Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application, with claims 1, 9, and 17 being the independent claims. Claims 1, 9, and 17 are sought to be amended. Claims 21-22 are sought to be canceled without prejudice to or disclaimer of the subject matter therein. These changes are believed to introduce no new matter, and their entry is respectfully requested.
3. This office action is in response to the RCE filed 02/17/2026.
4. 18/442,664 is a continuation of 17/500,291.
5. Claims 1, 9, and 17 being independent claims.
6. The office action is made Non-Final.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 07/01/2025 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of 10/13/2021 has been reviewed and is approved. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Examiner Note
7. The Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the Applicant(s). Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the Applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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 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.
9. 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) A patent may not be obtained through 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.
10. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Parthasarathy (US 10362092 B1) hereinafter as Parthasarathy in view of Shah et al (US 20190311041 A1) hereinafter as Shah.
11. Regarding claim 1, Parthasarathy teaches A computer-implemented method implemented on a primary computing cluster for distributing objects across computing clusters (Fig. 1B1 and Fig 1C (a flowchart 1C00) illustrate operations as implemented in systems that facilitate synchronized entity management in multi-cluster distributed systems. Col 3, lines 37-45, “manage cross-cluster entity metadata that is accessible from multiple access points in a multi-cluster distributed system”, col 19, lines 51-58, “a pod (e.g., a Kubernetes pod). Pods provide sharing mechanisms (e.g., when multiple containers are amalgamated into the scope of a pod) as well as isolation mechanisms (e.g., such that the namespace scope of one pod does not share the namespace scope of another pod).”
In line with Applicant Pre-Grant Pub [0022], [0027], [0029],
[0022], “a Primary computing cluster and a secondary computing cluster may reside in a cloud computing environment and can be managed by a cloud orchestration system. As a non-limiting example, the cloud orchestration system may be KUBERNETES (developed by Cloud Native Computing Foundation).”.
[0027], “a sources resource 118 may be a Kubernetes K10 object. Source resources 118 may also be templates or specs that define Kubernetes K10 objects. Moreover, source resources 118 may include global location profiles. Location profiles may be used to create backups from snapshots, move applications and their data across clusters and potentially across different clouds, and subsequently import these backups or exports into another cluster. Source resources 118 may also include global policies. Global policies may include policies to be implemented by various secondary computing clusters 120.”.
[0029], “Distribution engine 114 may be configured to distribute source resources 118 to secondary computing cluster 120. Furthermore, distribution engine 114 may monitor any updates to source resources 118. As a non-limiting example, distribution engine 114 may be a Kubernetes K10 component.”
Examiner notes and interpretations:
Per definition: A Multi-Cluster Service Account (MCSA) token allows a pod in one Kubernetes cluster to authenticate and access resources in another cluster, effectively enabling cross-cluster communication. This is achieved by importing the remote cluster's service account token into the local cluster, allowing the pod to act on behalf of the remote service account.
the method comprising:
receiving a request to distribute a first object and a second object stored on the primary computing cluster to a secondary computing cluster (Fig. 1B1 and Fig. 1C, step 133 (cluster Migration), Fig 1C, step 161 (Receive a request to migrate entities (a first object and a second object) from a source cluster to a target cluster), col 7, lines 64-67 & col 8, lines 1-45), wherein the primary computing cluster is connected to the secondary computing cluster via a persistent connection (col 12, lines 5-21, “the centralized access point 114 of cluster 102 (k) of Fig 1B2 (the primary computing cluster) can receive requests (e.g., HTTP requests) “persistent connection” and distribute them as appropriate to the local access points (secondary computing cluster for example any cluster 102(N) of Fig 1B2).”);
retrieving the first object based on an object identifier for the first object or an identifier of the secondary computing cluster (col 9, lines 14-38, “A subject entity metadata identifier (e.g., EID 142) and a parent entity metadata identifier (e.g., PID 144)”, lines 39-59, “the entity metadata can comprise an entity identifier or entityID, a cluster identifier or clusterID, a permissions indicator (e.g., corresponding to an enterprise access policy), an entity state indicator (e.g., active, disabled, pending deletion, etc.), and/or other attributes (e.g., date created, last modified, etc.).”, col 13, lines 52-67, “by migrating the entity metadata of the source cluster to the entity database of the target cluster. In such cases, the source entity metadata (e.g., source entity metadata 431) is identified (operation 404).”);
retrieving the second object based on an object identifier for the second object or an identifier of the secondary computing cluster (col 9, lines 14-38, col 13, lines 52-67, “the retrieving of the object based on an object identifier for the object or an identifier of the secondary computing cluster can be applied for any number of objects”);
identifying the secondary computing cluster based on the object identifier for the first object, the object identifier for the second object or the identifier of the secondary computing cluster (col 9, lines 14-38, lines 39-59 and col 13, lines 52-67, “by migrating the entity metadata of the source cluster to the entity database of the target cluster. In such cases, the source entity metadata (e.g., source entity metadata 431) is identified (operation 404).”));
distributing the first object and the second object to the secondary computing cluster via the persistent connection (Fig. 1B1 and Fig. 1C, step 133 (cluster Migration), Fig 1C, step 161 (Receive a request to migrate entities (a first object and a second object) from a source cluster to a target cluster), col 7, lines 64-67 & col 8, lines 1-45 and col 12, lines 5-21, “the centralized access point 114 of cluster 102 (k) of Fig 1B2 (the primary computing cluster) can receive requests (e.g., HTTP requests) “persistent connection” and distribute them as appropriate to the local access points (secondary computing cluster for example any cluster 102(N) of Fig 1B2).”).
Parthasarathy did not specifically teach wherein the second object is distributed before the first object due to a password or encryption key associated with the second object.
However, Shah teaches wherein the second object is distributed before the first object due to a password or encryption key associated with the second object ([0012], “the object attribute may be a foreign key that relates the root object to another object (e.g., a table).”, [0017], “determine the sequence of migrating all objects in the database schema to prioritize the parents in the identified parent-child relationship followed by the siblings of the child object in the identified parent-child relationship. In an example, the system may also determine the object sequence based on the four classifications of the object attribute determined above.”, [0027], Fig 5, step 510 [0061], Fig 7, step 710, [0084]).
Examiner interpretation: Migrating objects in a parent-child relationship based encryption key (foreign key) of the parent/root prioritize the migration of the parent followed by the siblings).
In line with Applicant Pre-Grant Pub [0071]).
[0071], “In some embodiments, distribution engine 114 may need to send multiple objects representing source resources 118 to secondary computing cluster 120. The objects may include dependencies to data in other objects. As such, distribution engine 114 may identify the dependencies between the objects. Distribution engine 114 identifies an order in which to distribute the objects to secondary computing cluster 120 such that the dependencies between the objects are maintained. Distribution engine 114 may distribute the objects in the identified order to secondary computing cluster 120. In the event distribution engine 114 determines that an object contains secrets (e.g., passwords, encryption keys, etc.), the object may be distributed before any other object.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the concept of teachings suggested in Gusler’s system into Parthasarathy’s and by incorporating Gusler into Parthasarathy because both systems are related to object migration would build a dynamic object-relationship model of a database and determines a sequence of data migration for moving data from one database to another (Shah).
12. Regarding claim 2, Parthasarathy and Shah teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1 above and further Parthasarathy teaches wherein the first object comprises backup storage policies or configurations associated with the secondary computing cluster, and the backup storage policies or the configurations comprise at least one backup storage policy or configuration that is different than previous backup storage policies or previous configurations implemented by the secondary computing cluster, and wherein the configurations are parameters used to implement the backup storage policies (col 8, lines 58-67, “facilitate issuance of requests 148 by a user to perform certain operations pertaining to the multi-cluster distributed system, such as deployment of entities and/or clusters, performing entity operations (e.g., establishing a backup policy for virtual machines in an application running on multiple clusters, management of data policies, and/or other operations).”).
13. Regarding claim 3, Parthasarathy and Shah teaches the invention as claimed in claim 2 above and further Parthasarathy teaches wherein the secondary computing cluster implements the backup storage policies or the configurations included in the first object in response to receiving the first object (col 8, lines 58-67, “facilitate issuance of requests 148 by a user to perform certain operations pertaining to the multi-cluster distributed system, such as deployment of entities and/or clusters, performing entity operations (e.g., establishing a backup policy for virtual machines in an application running on multiple clusters, management of data policies, and/or other operations).”).
14. Regarding claim 4, Parthasarathy and Shah teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1 above and further Parthasarathy teaches storing a plurality of objects in a data storage device associated with the primary computing cluster, wherein the plurality of objects comprises the first object corresponding to the secondary computing cluster and other objects corresponding to other secondary computing clusters (Fig 1B1, 1B2, col 6, lines 49-67, “Cluster 102(1) and cluster 102(N) each have an entity database (e.g., local entity database 106(1) and local entity database 106(N), respectively) to store metadata describing the entities (e.g., VMs, containers, storage facilities, processes, etc.) in the cluster.”, col 7, lines 39-51, “the protocol can transfer ownership (e.g., read-write permissions) of the subject entity metadata (e.g., stored in local entity database 106(1) and local entity database 106(N)) from local access points (e.g., local access point 104(1) and local access point 104(N)) to centralized access point 114 (step 3).”, see also Fig 1D, col 8, lines 58-67).
15. Regarding claim 5, Parthasarathy and Shah teaches the invention as claimed in claim 4 above and further Parthasarathy teaches wherein the data storage device resides in a namespace of the primary computing cluster such that configuration and backup storage policies of the primary computing cluster remain unaffected by the plurality of objects (col 19, lines 51-58, “Pods provide sharing mechanisms (e.g., when multiple containers are amalgamated into the scope of a pod) as well as isolation mechanisms (e.g., such that the namespace scope of one pod does not share the namespace scope of another pod).”).
16. Regarding claim 6, Parthasarathy and Shah teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1 above and further Parthasarathy teaches wherein the persistent connection is established based on credentials for a first user type and enables requests from a second user type for an object stored on the secondary computing cluster without credentials for the second user type (col 12, lines 5-21, “the centralized access point 114 of cluster 102 (k) of Fig 1B2 (the primary computing cluster) can receive requests (e.g., HTTP requests) “persistent connection” and distribute them as appropriate to the local access points (secondary computing cluster for example any cluster 102(N) of Fig 1B2).”, col 7, lines 39-51, “the protocol can transfer ownership (e.g., read-write permissions) of the subject entity metadata (e.g., stored in local entity database 106(1) and local entity database 106(N)) from local access points (e.g., local access point 104(1) and local access point 104(N)) to centralized access point 114 (step 3).”, Fig 1B2, col 8, lines 3-21, “Specifically, a request might be received at centralized access point 114 of cluster 102(K) to migrate some or all of the entities of a source cluster (e.g., cluster 102(1)) to a target cluster (e.g., cluster 102(N)) (step 1). Centralized access point 114 can invoke an ownership (e.g., read-write permissions) transfer of the source entity metadata in local entity database 106(1) from local access point 104(1) (step 2) to facilitate a “sync” (e.g., responsive to a snapshot event, or a data change event, any other event) of the source entity metadata to centralized entity database 116 (step 3).”).
17. Regarding claim 7, Parthasarathy and Shah teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1 above and further Parthasarathy teaches transforming the first object so that the first object is configured to be implemented by the secondary computing cluster, in response to retrieving the first object (col 9, lines 60-67 & col 10, lines 1-5, col 16, lines 24-37, col 17, lines 2-7).
18. Regarding claim 8, Parthasarathy and Shah teaches the invention as claimed in claim 1 above and further Parthasarathy teaches monitoring the first object on the secondary computing cluster to determine whether the first object corresponding to the secondary computing cluster on the primary computing cluster has been updated (col 1, lines 26-32, “the metadata can be used to operate on the entities (e.g., create or configure a VM, etc.) and/or monitor certain aspects of the entities (e.g., changes, accesses, permissions, etc.). Various access points (e.g., management interface) in a distributed system can be provided to perform entity management (e.g., configuration, monitoring, analyzing, etc.).”, col 12, lines 5-9, “provide a distributed resource management platform to facilitate management and monitoring of the entities (e.g., objects) and/or services in the multi-cluster distributed environment 200.”).
19. Regarding claims 9-16, those claims recite a system performs the method of claims 1-8 respectively and are rejected under the same rationale.
20. Regarding claims 17-20, those claims recite a non-transitory computer-readable medium having instructions stored thereon that, when executed by at least one computing device, causes a primary computing cluster to perform operations similar to the method of claims 2, 5 and 6 respectively and are rejected under the same rationale.
Respond to Amendments and Arguments
21. In the remarks received 02/17/2026, applicant respectively argued that:
Neither Parthasarathy nor Gusler teach or suggest distributing a second object to a secondary computing cluster before a first object due to a password or encryption key associated with the second object. Parthasarathy does not disclose passwords or encryption keys associated with its subject entities. Nor does Parthasarathy disclose any attributes of the subject entities that determine an order in which they are distributed to another computer cluster. Parthasarathy, 7:64-8:45.
Accordingly, independent claims 1, 9 and 17 as amended are patentable over the applied references. Claims 2-8, 10-16, and 18-20 depend from claim 1, 9, or 17 and are patentable for at least the same reason in addition to their own distinguishing features. Applicant respectfully requests that the Examiner reconsider and withdraw the rejection.
Examiner presents the following responses to Applicant’s arguments:
Applicant’s arguments (see REM, filed 02/17/2026), with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection necessitated by applicant’s amendment presented above, 35 USC § 103. The claim(s) are unpatentable over Parthasarathy (US 10362092 B1) in view of Shah et al (US 20190311041 A1).
CONCLUSION
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HICHAM SKHOUN whose telephone number is (571)272-9466. The examiner can normally be reached Normal schedule: Mon-Fri 10am-6:30pm.
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, Amy Ng can be reached at 5712701698. 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.
/HICHAM SKHOUN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2164