DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1, 3-15, 17-19, and 21-23 are pending.
Claims 1, 3-4, 7-8, 15, and 21 have been amended.
Claim 23 is new.
This action is Non-Final.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5, 15, and 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nay USPAT 9,098,278, and further in view of Maki et al. (hereinafter as Maki) PGPUB 2018/0083455.
As per claim 1, Nay teaches a computer-implemented method, comprising:
monitoring power available to a plurality of nodes, each node of the plurality of nodes corresponding to an electronic component, device, or group of devices [col. 4 lines 58-60 and col. 5 lines 31-34: (terminal may monitor various characteristics of operation of a battery such as voltage and current, for a battery that provides power to several servers (plurality of nodes))];
detecting that the power available to the plurality of nodes is outside a first power range within which all of the nodes of the plurality of nodes can operate at a full operation level such that the power available to the plurality of nodes is within a second power range [FIG. 6, col. 6 lines 44-58, col. 7 lines 1-7, and col. 8 lines 39-48: (first power range is 80%-100% battery power in which there is normal/full power, and second power range is less than 80% to 40% in which there is reduced power consumption; detects when the first threshold is crossed that leads to a transition into the second power range where power consumption is reduced)];
in response to detecting that the power available to the plurality of nodes is outside the first power range, determining allocation of the available power amongst the plurality of nodes, the determined allocation comprising an allocation of a non-zero amount of power [col. 5 lines 35-41: (one or more servers may enter into reduced power consumption state (different than a complete shutdown state) and FIG. 6 and col. 8 lines 52-64: (when in the reduced power consumption state, server may refrain executing certain types of jobs, scaled down voltage multiplier, and so worth; it still runs and is thus allocated nonzero power)];
in response to the determined allocation, signaling at least some of the nodes of the plurality of nodes to transition from the full operation level to a mode that utilizes less power than the full operation level [col. 8 lines 52-64: (when entering the reduced power consumption state, the identified power reduction measures are taken such that the servers can utilize less power than the normal mode)]; and
continuing, after the signaling the at least some of the nodes of the plurality of nodes to transition from the full operation level to the mode that utilizes less power than the full operation level, to monitor the power available to the plurality of nodes and, in response to detecting that the power available to the plurality of nodes is again within the first power range, signaling the at least some of the nodes to transition to the full operation level [FIG. 6 and col. 8 lines 60-62: (continues to monitor after transitioning to the reduced power consumption mode the battery capacity signal 380, and when it exceeds the first threshold again and returns back into the first range, transitioning back to state 610 for normal operation)].
Nay does not explicitly teach the second range that includes a minimum power usage determined from operating voltage and voltage tolerance of electronic components of the plurality of nodes. Nay teaches that second range as just under 80% to 40% and that below the 40% threshold leads to a graceful shutdown, but Nay does not explicitly mention that the second range includes a minimum power usage from operating voltage and tolerance of electronic components.
Maki teaches a device that performs graceful shutdown based on remaining battery level. Maki is thus similar to Nay because they both teach allowing devices to perform graceful shutdown based on battery level. Maki further teaches includes a minimum power usage determined from operating voltage and voltage tolerance of electronic components of the plurality of nodes [0027: (there is a safe minimum battery voltage at which above it the device may operate safely; when voltage drops to a certain point, graceful shutdown is performed to prevent damage)]. Maki thus shows that the threshold point for performing the graceful shutdown is to prevent damage of the computing device, and thus any range above that threshold point would include the minimum power usage that can be supported.
The combination of Nay with Maki leads to the 40% threshold in Nay being the minimum power usage point in the second range, and that anything below that threshold requires a transition to a graceful shutdown to prevent damage to the servers and their components. Maki teaches that the 40% threshold in Nay is a minimum operating point determined from operating voltage or voltage tolerance of components.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Maki’s teachings of performing a graceful shutdown to protect computing circuitry from damage and a minimum safe operating point prior to graceful shutdown at which the device can operate in Nay. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to have the 40% point in Nay be the minimum power usage point at which operation may be allowed prior to graceful shutdown because it allows the servers to run as long as possible without risking damage while using as much battery storage as it can, thus improving reliability.
As per claim 3, Nay and Maki teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the signaling the at least some of the nodes of the plurality of nodes to transition from the full operation level to the mode that utilizes less power than the full operation level causes the at least some of the plurality of nodes to engage in power reduction measures [Nay col. 8 lines 52-57].
As per claim 4, Nay and Maki teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein each node of the plurality of nodes comprises an electronic component of a computer device [Nay col. 4 lines 29-32] and the signaling the at least some of the nodes of the plurality of nodes to transition from the full operation level to the mode that utilizes less power than the full operation level causes the least some of the nodes to adjust performance of one or more electronic component operation parameters, wherein the electronic component operation parameters comprise a clock speed, a voltage parameter, a current parameter, or a cooling parameter [Nay col. 8 lines 52-57: (scale down voltage multiplier)].
As per claim 5, Nay and Maki teach the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein each node of the plurality of nodes independently comprises computer devices in a computing cluster, servers in a server rack, or server racks in a data center [Nay col. 4 lines 20-28].
Claim 15 is similar in scope to claim 1 as addressed above and is thus rejected under the same rationale. Nay further teaches one or more processors [col. 5 line 59-61 and col. 6 line 59-60: processor] and one or more non-transitory computer readable storage media storing programming for execution by the one or more processors [col. 5 lines 59-67: (memory storing instructions to be executed by processor)], the programming comprising instructions to: for each of a plurality of nodes, monitor power available to the respective node [col. 1 lines 44-47, col. 4 lines 58-60, and col. 5 lines 11-23: (there are a plurality of servers sharing a battery and power is monitored for servers; it is logical that it is performed for each of the servers because they too use the shared battery and would need to know the amount of power available and whether to adjust power operations based on the shared battery)].
As per claim 17, Nay and Maki teach the system of claim 15, wherein the programming further comprises instructions to determine whether the power available is within a third power level in which the power available is lower than the power available in the second power range [Nay FIG. 6, col. 8 lines 48-51, and col. 8 line 65 – col. 9 line 4: (determines when power is at a third power level that is below the 80%-40% range)] and, in response to determining that the power available is within the third power level, signal each the nodes of the plurality of nodes to take measures in anticipation of receiving insufficient power to operate properly [Nay FIG. 6, col. 8 lines 48-51, and col. 8 line 65 – col. 9 line 4: (take measures to perform graceful shutdown)].
As per claim 18, Nay and Maki teach the system of claim 15, further comprising instructions that enable an alternate power source to supply power to at least one node of the plurality of nodes in response to detecting that the power available to the plurality of nodes is outside the first power range [Nay col. 7 lines 30-56: (battery is enabled when external power source is unavailable or available power drops to the first range)].
Claim 19 is similar in scope to claim 4 as addressed above and is thus rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 6 and 21-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nay USPAT 9,098,278 further in view of Maki et al. (hereinafter as Maki) PGPUB 2018/0083455, and further in view of Allen-Ware et al. (hereinafter as Allen-Ware)1 PGPUB 2019/0004579.
As per claim 6, Nay and Maki teach the computer-implemented method of claim 1.
Nay and Maki do not teach further comprising determining a priority among the plurality of nodes; and enabling an alternate power source to supply power to one or more nodes of the plurality of nodes based on the determined priority amongst the plurality of nodes. Nay describes enabling an alternate power source to supply power (using the battery) but does not mention priorities.
Allen-Ware teaches a battery in a UPS that provides power to several servers. Allen-Ware is thus similar to Nay because they both teach using a battery to provide back-up power to servers. Allen-Ware further teaches determining a priority among the plurality of nodes [0083, 0151, and tables on page 21: (determine priorities of servers)]; and enabling an alternate power source to supply power to one or more nodes of the plurality of nodes based on the determined priority amongst the plurality of nodes [0060, 0082-0083, 0151, 0153, 0183, 0217: (in the event of a significant decrease in available power, backup power is proportionally distributed based on priorities to server blades)]. Allen-Ware teaches throttling lower priority servers more than higher priority servers such that high priority servers receive more power than lower priority servers.
The combination of Nay and Maki with Allen-Ware leads to Nay’s servers 101-105 being ranked according to priority, and leads to the battery providing more power to the higher priority servers than to the lower priority servers in the reduced power consumption state when the first threshold is reached.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Allen-Ware’s teachings of providing more power to higher-priority servers than to lower-priority servers when not enough power is available in Nay. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide more power to the higher priority servers than the lower priority servers in Nay and Maki in order to prolong operation/runtime of the higher priority servers because it would ensure that the more important servers keep running for a longer period of time, thus improving reliability.
As per claim 21, Nay and Maki teach the computer-implemented method of claim 1. Nay and Maki do not explicitly teach, wherein determining, in response to detecting that the power available to the plurality of nodes is outside the first power range, the allocation of the available power amongst the plurality of nodes comprises determining the allocation of the available power amongst the plurality of nodes according to priorities determined for the nodes of the plurality of nodes. Nay describes allocation of power to when outside the first power range, but does not mention priorities.
Allen-Ware teaches a battery in a UPS that provides power to several servers. Allen-Ware is thus similar to Nay because they both teach using a battery to provide back-up power to servers. Allen-Ware further teaches determining, in response to detecting that the power available to the plurality of nodes is outside the first power range, the allocation of the available power amongst the plurality of nodes comprises determining the allocation of the available power amongst the plurality of nodes according to priorities determined for the nodes of the plurality of nodes [0083, 0151, and tables on page 21: (determine priorities of servers) and 0060, 0082-0083, 0151, 0153, 0183, 0217: (in the event of a significant decrease in available power, backup power is proportionally distributed based on priorities to server blades)]. Allen-Ware teaches that when there is less power available, identifying priorities of servers and throttling lower priority servers more than higher priority servers such that high priority servers receive more power than lower priority servers.
The combination of Nay and Maki with Allen-Ware leads to Nay’s servers 101-105 being ranked according to priority, and leads to the battery providing more power to the higher priority servers than to the lower priority servers in the reduced power consumption state when the first threshold is reached.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Allen-Ware’s teachings of providing more power to higher-priority servers than to lower-priority servers when not enough power is available in Nay. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide more power to the higher priority servers than the lower priority servers in Nay and Maki order to prolong operation/runtime of the higher priority servers because it would ensure that the more important servers keep running for a longer period of time, thus improving reliability.
As per claim 22, Nay and Maki teach the system of claim 15.
Nay and Maki do not teach further comprising instructions to determine the at least some of the nodes to signal to transition to the second operation level according to priorities determined for the nodes of the plurality of nodes.
Allen-Ware teaches a battery in a UPS that provides power to several servers. Allen-Ware is thus similar to Nay because they both teach using a battery to provide back-up power to servers. Allen-Ware further teaches determine the at least some of the nodes to signal to transition to the second operation level according to priorities determined for the nodes of the plurality of nodes [0083, 0151, and tables on page 21: (determine priorities of servers) and 0060, 0082-0083, 0151, 0153, 0183, 0217: (in the event of a significant decrease in available power, backup power is proportionally distributed based on priorities to server blades)]. Allen-Ware teaches that when there is less power available, identifying priorities of servers and throttling lower priority servers more than higher priority servers such that high priority servers receive more power than lower priority servers.
The combination of Nay and Maki with Allen-Ware leads to Nay’s servers 101-105 being ranked according to priority, and leads to the battery providing more power to the higher priority servers than to the lower priority servers in the reduced power consumption state when the first threshold is reached.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Allen-Ware’s teachings of providing more power to higher-priority servers than to lower-priority servers when not enough power is available in Nay. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide more power to the higher priority servers than the lower priority servers in Nay and Maki order to prolong operation/runtime of the higher priority servers because it would ensure that the more important servers keep running for a longer period of time, thus improving reliability.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nay USPAT 9,098,278 further in view of Maki et al. (hereinafter as Maki) PGPUB 2018/0083455, and further in view of Cline et al. (hereinafter as Cline)2 PGPUB 2023/0384852.
As per claim 7, Nay and Maki teach the computer-implemented method of claim 4.
Nay and Maki do not explicitly teach, wherein monitoring the power available is continuous and the signaling that causes at least some of the nodes to adjust performance of the one or more electronic component operation parameters is substantially instantaneous. Nay and Maki describe monitoring the power available and adjusting performance, but does not indicate the timeframe in which it happens.
Cline teaches monitoring the power available to servers in a data center. Cline is therefore similar to Nay and Maki. Cline further teaches wherein monitoring the power available is continuous [0113] and the signaling that causes at least some of the nodes to adjust performance of the one or more electronic component operation parameters is substantially instantaneous [Cline 0056, 0063, and 0161: (signaling to quickly ramp up or down (substantially instantaneous)].
The combination of Nay and Maki with Cline leads to Nay continuously monitoring the power available at the battery and adjusting performance at servers substantially instantaneously.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Cline’s teachings of monitoring power available continuously and making adjustments substantially instantaneously in Nay and Maki. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to monitor the available power continuously and make near instantaneous adjustments in Nay and Maki because it allows for a faster response time to changing power conditions, thereby improving reliability and ensuring the servers stay powered and have uninterrupted operation.
Claim(s) 8, 11-12, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nay USPAT 9,098,278 further in view of Allen-Ware et al. (hereinafter as Allen-Ware) PGPUB 2019/0004579.
As per claim 8, Nay teaches a computer-implemented method comprising:
monitoring power available to a system that includes a plurality of nodes [col. 4 lines 58-60 and col. 5 lines 31-34: (terminal may monitor various characteristics of operation of a battery such as voltage and current, for a battery that provides power to several servers (plurality of nodes))], wherein the monitoring comprises determining whether the power available is within a first range that is above a first threshold [col. 6 lines 44-48: (first threshold of 80% capacity, and first range of 80%-100%) and col. 8 lines 39-46: (determines power available is in the first range)], within a second range that is below the first threshold and above a second threshold [col. 6 lines 48-58: (second threshold of 40% capacity, and second range of 40%- just less than 80%) and col. 8 lines 45-48: (when power falls below 80% but above 40%)], or within a third range that is below the second threshold [(third range of below 40%)], wherein the first threshold is a defined first value and the second threshold is a defined second value [col. 6 lines 44-58: (defined thresholds of 40% and 80%)];
determining, at a first time, that the power available is within the first range, and in response, providing full power to each node of the plurality of nodes [col. 4 lines 58-60: (battery is shared by the servers), col. 7 lines 7-9: (application that monitors and control the voltage may be executed on the terminal), and FIG. 6 and col. 8 lines 37-51: (description is provided for server 101 and its internal components, but it can be applied to all the servers that share the battery; in normal operation state when signal 380 remains above threshold T1, each node is provided full power in normal operation state)];
determining, at a second time, that the power available is within the second range [FIG. 6 and col. 8 lines 46-51: (when the voltage falls below the first threshold T1 but is still above second threshold T2, transition to reduced power consumption state 620)]; and
determining, at a third time, that the power available is within the third range, and in response, prompting the plurality of nodes to take measures in anticipation of receiving insufficient power to operate properly [FIG. 6 and col. 8 line 49 to col. 9 line 4: (when voltage falls below second threshold (to third range), data is saved to prepare for a graceful shutdown)].
Nay does not explicitly mention at the second time, prioritizing power utilization amongst the plurality of nodes and providing more power to higher priority nodes of the plurality of nodes than to lower priority nodes of the plurality of nodes. Nay did not explicitly mention the prioritizing of power among nodes.
Allen-Ware teaches a battery in a UPS that provides power to several servers. Allen-Ware is thus similar to Nay because they both teach using a battery to provide back-up power to servers. Allen-Ware further teaches at the second time, prioritizing power utilization amongst the plurality of nodes and providing more power to higher priority nodes of the plurality of nodes than to lower priority nodes of the plurality of nodes [0060, 0082-0083, 0151, 0153, 0183, 0217: (in the event of a significant decrease in available power, backup power is proportionally distributed based on priorities to server blades)]. Allen-Ware teaches throttling lower priority servers more than higher priority servers such that high priority servers receive more power than lower priority servers.
The combination of Nay with Allen-Ware leads to Nay’s servers 101-105 being ranked according to priority, and leads to the battery providing more power to the higher priority servers than to the lower priority servers in the reduced power consumption state when the first threshold is reached.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Allen-Ware’s teachings of providing more power to higher-priority servers than to lower-priority servers when not enough power is available in Nay. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to provide more power to the higher priority servers than the lower priority servers in order to prolong operation/runtime of the higher priority servers because it would ensure that the more important servers keep running for a longer period of time, thus improving reliability.
As per claim 11, Nay and Allen-Ware teach the computer-implemented method of claim 8, wherein each node of the plurality of nodes independently comprises: computer devices in a computing cluster; servers in a server rack; or server racks in a data center [Nay col. 4 lines 20-28].
As per claim 12, Nay and Allen-Ware teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 8, wherein each node of the plurality of nodes comprises a component of a computer device [Nay col. 4 lines 29-32].
As per claim 14, Nay and Allen-Ware teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 8, wherein the measures taken in anticipation of receiving insufficient power to operate properly comprises suspending operation of the plurality of nodes [Nay col. 8 line 65 – col. 9 line 4: (graceful shutdown is performed on the servers when there is insufficient power)].
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nay USPAT 9,098,278 further in view of Allen-Ware et al. (hereinafter as Allen-Ware) PGPUB 2019/0004579, and further in view of Bresniker et al. (hereinafter as Bresniker)2 PGPUB 2003/0084359.
As per claim 9, Nay and Allen-Ware teach the computer-implemented method of claim 8.
Nay and Allen-Ware do not appear to describe, wherein providing more power to higher priority nodes comprises keeping the higher priority nodes at full power and providing low power to the lower priority nodes.
Bresniker teaches server systems in data center and selectively reducing power to server/processing cards based on the amount of available power [FIG. 9 and 0107-0110]. Bresniker is thus similar to Nay and Allen-Ware because they all place computing devices of a server into a lower power mode based on reduced availability of power from the power supplies. Bresniker further teaches wherein providing more power to higher priority nodes comprises keeping the higher priority nodes at full power and providing low power to the lower priority nodes [Bresniker 0089, 0098-0099, 0107, 0109-0110: (lower priority components are placed in a power saving mode before higher priority ones are)]. Bresniker teaches reducing power to lower priority components first.
The combination of Nay and Allen-Ware with Bresniker leads to reducing power consumption on the lower priority servers first, but not the higher priority servers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Bresniker’s teachings of reducing power only to the lower priority servers in Nay and Allen-Ware. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to reduce power on lower priority servers and keep higher priority servers on in Nay and Allen-Ware because it would conserve battery power while allowing the most important/priority servers to continue to run as normal, thus maintaining operation of the highest priority servers and extending its runtime.
As per claim 10, Nay and Allen-Ware teach the computer-implemented method of claim 8.
Nay and Allen-Ware do not appear to describe wherein providing more power to higher priority nodes comprises providing power sufficient for the higher priority nodes to continue to operate and causing the lower priority nodes to suspend operation.
Bresniker teaches server systems in data center and selectively reducing power to server/processing cards based on the amount of available power [FIG. 9 and 0107-0110]. Bresniker is thus similar to Nay and Allen-Ware because they all place computing devices of a server into a lower power mode based on reduced availability of power from the power supplies. Bresniker further teaches wherein providing more power to higher priority nodes comprises providing power sufficient for the higher priority nodes to continue to operate and causing the lower priority nodes to suspend operation [Bresniker 0089, 0098-0099, 0107, 0109-0110: (lower priority components are suspended before higher priority ones are)].
The combination of Nay and Allen-Ware with Bresniker leads to suspending lower priority servers, but not the higher priority servers.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Bresniker’s teachings of suspending power only to the lower priority servers in Nay and Allen-Ware. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to suspend power on lower priority servers and keep higher priority servers on in Nay and Allen-Ware because it would conserve battery power while allowing the most important/priority servers to continue to operate, thus maintaining operation of the highest priority servers and extending its runtime.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nay USPAT 9,098,278 further in view of Allen-Ware et al. (hereinafter as Allen-Ware) PGPUB 2019/0004579, and further in view of Gao PGPUB 2022/0320876.
As per claim 13, Nay and Allen-Ware teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 8.
Nay and Allen-Ware do not teach further comprising, in response to determining that the power available is within the second range or the third range, enabling an alternate power source to supply power to the plurality of nodes. Nay and Allen-Ware enables the battery in the first range but does not describe enabling additional power supplies in the second or third range.
Gao teaches providing battery backup power to server blades when the main power is lost. Gao is thus similar to Nay and Allen-Ware. Gao further teaches in response to determining that the power available is within the second range or the third range, enabling an alternate power source to supply power to the plurality of nodes [0037: (first battery is turned on when utility power is lost due to an outage), and 0040: (second battery can be connected, and when it discharges to a certain low threshold, a third battery can be connected)]. Gao teaches activating alternate power sources when available power falls to a second or third range.
The combination of Nay and Allen-Ware with Gao leads to Nay and Allen-Ware’ servers operating normally on a first battery power when its range is 80%-100%, switching to reduced power consumption in which lower priority servers are throttled between 40%-80%, and activating another battery as the first battery nears 40%.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Gao’s teachings of activating an additional power source as the battery reaches a certain low threshold in Nay and Allen-Ware. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to activate another power source in Nay and Allen-Ware when it reaches a low threshold because it allows for further runtime and provides enough energy to guarantee a safe graceful shutdown, and provides a backup to the battery, thereby improving reliability.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nay USPAT 9,098,278 further in view of Allen-Ware et al. (hereinafter as Allen-Ware) PGPUB 2019/0004579, and further in view Ou Yang et al. (hereinafter as Ou Yang) PGPUB 2016/0320827.
As per claim 23, Nay and Allen-Ware teach the computer-implemented method of claim 8.
Nay and Allen-Ware do not explicitly teach, wherein: the monitoring further comprises determining whether the power available is within a fourth range that is above a third threshold; and the method further comprises, in response to determining, at a fourth time, that the power available is within the fourth range, and in response, signaling at least some of the nodes of the plurality of nodes to operate in a high power mode that utilizes more power than the full power provided to each node when the power available is within the first range. Nay and Allen-Ware describes when AC main power is lost, operate on backup battery power and adjust computing load based on the thresholds and ranges of the battery.
Ou Yang teaches providing power to servers on a data center using AC power and backup battery power. Ou Yang is thus similar to Nay and Allen-Ware. Ou Yang further teaches wherein: the monitoring further comprises determining whether the power available is within a fourth range that is above a third threshold [0003-0004 and 0017: (determines that energy storage (such as a battery) is available and PSU is also available; thus the power available is a fourth range that includes the full power available to the PSU and the full power available to the battery (above 100% capacity of the battery))]; and the method further comprises, in response to determining, at a fourth time, that the power available is within the fourth range, and in response, signaling at least some of the nodes of the plurality of nodes to operate in a high power mode that utilizes more power than the full power provided to each node when the power available is within the first range [0003, 0017-0018, and 0040: (operate in a boost mode in which power from the energy storage device is used to supplement the power outputted from the PSU to handle higher overclocked workloads on the server)]. Ou Yang teaches a higher power mode than the full power mode, and that it may be available when the battery and the main power is available.
The combination of Nay and Allen-Ware with Ouyang leads to overclocking a server by entering a boost mode when both the main power and battery power is available.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use Ouyang’s teachings of overclocking a server using power from the battery and the PSU/main power in Nay and Allen-Ware. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use the backup battery to supply supplemental power to the PSU in Nay and Allen-Ware to achieve a higher boost mode because it allows for higher performance of a server a handle large bursts of processing demands, thereby improving operations and performance.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 8, and 15 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is reminded that in amending in response to a rejection of claims, the patentable novelty must be clearly shown in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited and the objections made. Applicant must also show how the amendments avoid such references and objections. See 37 CFR §1.111(c).
Vaserfirer (PGPUB 2006/0149976) teaches performing graceful shutdown when there is insufficient voltage, thus avoiding damaging power failures [0025].
Wang et al. (USPAT 11,334,135) teaches using backup batteries for servers in a data center to supplement AC power to provide power to peak loads [Col. 8 lines 19-30 and col. 8 line 52 – col. 9 line 3]
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANNY CHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5134. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10-7 EST.
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, Andrew J. Jung can be reached at 5712703779. 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.
/DANNY CHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2175
1 Cited in Office Action on 10/31/2025.
2 Previously cited prior art.
Prosecution Insights