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 .
Priority
Applicant claims the benefit of US Provisional Application No. 63/379,342, filed October 13, 2022. Claims 1-6 and 9-14 have been afforded the benefit of this filing date.
Claim Objections
Claims 9-16 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 9, line 5, “the (M-1)th index virtual node”, lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claims 10-16 depend on the rejected claim and inherit the same issues.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1, line 3, “the nodes” is unclear whether it refers to “new nodes” in line 2 of claim 1 or “existing nodes” in line 2 of claim 1. For the following prior art rejection, “the nodes” in line 3 is treated as --the new nodes--.
Claim 1, line 4, “the nodes” is unclear whether it refers to “new nodes” in line 2 of claim 1 or “existing nodes” in line 2 of claim 1. For the following prior art rejection, “the nodes” in line 3 is treated as --the new nodes--.
Claim 5, line 2, “the new nodes” is unclear whether it refers to “new nodes” in line 2 of claim 1 or “M new nodes” in line 1 of claim 5. For the following prior art rejection, “the nodes” in line 3 is treated as --the M new nodes--.
Claim 8, line 2, “the nodes” is unclear whether it refers to “new nodes” in line 2 of claim 1 or “existing nodes” in line 2 of claim 1, or “virtual nodes” in line 3 of claim 1. For the following prior art rejection, “the nodes” in line 3 is treated as --the virtual nodes--.
Claim 9, line 4, “the nodes” is unclear whether it refers to “nodes” in line 2 of claim 1 or “existing nodes” in line 2 of claim 1. For the following prior art rejection, “the nodes” in line 3 is treated as --the identified nodes--.
Claim 16, line 2, “the nodes” is unclear whether it refers to “nodes” in line 2 of claim 1 or “existing nodes” in line 2 of claim 1, or “virtual nodes” in line 3 of claim 1. For the following prior art rejection, “the nodes” in line 3 is treated as --the virtual nodes--.
Claims 2-4, 6-7, and 10-15 depend on the rejected claim and inherit the same issues.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
Claims 1-4, 9-10, and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jawahar et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 20200319909 A1, hereinafter “Jawahar”) in view of Araujo et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 20190149410 A1, hereinafter “Araujo”).
With regard to claim 1, Jawahar discloses:
A method for hash token selection (“a system and method for a distributed key-value store”, para [0004]) comprising:
identifying new (“The cluster manager 220 includes programmed instructions to add one or more of the container instances 206 to a cluster and/or remove one or more of the container instances 206 from a cluster.”, para [0050], “The cluster manager 220 may include instructions to restart the existing container instances 206 and to deploy the new container instances 206.”, para [0050]);
generating virtual nodes to correspond with the (“For example, if there are three container instances and four vnodes created, the first vnode is assigned to the first container instance, the second vnode is assigned to the second container instance, the third vnode is assigned to the third container instance, and the fourth vnode is assigned to the first container instance.”, para [0066]); and
assigning each of the virtual nodes to the (“The cluster manager distributes the node number of virtual nodes equally across the container number of container instances (306). In some embodiments, distributing the node number of vnodes across the container number of container instance may include round robin assigning.”, para [0066]).
However, Jawahar does not explicitly teach nodes. Araujo discloses container instances are nodes ("The computing devices may further host virtual environments allowing multiple computing nodes (e.g., virtual machine instances, container instances) to be hosted on a single physical computing device.", para [0002]).
Both the systems of Jawahar and Araujo deal with container instances. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Jawahar in view of Araujo to understand container instances are nodes.
With regard to claim 2, Jawahar discloses the method of claim 1.
Jawahar further discloses:
wherein the virtual nodes correspond with the new (“the first vnode is assigned to the first container instance”, para [0066], “The cluster manager 220 may include instructions to restart the existing container instances 206 and to deploy the new container instances 206.”, para [0050]).
However, Jawahar does not explicitly teach nodes. Araujo discloses container instances are nodes ("The computing devices may further host virtual environments allowing multiple computing nodes (e.g., virtual machine instances, container instances) to be hosted on a single physical computing device.", para [0002]).
Both the systems of Jawahar and Araujo deal with container instances. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Jawahar in view of Araujo to understand container instances are nodes.
With regard to claim 3, Jawahar discloses the method of claim 2.
Jawahar further discloses:
wherein the round robin structure corresponds with each of the virtual nodes being assigned to a corresponding one of the new (“The cluster manager distributes the node number of virtual nodes equally across the container number of container instances (306). In some embodiments, distributing the node number of vnodes across the container number of container instance may include round robin assigning. For example, if there are three container instances and four vnodes created, the first vnode is assigned to the first container instance, the second vnode is assigned to the second container instance, the third vnode is assigned to the third container instance, and the fourth vnode is assigned to the first container instance.”, para [0066]).
However, Jawahar does not explicitly teach nodes. Araujo discloses container instances are nodes ("The computing devices may further host virtual environments allowing multiple computing nodes (e.g., virtual machine instances, container instances) to be hosted on a single physical computing device.", para [0002]).
Both the systems of Jawahar and Araujo deal with container instances. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Jawahar in view of Araujo to understand container instances are nodes.
With regard to claim 4, Jawahar discloses the method of claim 2.
Jawahar further discloses:
wherein the round robin structure allocates the virtual nodes to a token range (“The cluster manager 220 includes programmed instructions to assign a key range to each of the vnodes 210. For example, the cluster manager 220 assign the first key range to the vnode 211A, and assign the second key range to the vnode 211B.”, para [0045]).
With regard to claim 9, Jawahar discloses:
A method for cumulative balance selection (“a system and method for a distributed key-value store”, para [0004]) comprising:
identifying (“The cluster manager 220 includes programmed instructions to add one or more of the container instances 206 to a cluster and/or remove one or more of the container instances 206 from a cluster.”, para [0050], “The cluster manager 220 may include instructions to restart the existing container instances 206 and to deploy the new container instances 206.”, para [0050]);
generating virtual nodes to correspond with the identified (“For example, if there are three container instances and four vnodes created, the first vnode is assigned to the first container instance, the second vnode is assigned to the second container instance, the third vnode is assigned to the third container instance, and the fourth vnode is assigned to the first container instance.”, para [0066]); and
assigning each of the virtual nodes to the (“The cluster manager distributes the node number of virtual nodes equally across the container number of container instances (306). In some embodiments, distributing the node number of vnodes across the container number of container instance may include round robin assigning. For example, if there are three container instances and four vnodes created, the first vnode is assigned to the first container instance, the second vnode is assigned to the second container instance, the third vnode is assigned to the third container instance, and the fourth vnode is assigned to the first container instance.”, para [0066]).
However, Jawahar does not explicitly teach nodes. Araujo discloses container instances are nodes ("The computing devices may further host virtual environments allowing multiple computing nodes (e.g., virtual machine instances, container instances) to be hosted on a single physical computing device.", para [0002]).
Both the systems of Jawahar and Araujo deal with container instances. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Jawahar in view of Araujo to understand container instances are nodes.
With regard to claim 10, Jawahar discloses the method of claim 9.
Jawahar further discloses:
wherein the round robin structure allocates the virtual nodes to a token range (“The cluster manager 220 includes programmed instructions to assign a key range to each of the vnodes 210. For example, the cluster manager 220 assign the first key range to the vnode 211A, and assign the second key range to the vnode 211B.”, para [0045]).
With regard to claim 13, Jawahar discloses the method of claim 9.
Jawahar further discloses:
wherein the virtual nodes correspond with the identified (“the first vnode is assigned to the first container instance”, para [0066], “The cluster manager 220 may include instructions to restart the existing container instances 206 and to deploy the new container instances 206.”, para [0050]).
However, Jawahar does not explicitly teach nodes. Araujo discloses container instances are nodes ("The computing devices may further host virtual environments allowing multiple computing nodes (e.g., virtual machine instances, container instances) to be hosted on a single physical computing device.", para [0002]).
Both the systems of Jawahar and Araujo deal with container instances. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Jawahar in view of Araujo to understand container instances are nodes.
With regard to claim 14, Jawahar discloses the method of claim 9.
Jawahar further discloses:
wherein the round robin structure corresponds with each of the virtual nodes being assigned to a corresponding one of the identified (“The cluster manager distributes the node number of virtual nodes equally across the container number of container instances (306). In some embodiments, distributing the node number of vnodes across the container number of container instance may include round robin assigning. For example, if there are three container instances and four vnodes created, the first vnode is assigned to the first container instance, the second vnode is assigned to the second container instance, the third vnode is assigned to the third container instance, and the fourth vnode is assigned to the first container instance.”, para [0066]).
Jawahar does not disclose however, Araujo discloses:
However, Jawahar does not explicitly teach nodes. Araujo discloses container instances are nodes ("The computing devices may further host virtual environments allowing multiple computing nodes (e.g., virtual machine instances, container instances) to be hosted on a single physical computing device.", para [0002]).
Both the systems of Jawahar and Araujo deal with container instances. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Jawahar in view of Araujo to understand container instances are nodes.
Claims 5-6 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jawahar and Araujo as applied to claims 4 and 10 above, and further view of Weisberg et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 20150186187 A1, hereinafter “Weisberg”).
With regard to claim 5, Jawahar as modified discloses the method of claim 4.
Jawahar as modified does not disclose however, Weisberg discloses:
wherein when adding M new nodes (“FIG. 3 is a simplified illustration showing the addition of a new node 3 with logical partitions P5 and P6 to a database cluster.”, para [0023], fig 3), a distance between two of the virtual nodes for one of the new nodes is at least M-1 virtual nodes (“FIG. 4 illustrates addition of logical partitions P5 and P6 to the hash ring of FIG. 2.”, para [0024], fig 4, Fig. 4 shows three logical partitions between P5 and P6).
PNG
media_image1.png
352
376
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Both the systems of Jawahar and Weisberg deal with consistent hashing. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Jawahar as modified in view of Weisberg to improve the distribution of the load.
With regard to claim 6, Jawahar as modified discloses the method of claim 5.
Jawahar further discloses:
wherein the round robin structure comprises assigning node 1 a 0th index virtual node, and assigning node 2 a 1st index virtual node (“In some embodiments, distributing the node number of vnodes across the container number of container instance may include round robin assigning. For example, if there are three container instances and four vnodes created, the first vnode is assigned to the first container instance, the second vnode is assigned to the second container instance, the third vnode is assigned to the third container instance, and the fourth vnode is assigned to the first container instance.”, para [0066]).
With regard to claim 11, Jawahar as modified discloses the method of claim 10.
Jawahar as modified does not disclose however, Weisberg discloses
wherein when adding M new nodes (“FIG. 3 is a simplified illustration showing the addition of a new node 3 with logical partitions P5 and P6 to a database cluster.”, para [0023], fig 3), a distance between two of the virtual nodes for one of the new nodes is at least M-1 virtual nodes (“FIG. 4 illustrates addition of logical partitions P5 and P6 to the hash ring of FIG. 2.”, para [0024], fig 4, Fig. 4 shows three logical partitions between P5 and P6).
PNG
media_image1.png
352
376
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Both the systems of Jawahar and Weisberg deal with consistent hashing. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Jawahar as modified in view of Weisberg to improve the distribution of the load.
With regard to claim 12, Jawahar as modified discloses the method of claim 11.
Jawahar further discloses:
wherein the round robin structure comprises assigning node 1 a 0th index virtual node, and assigning node 2 a 1st index virtual node (“In some embodiments, distributing the node number of vnodes across the container number of container instance may include round robin assigning. For example, if there are three container instances and four vnodes created, the first vnode is assigned to the first container instance, the second vnode is assigned to the second container instance, the third vnode is assigned to the third container instance, and the fourth vnode is assigned to the first container instance.”, para [0066]).
Claims 7-8 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jawahar and Araujo as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further view of Wang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. US 20220057955 A1, hereinafter “Wang”).
With regard to claim 7, Jawahar as modified discloses the method of claim 1.
Jawahar as modified does not disclose however, Wang discloses:
wherein the (“In some examples, assigning each virtual node to the selected segment cleaner comprises load balancing.”, para [0047], “In relation to FIGS. 2A-2D, segment cleaners correspond to the assets and virtual nodes correspond to the computational burdens”, para [0029], “FIG. 2A illustrates a scenario in which four assets A1, A2, A3, and A4, are available for tasking, and four computational burdens, B1, B2, B3, and B4, are to be assigned to the four assets A1-A4. Ideally, computational burdens B1-B4 will be assigned to assets A1-A4 in a manner that the loads on assets A1-A4 are balanced.”, para [0026]).
Both the systems of Jawahar and Wang deal with assigning virtual nodes. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Jawahar as modified in view of Wang to “improve the speed” (Wang, para [0015]).
With regard to claim 8, Jawahar as modified discloses the method of claim 7.
Jawahar as modified does not disclose however, Wang discloses:
wherein the configurations comprise at least one of a number of the nodes (i.e. “four assets A1-A4”), (“FIG. 2A illustrates a scenario in which four assets A1, A2, A3, and A4, are available for tasking, and four computational burdens, B1, B2, B3, and B4, are to be assigned to the four assets A1-A4. Ideally, computational burdens B1-B4 will be assigned to assets A1-A4 in a manner that the loads on assets A1-A4 are balanced.”, para [0026], “In relation to FIGS. 2A-2D, segment cleaners correspond to the assets and virtual nodes correspond to the computational burdens”, para [0029]).
Both the systems of Jawahar and Wang deal with assigning virtual nodes. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Jawahar as modified in view of Wang to “improve the speed” (Wang, para [0015].
With regard to claim 15, Jawahar as modified discloses the method of claim 10.
Jawahar as modified does not disclose however, Wang discloses:
wherein the (“In some examples, assigning each virtual node to the selected segment cleaner comprises load balancing.”, para [0047], “In relation to FIGS. 2A-2D, segment cleaners correspond to the assets and virtual nodes correspond to the computational burdens”, para [0029], “FIG. 2A illustrates a scenario in which four assets A1, A2, A3, and A4, are available for tasking, and four computational burdens, B1, B2, B3, and B4, are to be assigned to the four assets A1-A4. Ideally, computational burdens B1-B4 will be assigned to assets A1-A4 in a manner that the loads on assets A1-A4 are balanced.”, para [0026]).
Both the systems of Jawahar and Wang deal with assigning virtual nodes to nodes. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Jawahar as modified in view of Wang to “improve the speed” (Wang, para [0015].
With regard to claim 16, Jawahar as modified discloses the method of claim 15.
Jawahar as modified does not disclose however, Wang discloses
wherein the configurations comprise at least one of a number of the nodes (i.e. “four assets A1-A4”), (“FIG. 2A illustrates a scenario in which four assets A1, A2, A3, and A4, are available for tasking, and four computational burdens, B1, B2, B3, and B4, are to be assigned to the four assets A1-A4. Ideally, computational burdens B1-B4 will be assigned to assets A1-A4 in a manner that the loads on assets A1-A4 are balanced.”, para [0026], “In relation to FIGS. 2A-2D, segment cleaners correspond to the assets and virtual nodes correspond to the computational burdens”, para [0029]).
Both the systems of Jawahar and Wang deal with assigning virtual nodes to nodes. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine Jawahar as modified in view of Wang to “improve the speed” (Wang, para [0015].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Cucinotta discloses (EP Patent Publication No. EP 2940580 B1) “Figure 2b is a schematic representation of a pre- and post-capacity change situation according to an example, in which two new nodes are added to an existing set of four nodes. In the new cluster with 4+2=6 elements, the two new nodes e and f are positioned in the 2nd and 5th positions within the cluster, as shown in the bottom part of figure 2b. Therefore, all four nodes a, b, c, d need only transfer only 1/3 of their respective contents, as can be seen in figure 2a. The saving in network bandwidth and the time needed to restore a consistent operational, yet perfectly balanced, state of the component is therefore significant.” (Cucinotta, para [0033]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SELENA SABAH NAHRA whose telephone number is (571)272-6115. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:00 AM -5:30 PM.
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, Hyung Sough can be reached at (571)272-6799. 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.
/S.S.N./Examiner, Art Unit 2192
/S. Sough/SPE, Art Unit 2192