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 .
General Remarks
This communication is considered fully responsive to Applicant’s response filed 12/23/2025.
Application filed: 01/03/2024
Applicant’s PgPUB: 2025/0217261
Claims:
Claims 1, 3-13 and 15-20 are pending.
Claims 1, 13 and 20 are independent.
Claims 2 and 14 are canceled.
Claims 1, 10, 13, 15, 18-20 are amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant’s response, filed 12/23/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 3-13 and 15-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2022/0075694 A1 to Epping et al. (“Epping”) in and U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0244600 A1 to Shani et al. (“Shani”)..
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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 3-7, 13, 15-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0159841 A1 to Tabares et al. (“Tabares”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0027115 A1 to Kamboh et al. (“Kamboh”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2022/0075694 A1 to Epping et al. (“Epping”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0244600 A1 to Shani et al. (“Shani”).
As to claim 1, Tabares discloses:
a method of aggregating logs of activities in a cluster system operated by a user and having a plurality of nodes executing containerized applications, the method comprising:
collecting logs for each node of a plurality of nodes in the cluster system, wherein the logs record transactions of components of the system (¶0037 – Tabares teaches collected logs from multiple sources (i.e., components));
writing logs for critical components to [dedicated persistent volumes for each respective component] (Fig. 3A, Critical Logs, Non-Critical Logs; ¶0044 – Tabares teaches determining if logs are critical or non-critical);
writing logs for non-critical components to a central persistent volume (PV) (Fig. 3A, Critical Logs, Non-Critical Logs; ¶0044 – Tabares teaches determining if logs are critical or non-critical); and
combining the collected logs for the critical and non-critical components into a data element for further log processing by the system (¶0047, ¶0050 – Tabares teaches that previous logs (i.e., critical and non-critical logs) based off queries to train the ML system. This shows that logs are combined (i.e., previous logs) for further processing (i.e., train ML system)).
Kamboh discloses what Tabares does not expressly disclose.
Kamboh discloses:
dedicated persistent volumes for each respective component (Fig. 2, ¶0093 – Kamboh teaches that log data is stored within each cluster node instead of the manager)
Tabares and Kamboh are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to logging data.
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate dedicated storage volumes as discussed in Kamboh with the aggregation of logs of activities in a cluster system operated by a user and having a plurality of nodes executing containerized applications as discussed in Tabares by adding the functionality of Kamboh to the system/method of Tabares in order to demonstrate use of separated volume data logging (Kamboh, ¶0093).
Epping and Shani discloses what Tabares and Kamboh does not expressly disclose.
Epping discloses:
identifying critical components requiring needs based on node affinity involving services that require restarting on a same node in cases of failure recovery [and that require log perseverance] (¶0025, ¶0028 – Epping teaches some critical workloads have strict resource requirements that need to be met in order to restart and operate adequately after a failure. As will be further described later below, the AER system/method addresses this issue by enabling non-critical workloads to be powered off in a scenario where critical workloads cannot be restarted during a failure as a result of resource shortages; Note: Epping teaches that the VMs (i.e., components) are the workloads)
Tabares, Kamboh and Epping are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to network resources.
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate identifying critical components and needed resources during a failure as discussed in Epping with dedicated storage volumes as discussed in Kamboh with the aggregation of logs of activities in a cluster system operated by a user and having a plurality of nodes executing containerized applications as discussed in Tabares by adding the functionality of Kamboh to the system/method of Tabares in order to determine whena restart would be appropriate (Kamboh, ¶00025).
Shani discloses what Tabares, Kamboh and Epping does not expressly disclose.
Shani discloses:
identifying critical components … that require log perseverance (¶0048 – Shani teaches Specifically, the logging system 190 is configured to guarantee the storage life of high-priority log data at the expense of low-priority log data by promoting low-priority buffers to a high-priority status when the logging system 190 runs out of storage space to instantiate new buffers, and none of the present high-priority buffers has expire)
Tabares, Kamboh, Epping and Shani are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to logging data.
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate high-priority log persistence as discussed in Shani with identifying critical components and needed resources during a failure as discussed in Epping with dedicated storage volumes as discussed in Kamboh with the aggregation of logs of activities in a cluster system operated by a user and having a plurality of nodes executing containerized applications as discussed in Tabares by adding the functionality of Shani to the system/method of Tabares, Kamboh and Epping in order to determine when some logs need to be purged for more important logs (Shani, ¶0048).
As to claim 3, Tabares, Kamboh, Epping and Shani discloses:
method of claim 1, and
Tabares discloses:
wherein the further log processing comprises
an audit log management system, the method further comprising aggregating the logs into a consistent audit log format (¶0044 – Tabares teahce Index 334 may comprise a database, array, flat file, or other data structure for storing data about each log in an easily queried format, such as a SQL data file; ¶0053 – Tabares teaches The extracted or parsed data may be added to a data structure to allow easy queries, such as a relational database, array, or other type and format of data.).
As to claim 4, Tabares, Kamboh, Epping and Shani discloses:
method of claim 3, and
Tabares discloses:
wherein the logs are collected for events including system changes, authorization activities, privileged access events, and audit related activities (¶0035 – Tabares teaches event logs, audit records, etc).
As to claim 5, Tabares, Kamboh, Epping and Shani discloses:
method of claim 4, and
Tabares discloses:
wherein the system changes comprise
component failures and changes to availability, configuration, or source code (¶0038 – Tabares teaches logs with error codes);
the authorization activities comprise login or access failures and access provisioning (¶0042 – Tabares teaches event logs, access logs, process logs, network logs, or any other type of audit record);
the privileged access events comprise using a superuser status or running an administrator console (¶0042 – Tabares teaches event logs, access logs, process logs, network logs, or any other type of audit record); and
the audit-related activities comprise changing event logging configurations, deleting event logs, or audit log failures (¶0042 – Tabares teaches event logs, access logs, process logs, network logs, or any other type of audit record).
As to claim 6, Tabares, Kamboh, Epping and Shani discloses:
method of claim 5, and
Tabares discloses:
wherein the audit log format facilitates display of log information to a user through a graphical user interface (Fig. 1, Fig. 3A, Manager Device, 302 – Tabares teaches system 101 has a GUI/display and 302 can be the same device as 101) and transfer of the logs to an audit log management system (Fig. 4, 418 – Tabares teaches the Manager device transferring logs to the Log aggregator).
As to claim 7, Tabares, Kamboh, Epping and Shani discloses:
method of claim 6, and
Tabares discloses:
wherein the audit log format dictates inclusion of information including sender ID, receiver ID, specified user operations, and actions performed by the component (Fig. 3C of Tabares).
As to claim 13, similar rejection as claim 1.
As to claim 15, similar rejection as claim 3.
As to claim 16, similar rejection as claims 4 and 5.
As to claim 17, similar rejection as claims 6 and 7.
As to claim 20, similar rejection as claim 1.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0159841 A1 to Tabares et al. (“Tabares”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0027115 A1 to Kamboh et al. (“Kamboh”) in further view U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0027115 A1 to Al-Alem et al. (“Al-Alem”).
As to claim 8, Tabares, Kamboh, Epping and Shani discloses:
method of claim 2,
Al-Alem discloses what Tabares, Kamboh, Epping and Shani do not expressly disclose.
Al-Alem discloses:
further comprising
using a PV mounter pod to mount each dedicated PV to the respective component (Fig. 1B of Al-Alem).
Tabares, Kamboh, Epping, Shani and Al-Alem are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to data logging.
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate mounter pods as discussed in Al-Alem with high-priority log persistence as discussed in Shani with identifying critical components and needed resources during a failure as discussed in Epping with dedicated storage volumes as discussed in Kamboh with the aggregation of logs of activities in a cluster system operated by a user and having a plurality of nodes executing containerized applications as discussed in Tabares by adding the functionality of Kamboh to the system/method of Tabares, Kamboh, Epping and Shani in order to demonstrate use of mounter pods (Al-Alem, ¶0029).
Claims 9 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0159841 A1 to Tabares et al. (“Tabares”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0027115 A1 to Kamboh et al. (“Kamboh”) in further view U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0027115 A1 to Al-Alem et al. (“Al-Alem”) in further view U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0012736 A1 to Singarapu et al. (“Singarapu”)
As to claim 9, Tabares, Kamboh, Epping, Shani and Al-Alem:
method of claim 8
Singarapu discloses what Tabares, Kamboh, Epping, Shani and Al-Alem do not expressly disclose.
Singarapu discloses:
further comprising
writing the logs for the non-critical components to one of a local file using central persistent volume using one of a standard output function and a log forwarder utility, or a sidecar container that tracks log files in a pod and that transfers the log files to other services (¶0034 – Singarapu teaches use of Fluentbit and Fluentd, which are log processors rand forwarders configured to collect data and logs from different application, unify the logs and transmit the logs to one or more locations).
Tabares, Kamboh, Epping, Shani, Al-Alem and Singarapu are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to data logging
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate data forwarders as discussed in Singarapu with mounter pods as discussed in Al-Alem with high-priority log persistence as discussed in Shani with identifying critical components and needed resources during a failure as discussed in Epping with dedicated storage volumes as discussed in Kamboh with the aggregation of logs of activities in a cluster system operated by a user and having a plurality of nodes executing containerized applications as discussed in Tabares by adding the functionality of Kamboh to the system/method of Tabares, Kamboh, Epping and Shani in order to provide logging and/or log management and analysis of logs for different applications in an environment (Singarapu, ¶0008).
As to claim 18, similar rejection as claims 8 and 9.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0159841 A1 to Tabares et al. (“Tabares”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0027115 A1 to Kamboh et al. (“Kamboh”) in further view U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0094620 A1 to Darling et al. (“Darling”).
As to claim 10, Tabares, Kamboh, Epping and Shani discloses:
method of claim 2
Darling discloses what Tabares, Kamboh, Epping and Shani do not expressly disclose.
Darling discloses:
further comprising
defining one or more log levels to define a verbosity of a corresponding log, with a relatively higher level generating greater verbosity in the log file. (¶0092 – Darling teaches use of syslog verbosity)
Tabares, Kamboh, Epping, Shani and Darling are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to data logging.
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate verbosity as discussed in Darling with high-priority log persistence as discussed in Shani with identifying critical components and needed resources during a failure as discussed in Epping with dedicated storage volumes as discussed in Kamboh with the aggregation of logs of activities in a cluster system operated by a user and having a plurality of nodes executing containerized applications as discussed in Tabares by adding the functionality of Kamboh to the system/method of Tabares, Kamboh, Epping and Shani in order to provide distributed logging storage solution that is scalable and configurable (Darling, ¶0002).
Claims 11, 12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0159841 A1 to Tabares et al. (“Tabares”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0027115 A1 to Kamboh et al. (“Kamboh”) in further view U.S. Patent No. 11,599,506 B1 to Shilane et al. (“Shilane”).
As to claim 11, Tabares, Kamboh, Epping and Shani discloses:
method of claim 1,
Shilane discloses what Tabares, Kamboh, Epping and Shani do not expressly disclose.
Shilane discloses:
wherein the cluster system comprises
a Santorini network processing containerized data utilizing a Kubernetes-based framework, and wherein the cluster network comprises part of a Data Domain deduplication backup system performing backup and restore operations for the nodes (Fig. 2A, Clustered Storage System, Fig. 2B, Abstract, col. 6 ll. 44-55 – Shilane teaches Data Domain deduplication and backup storage systems; col. 7 ll. 42-49 – Shilane teaches use of Kubernetes within a clustered storage system (i.e., Santorini network)).
Tabares, Kamboh, Epping, Shani and Shilane are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to data logging.
Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate deduplication as discussed in Shilane with high-priority log persistence as discussed in Shani with identifying critical components and needed resources during a failure as discussed in Epping with dedicated storage volumes as discussed in Kamboh with the aggregation of logs of activities in a cluster system operated by a user and having a plurality of nodes executing containerized applications as discussed in Tabares by adding the functionality of Kamboh to the system/method of Tabares, Kamboh, Epping and Shani in order to provide data deduplication system can receive data segments, compare these received data segments against previously stored data segments, identify which received data segments are unique because they have not been previously stored, and store the unique data segments. (Shilane, col. 1 ll. 32-43).
As to claim 12, Tabares, Kamboh, Epping, Shani and Shilane discloses:
method of claim 11, and
Shilane discloses:
wherein the components comprise
at least one of system elements or services that implement containerized applications comprising at least one of a Data Domain container running deduplication and compression processes, a cloud-native data protection manager, and a scalable object storage manager. (Fig. 2A, Clustered Storage System, Fig. 2B, Abstract, col. 6 ll. 44-55 – Shilane teaches Data Domain deduplication and backup storage systems; col. 7 ll. 42-49 – Shilane teaches use of Kubernetes within a clustered storage system (i.e., Santorini network)). The suggestion/motivation and obviousness rejection is the same as in claim 11.
As to claim 19, similar rejection as claims 11 and 12.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 TAYLOR A ELFERVIG whose telephone number is (571)270-5687. The examiner can normally be reached Monday (10:00 AM CST) - Friday (4:00 PM CST).
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, Oscar Louie can be reached at (571) 270-1684. 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.
/TAYLOR A ELFERVIG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2445