided by the storage system per specification page 11 lines 12-21, and the third number of snapshots to be created is obtained earlier in the claim (“obtaining a third number of snapshots to be created in the first storage system based on setting information of a snapshot scheduler, wherein the setting information includes at least a life cycle (K) of a snapshot from among the third number of snapshots to be created, and a creation interval (D) of the snapshot from among the third number of snapshots to be created, and wherein the third number of snapshots to be created is equal to a product of a ratio (K/D) of the life cycle (K) to the creation interval (D) and a positive integer (N) greater than or equal to one (1)”) which recites a broad set of steps that are incomplete. For example the setting information is missing a number of system files and/or volumes associated with the snapshot scheduler per specification page 11 lines 3-21, and the third number of snapshots is equal to a product of a ratio (K/D) of the life cycle (K) to the creation interval (D) and said number of system files and/or volumes associated with the snapshot scheduler, not simply a positive integer greater than or equal to one, also per page 11 lines 3-21. A person of ordinary skill in the art could use the recited formula to calculate the third number of snapshots to be created and only be randomly correct. Furthermore, the step of reducing the third number of snapshots, when the sum of a number of consumed storage resource objects and said third number of snapshots is greater than a quota, also includes user input for modifying the setting information of reducing the life cycle K and the creation interval D, per pages 12-13 lines 26-4, without which a person of ordinary skill in the art has no way of knowing how or why to reduce one of the life cycle or creation interval values. Thus, using one of said reduced values to calculate a sum of the first number of consumed storage resource objects and the third number of snapshots to be created would be broad and not according to the steps in the specification providing an improvement for ‘the number of storage resource objects in the system has been exhausted and no snapshots can be created.”
MPEP 2106.04(d)(1) states “if the specification sets forth an improvement in technology, the claim must be evaluated to ensure that the claim itself reflects the disclosed improvement. That is, the claim includes the components or steps of the invention that provide the improvement described in the specification.” Thus Examiner does not believe the claims recite a practical application.
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.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRUCE M MOSER whose telephone number is (571)270-1718. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5p.
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, Boris Gorney can be reached at 571 270-5626. 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.
/BRUCE M MOSER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2154 10/8/26
