DETAILED ACTION
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 Remarks/Arguments
This Office Action is in response to the communications for the present US application number 18/368,870 last filed on September 29th, 2025.
Claims 1, 3, 9, 11, 12, 14, 17 and 19 were amended.
Claims 1-20 remain pending and have been examined, directed to RESOURCE ALLOCATION FOR VIRTUAL PRIVATE LABEL CLOUDS.
Upon further review of the latest interview summary and claim amendments along with the applicant’s representative’s response, the examiner reviewed the applied reference and respectfully disagrees.
With respect to the 35 U.S.C. § 102 rejection, using Cidon, and using amended independent claim 1 for example, the applicant’s representative argued that Cidon does not have tiered policies for different levels of users of the system.
In response, the Examiner reviewed Cidon and focused on some of the examples that were already explained previously, as Cidon provided several examples ranging from large corporations as “users” or entities utilizing Cidon’s system to smaller entities. In both cases, there are settings/policies/configurations/guarantees in place with the system. A large corporation entity would have certain resources or environments allocated and guaranteed, and from there, the users within that corporation or business can be further allocated a subset of those resources. Previous interview discussions had touched upon this concept in trying to see how the present application’s approach can differentiate between large or small entity users of the system. The current claim language only introduces the idea that different users of the system would have different policies or configuration in place, which is of course obvious with any user of a system, which is also why it’s already taught and covered in Cidon’s teachings as well. The Examiner remains unpersuaded at this time.
The other independent claim 12 was similarly amended and argued following claim 1 and thus was similarly rejected under the same rationale.
The remaining dependent claims were not specifically argued at this time.
Applicant's arguments were considered but they were not found persuasive. See the following claim rejections for further clarifications with added emphasis on the points previously disclosed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. US 2021/0067372 A1 to Cidon et al. (referred to hereafter as “Cidon”).
As to claim 1, Cidon further discloses a method, comprising:
using a first portion of cloud service provider (CSP)-provided infrastructure in a first region to provide one or more CSP-offered cloud services to one or more customers of the CSP (Cidon discloses of a similar system that can provide one or more users/tenants/entities with virtual networked services and resources, e.g., Cidon: ¶¶ 13-14 and 61-64);
creating a first virtual private label cloud (vPLC) for a first reseller based upon the CSP-provided infrastructure, wherein creating the first vPLC comprises allocating a second portion of the CSP-provided infrastructure to the first vPLC (The system can provide each tenant with their own environment and resources. A tenant can run their services within a subsection or what’s allocated by the system, which can be their virtual environment, e.g., Cidon: ¶¶ 82 and 240-251);
using the first vPLC to provide one or more first reseller-offered cloud services to one or more customers of the first reseller (Each tenant (or reseller-1630) with their services can have their own recipients (or customers-1640), e.g., Cidon: ¶¶ 240-251 and Fig. 16);
allocating, from a plurality of resources provided by the CSP-provided infrastructure, a first set of resources for providing the one or more CSP-offered cloud services (The virtual network provider (VNP) is providing the infrastructure and/or resources and thus in other words allocating the resources to the various tenants/resellers for them to run their own environments with their own customer base, e.g., Cidon: ¶¶ 240-251 and Fig. 16); and
allocating, from the plurality of resources provided by the CSP-provided infrastructure, a second set of resources for use by a set of vPLCs including the first vPLC, wherein the second set of resources are allocated based on a hierarchy of policies including a first-level policy associated between the CSP and the first reseller, and a second-level policy associated between the first reseller and one or more customers of the first reseller (Cidon’s system can accommodate and allocate resources for the different demands from the various customers or entity users of the system. Entities can refer to entire corporations with multiple users within it which means there are already two or more layers of policies or configuration settings, between the system and the entity and between the corporation and their internal users. Cidon discloses in examples that a business/corporate entity as a customer of the system would have bandwidth guarantees, which is a different configuration or policy relationship between the business and its own users/tenants/customers (e.g., Cidon: ¶¶ 76, 82, 210-211 and Fig. 14). In other examples, like in Fig. 16, which again also highlights relationship between at least three levels, and a third level entity, as a “cloud reseller” can have its own customer base, with each customer having their own sets of resources and requirements (e.g., Cidon: ¶¶ 242-251 and Figs. 16 and 17, tenant configurations and statistics).
As to claim 2, Cidon further discloses the method of claim 1, wherein allocating the second set of resources for use by a set of vPLCs comprises allocating a first subset of the second set of resources to the first vPLC (Following claim 1, the system can allocate and set guarantees for any appropriate amount of resources to a “customer” or entity. So, in the case of a large corporate entity, there can be Ingress and Egress Committed Rate guarantees. And from there, that business corporation can further divide up subsets of the total amount that was allocated with further guarantees to the end users within that corporation (e.g., Cidon: ¶¶ 61, 67-68, 74, 210-216, 240-251, 254 and Figs. 16 and 17).
As to claim 3, Cidon further discloses the method of claim 2, further comprising checking the first-level policy to determine whether the first subset of the second set of resources is allowed to be allocated to the first vPLC (Following claims 1 and 2, the system would have agreements (or policies) in place for each user/tenant of the system, with respect to their environments (for their purposes). Cidon also discloses in other terms and ways of how the system can meet certain levels of standards or service(s) for each user/tenant of the system (e.g., Cidon: ¶¶ 106, 211-212, 307-308, 240-251 and Figs. 16 and 17).
As to claim 4, Cidon further discloses the method of claim 2, further comprising checking a resource database to determine whether the first subset of the second set of resources is available to be allocated to the first vPLC, the resource database being configured to track resource allocation history associated with the first vPLC (Following claims 1 and 2, the system can provide and keep track of various resources that are provided/allocated to each tenant, such as through guaranteed levels of service/resources, e.g., Cidon: ¶¶ 203, 214-215, and 282).
As to claim 5, Cidon further discloses the method of claim 3, wherein the first-level policy is based at least in part on an agreement between the CSP and the first reseller (Following claims 1-3, once again, the system would have agreements (or policies) in place for each user/tenant of the system, with respect to their environments (for their purposes), such as with meeting certain levels of standards or service(s) for each user/tenant of the system, e.g., Cidon: ¶¶ 106, 211-212, 307-308, 240-251 and Fig. 16).
As to claim 6, Cidon further discloses the method of claim 3, wherein the first-level policy comprises a requirement for types of resources (Following claims 1-3, a type can be broadly interpreted in terms of minimum speed, quality, space requirements, etc. or any other possibilities with respect to a user/tenant’s purposes with their needed resources and/or environment, e.g., Cidon: ¶¶ 106, 211-212, 307-308, 240-251 and Fig. 16).
As to claim 7, Cidon further discloses the method of claim 3, wherein the first-level policy comprises a requirement for amount of resources (Following claims 1-3 and similar to claim 6, a minimum amount of some resource is fully taught and can be mapped to for example, speed, quality, space, etc., e.g., Cidon: ¶¶ 106, 211-212, 307-308, 240-251 and Fig. 16).
As to claim 8, Cidon further discloses the method of claim 2, further comprising allocating a first portion of the first subset of the second set of resources to a customer tenancy of a first customer of the first reseller (Following claims 1 and 2, the user/tenant can set up their own environment, such as like a business and interact with their own customers in their own way, which can further involve providing resources and/or services (like a business) to those customers, e.g., Cidon: ¶¶ 67-68, 243-246, 249-251, and 254).
As to claim 9, Cidon further discloses the method of claim 8, further comprising checking the second-level policy to determine whether the first portion of the first subset of the second set of resources is allowed to be allocated to the customer tenancy of the first customer of the first reseller (Following claims 1, 2, and 8, the user/tenant can set up their own rules within their own environment, such as with their business and what type of relationship that would entail with respect to any connecting customers, e.g., Cidon: ¶¶ 67-68, 243-246, 249-251, and 254).
As to claim 10, Cidon further discloses the method of claim 9, wherein the second-level policy is based at least in part on an agreement between the first reseller and the first customer of the first reseller (Following claims 1, 2, 8, and 9, similar to how the system can form agreements with its first level users/tenants, who can be the resellers running some business, those users/tenants can in turn also set up something similar for the their own customers, in terms of resources and/or services and costs, e.g., Cidon: ¶¶ 67-68, 243-246, 249-251, and 254).
As to claim 11, Cidon further discloses the method of claim 1, wherein allocating the second set of resources for use by the set of vPLCs further comprising allocating a subset of the second set of resources for the first vPLC based at least in part on a partitioning requirement for the first vPLC, and wherein the partition requirement is an infrastructure level at which the subset of the second set of resources is allocated exclusively to the first vPLC and not shared by other vPLCs (Following claim 1, a partitioning requirement at an infrastructural level is still with respect to the first allocated virtual environment. In the first examples with a corporation, users within that corporation are allocated a subset of resources from what the first entity/corporation is allocated with their guaranteed amounts and rates, which is still exclusive to that entity. In other examples, each user/tenant of the system, who can be a reseller, would be getting those resources exclusively, e.g., Cidon: ¶¶ 78, 210, 214, 240, 250).
As to claims 12-15 and 16, see the similar corresponding rejections of claims 1-4 and 8 respectively.
As to claims 17-19 and 20, see the similar corresponding rejections of claims 1-3 and 8 respectively.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Xiang Yu whose telephone number is (571)270-5695. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-3:00 (PST/PDT).
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, Emmanuel Moise can be reached at (571)272-3865. 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.
/X.Y./Examiner, Art Unit 2455
/EMMANUEL L MOISE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2455