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 Arguments
1. Applicant’s arguments have been fully 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.
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 for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
2. Claims 1, 11, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cabrera et al. (US 20170142189 A1) in view of Pacella et al. (US 20160294644 A1).
Claim 1 Cabrera teaches a method for managing services provided by data processing systems using a management system, the method comprising:
obtaining capability data of an infrastructure boundary (FIG. 3, step 34, ¶0027, obtaining capability data of a cloud service, wherein the cloud service comprises an infrastructure boundary) from an observability and serviceability repository, (¶0027, from a service publication source) the infrastructure boundary contains one or more of the data processing systems; (FIG. 1, Cloud Service 10, ¶0021-¶0022, the cloud service containing one or more data processing systems, such as computing assistance or big data service)
using the capability data of the infrastructure boundary to generate service provisioning instructions for provisioning one or more services within the infrastructure boundary, (FIG. 2, ¶0025, incorporate the capability data to generate a deployment plan 24, i.e. service provisioning instructions for provisioning one or more services) and
transmitting the service provisioning instructions to the infrastructure boundary to cause the one or more of the data processing systems contained in the infrastructure boundary to provision the one or more services. (FIG. 3, step 38, ¶0028, transmitting the service provisioning instructions to the infrastructure boundary, i.e. binding the cloud service to the instructions comprised in the deployment plan to cause the deployment, i.e. provisioning, of the one or more services)
However Cabrera does not explicitly teach wherein the service provisioning instructions comprise one or more actions that cause an automatic update of the observability and serviceability repository with a change in the capability data of the infrastructure boundary as a result of the provisioning of the one or more services.
From a related technology, Pacella teaches an automatic update of the observability and serviceability repository with a change in the capability data of the infrastructure boundary (FIG. 8, step 840, ¶0065, updating network capability mapping) as a result of the provisioning of the one or more services. (¶0062, wherein a forwarding box is discovered, i.e. wherein a updating capabilities are based on the provisioning of a service, such as the forwarding box)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Cabrera to incorporate the teachings of Pacella wherein network changes are followed by corresponding updates in order to more efficiently manage network resources across network changes.
Claim 11 is taught by Cabrera in view of Pacella as described for Claim 1.
Claim 16 is taught by Cabrera in view of Pacella as described for Claim 1.
3. Claims 2-10, 12-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cabrera et al. (US 20170142189 A1) in view of Pacella et al. (US 20160294644 A1) and in view of Bos et al. (US 20230259519 A1).
Claim 2 Cabrera in view of Pacella teaches Claim 1, but does not explicitly teach the service provisioning instructions comprise instructions for provisioning a first sidecar for each of the one or more services to be provisioned within the infrastructure boundary, and the first sidecar is configured to collect the capability data of the infrastructure boundary and store the capability data in the observability and serviceability repository.
From a related technology, Bos teaches the service provisioning instructions comprise instructions for provisioning a first sidecar for each of the one or more services to be provisioned within the infrastructure boundary, (Bos, ¶0038, received data capability data for provisioning data sidecars for each of the services to be provisioned, i.e. application logic)
after the one or more services are provisioned within the infrastructure boundary:
the first sidecar of each of the one or more services collects capabilities of a respective service to which the first sidecar is attached directly from the respective service (Bos, ¶0023, wherein the data agent sidecar 145 collects capabilities of the data source, i.e. the infrastructure boundaries) and updates the capability data of the infrastructure boundary using capabilities collected directly from the respective service to which the sidecar is attached. (Bos, FIG. 4, step 430, ¶0038, wherein the data agent caches the capability data in a cache, i.e. the observability and serviceability repository)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Cabrera to incorporate the teachings of Bos to utilize the repository for capability information in order to more efficiently obtain capability information and therefore more efficiently utilized network resources.
Claim 3 Cabrera in view of Pacella and Bos teaches Claim 2, and further teaches the service provisioning instructions further comprise instructions for provisioning a second sidecar for each of the one or more services to be provisioned within the infrastructure boundary, (Bos, ¶0038, received data capability data for provisioning data sidecars for each of the services to be provisioned, i.e. application logic)
after the one or more services are provisioned within the infrastructure boundary: the second sidecar of each of the one or more services collects context data of a respective service to which the second sidecar is attached directly from the respective service (Bos, ¶0023, wherein the data agent sidecar 145n collects capabilities of the data source, i.e. the infrastructure boundaries) and updates a context repository different from the observability and serviceability repository using the context data collected directly from the respective service to which the second sidecar is attached. (Bos, FIG. 4, step 430, ¶0038, wherein the data agent 145n caches the capability data in a cache, i.e. ta context repository)
Claim 4 Cabrera in view of Pacella and Bos teaches Claim 3, and further teaches wherein the infrastructure boundary, in addition to the first sidecar and the second sidecar, includes a service mesh that collects the capability data of the infrastructure boundary (Bos, ¶0023, wherein the data agent sidecar 145n, which additionally comprises a service mesh, collects capabilities of the data source, i.e. the infrastructure boundaries) and stores the capability data in the observability and serviceability repository, (Bos, FIG. 4, step 430, ¶0038, wherein the data agent 145n caches the capability data in a cache, i.e. the observability and serviceability repository), the service mesh being separate and distinct from the first sidecar and the second sidecar, and each of the first sidecar and the second sidecar being configured to collect the capability data and the context data, respectively, for only the respective service to which they are attached while the service mesh being configured to collect the capability data for every one of the one or more services. (Examiner notes that the service mesh appears to exist prior to the provisioning of services, and therefore interprets the service mesh and sidecar as being distinct temporally, i.e. before and after the provisioning of services)
Claim 5 Cabrera in view of Pacella and Bos teaches Claim 4, and further teaches wherein the observability and serviceability repository and the context repository are both remote to the management system. (Bos, FIG. 4, step 430, ¶0038, wherein the data agent 145n caches are remote from the management system)
Claim 6 Cabrera in view of Pacella and Bos teaches Claim 5, and further teaches wherein the capability data comprises, at least, functions, resources, and performances (Cabrera, ¶0024, wherein capabilities comprise storage capacity, which would be a storage function, storage resource, and storage performance) provided by the infrastructure boundary, the resources comprising tools and frameworks of the infrastructure boundary for capturing traces, logs, and metrics of the one or more of the data processing systems contained within the infrastructure boundary. (Cabrera, ¶0024, wherein storage capacity would comprise a tool and framework for capturing data, such as traces, logs, and metrics)
Claim 7 Cabrera in view of Pacella and Bos teaches Claim 6, and further teaches wherein the capability data further comprises solutions available within the infrastructure boundary, the solutions comprising connectivity-related solutions for communication between the one or more of the data processing systems contained within the infrastructure boundary and for communication with the one or more of the data processing systems contained within the infrastructure boundary. (Examiner interprets “solutions” as resources, as resources are used to solve issues; Cabrera, ¶0024, wherein capabilities comprise solutions)
Claim 8 Cabrera in view of Pacella and Bos teaches Claim 2, and further teaches wherein completion of the provisioning of the one or more services by the infrastructure boundary causes the change in the capability data of the infrastructure boundary, (Cabrera, FIG. 2, ¶0025, incorporate the capability data to generate a deployment plan 24, wherein provisioning the deployment plan changes the capability of the infrastructure boundary; Bos, ¶0023, wherein the data agent sidecar 145n, i.e. a service mesh, collects capabilities of the data source, i.e. the infrastructure boundaries)
Claim 9 Cabrera in view of Pacella teaches Claim 1, but does not explicitly teach generating first context data for the infrastructure boundary using the service provisioning instructions. (Cabrera, FIG. 2, ¶0025, incorporate the capability data to generate a deployment plan 24, i.e. first context data for provisioning one or more services)
However, Cabrera does not explicitly teaches and storing the first context data for the infrastructure boundary in a context repository that is different from the observability and serviceability repository.
From a related technology, Bos teaches storing the first context data for the infrastructure boundary in a context repository that is different from the observability and serviceability repository. (FIG. 4, step 430, ¶0038, wherein the data agent 145n caches are remote from the management system and each data agent caches separately, and therefore differently)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Cabrera to incorporate the teachings of Bos to utilize the repository for capability information in order to more efficiently obtain capability information and therefore more efficiently utilized network resources.
Claim 10 Cabrera in view of Pacella and Bos teaches Claim 9, and further teaches
determining, before generating the service provisioning instructions, that second context data for the infrastructure boundary exists in the context repository; (Bos, ¶0038, receiving capabilities, wherein capabilities comprise context data of the data source, wherein receiving context data comprises determining that it exists) and
obtaining the second context data for the infrastructure boundary from the context repository, (Bos, ¶0038, receiving capabilities, wherein capabilities comprise context data of the data source) wherein generating the service provisioning instructions comprises using the second context data the infrastructure boundary and the capability data to generate the service provisioning instructions, and wherein storing the first context data for the infrastructure boundary comprises updating the first context data for the infrastructure boundary using the second context data for the infrastructure boundary. (Bos, FIG. 4, step 430, ¶0038, wherein the data agent 145n caches the capability data in a cache, i.e. the observability and serviceability repository using the received data)
Claims 12-15 are taught by Cabrera in view of Pacella and Bos as described for Claims 2-5.
Claims 17-20 are taught by Cabrera in view of Pacella and Bos as described for Claims 2-5.
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 CHRISTOPHER PALACA CADORNA whose telephone number is (571)270-0584. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00-7:00.
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, John Follansbee can be reached at (571) 272-3964. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER P CADORNA/Examiner, Art Unit 2444
/JOHN A FOLLANSBEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2444
Prosecution Insights