DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
In response to communications filed on January 23, 2026, claims 1-21 are presently pending in the application, of which, claims 1, 12, and 18 are presented in independent form. The Examiner acknowledges no claims were amended.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 23 January 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
All objections and/or rejections issued in the previous Office Action, mailed 12 January 2026, have been withdrawn, unless otherwise noted in this Office Action.
Applicant's arguments filed 23 January 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Applicant argues:
Neither Terry or Koszewnik, either alone or in combination, fail to teach or suggest ‘receiving a modification of a set of data values of a first data record at an application from an associated buffer of a plurality of buffers,’ as recited in independent claim 1 and similarly in corresponding independent claims 12 and 18.
The Examiner disagrees. The modified teachings of Terry and Koszewnik teaches ‘receiving a modification of a set of data values of a first data record at an application from an associated buffer of a plurality of buffers.’
The Examiner disagrees. The modified teachings of Terry and Koszewnik teaches receiving a modification of a set of data values of a first data record at an application from an associated buffer of a plurality of buffers. At least Koszwenik, see paragraphs [0091-0096], which discloses a write state generates a snapshot, a delta file, and a reverse delta file associated with the N versions of the source state, where the delta file and reverse delta represent an associated buffer of a plurality of buffer and where the write state contains a set of data values.
No other argument was presented and therefore the Examiner maintains the rejection below.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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 1-7, 9-16, and 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Terry, Paul, et al (U.S. 2009/0327893 and known hereinafter as Terry) in view of Koszewnik, John (U.S. 2018/0101311 and known hereinafter as Koszewnik).
As per claim 1, Terry teaches a method for reading datasets distributed over a network, the method comprising:
the modification being received at an application of a plurality of applications from an associated buffer of a plurality of buffers (e.g. Terry, see paragraphs [0052-0055], which discloses playing video images containing video data, which is compressed into multiple streams of video data, where each stream corresponds to one or more buffer, where when the video data changes, the buffer must be large enough to accommodate the change.), wherein the modification of the first data record is to be incorporated in a snapshot of a dataset co-located in memory at the application (e.g. Terry, see paragraphs [0165-0167], which discloses the use of window size changes to control the position of the window, where a series of snapshots of a window moving across the display.), and wherein the snapshot is replicated across the plurality of applications and comprises a compressed plurality of records (e.g. (e.g. Terry, see paragraphs [0052-0055], which discloses playing video images containing video data, which is compressed into multiple streams of video data, where each stream corresponds to one or more buffer, where when the video data changes, the buffer must be large enough to accommodate the change; Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0060-0066], which discloses updating the record lists to represent the source dataset when the source data set is in the state of 1, the write state application generates the snapshot that represents the state of 1 of the source dataset.);
storing information associated with the modification of the first data record in a portion of memory accessible to the application that is separate from the snapshot (e.g. Terry, see paragraphs [0248-0249], which discloses a server having a data store containing data for one or more coordinated video presentations.);
Terry does not explicitly disclose receiving a modification of a set of data values of a first data record included in a plurality of data records; receiving a request to retrieve the record from the snapshot associated with the application; responsive to a determination that the record is available in the portion of memory, accessing the portion of the memory to respond to the request; receiving an updated snapshot, wherein the updated snapshot incorporates the modification to the record; and replacing the snapshot with the updated snapshot.
Koszewnik teaches receiving a modification of a set of data values of a first data record included in a plurality of data records (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0034-0038], which discloses after generating the record lists, the write state application generates state files N associated with the current state N, which includes a snapshot N, a delta file, and a reverse delta file. The write state generates the snapshot N (e.g. modified set of data values of the first data record (initial state) based on the compressed data included in the records that represent the current state N.);
receiving a request to retrieve the first data record from the snapshot associated with the application (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0032-0035], which discloses generating a records lists from the application.);
responsive to a determination that the first data record is available in the portion of memory, accessing the portion of the memory to respond to the request (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0032-0035], which discloses generating a record list from the application, where the state files include a snapshot, a delta file, and a reverse delta file. The snapshot represents the state associated with the current version N.);
receiving an updated snapshot (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraph [0037, 0041-0043], which discloses the write state application performs validation operations on the state files N, where the delta file to the snapshot generates a forward snapshot. The Examiner notes the forward snapshot is the updated snapshot. It also generates a reverse delta file to the snapshot to generate a reverse snapshot.), wherein the updated snapshot incorporates the modification of the first data record (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0034-0039, 0041-0043], which discloses the write state application performs validation operations on the state files N, where the delta file to the snapshot generates a forward snapshot and the first data record is what is associated with the initial state.); and
replacing the snapshot with the updated snapshot (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0093-0094], which discloses the write state application performs validation operations on the state files, where the delta file to the snapshot generates a forward snapshot. If the write state application determines that the state files are valid, then the write state application copies the state files N to the central file store, thereby replacing the old state files.).
Terry is directed to coordinated video presentation. Koszewnik is directed to generating snapshots of datasets. Both are analogous art because they are directed to modifying snapshots and therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Terry with the teachings of Koszewnik to include the claimed features with the motivation to improve consistency of snapshots.
As per claim 12, Terry teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium including instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform the steps of:
the modification being received at an application of a plurality of applications from an associated buffer of a plurality of buffers (e.g. Terry, see paragraphs [0052-0055], which discloses playing video images containing video data, which is compressed into multiple streams of video data, where each stream corresponds to one or more buffer, where when the video data changes, the buffer must be large enough to accommodate the change.), wherein the modification of the first data record is to be incorporated in a snapshot of a dataset co-located in memory at the application (e.g. Terry, see paragraphs [0165-0167], which discloses the use of window size changes to control the position of the window, where a series of snapshots of a window moving across the display.), and wherein the snapshot is replicated across the plurality of applications and comprises a compressed plurality of records;
storing information associated with the modification of the first data record in a portion of memory accessible to the application that is separate from the snapshot (e.g. Terry, see paragraphs [0248-0249], which discloses a server having a data store containing data for one or more coordinated video presentations.);
Terry does not explicitly disclose receiving a modification of a set of data values of a first data record included in a plurality of data records; receiving a request to retrieve the record from the snapshot associated with the application; responsive to a determination that the record is available in the portion of memory, accessing the portion of the memory to respond to the request; receiving an updated snapshot, wherein the updated snapshot incorporates the modification to the record; and replacing the snapshot with the updated snapshot.
Koszewnik teaches receiving a modification of a set of data values of a first data record included in a plurality of data records (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0034-0038], which discloses after generating the record lists, the write state application generates state files N associated with the current state N, which includes a snapshot N, a delta file, and a reverse delta file. The write state generates the snapshot N (e.g. modified set of data values of the first data record (initial state) based on the compressed data included in the records that represent the current state N.);
receiving a request to retrieve the first data record from the snapshot associated with the application (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0032-0035], which discloses generating a records lists from the application.);
responsive to a determination that the first data record is available in the portion of memory, accessing the portion of the memory to respond to the request (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0032-0035], which discloses generating a record list from the application, where the state files include a snapshot, a delta file, and a reverse delta file. The snapshot represents the state associated with the current version N.);
receiving an updated snapshot (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraph [0037, 0041-0043], which discloses the write state application performs validation operations on the state files N, where the delta file to the snapshot generates a forward snapshot. The Examiner notes the forward snapshot is the updated snapshot. It also generates a reverse delta file to the snapshot to generate a reverse snapshot.), wherein the updated snapshot incorporates the modification of the first data record (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0034-0039, 0041-0043], which discloses the write state application performs validation operations on the state files N, where the delta file to the snapshot generates a forward snapshot and the first data record is what is associated with the initial state.); and
replacing the snapshot with the updated snapshot (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0093-0094], which discloses the write state application performs validation operations on the state files, where the delta file to the snapshot generates a forward snapshot. If the write state application determines that the state files are valid, then the write state application copies the state files N to the central file store, thereby replacing the old state files.).
Terry is directed to coordinated video presentation. Koszewnik is directed to generating snapshots of datasets. Both are analogous art because they are directed to modifying snapshots and therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Terry with the teachings of Koszewnik to include the claimed features with the motivation to improve consistency of snapshots.
As per claim 18, Terry teaches a system comprising:
a memory storing an application associated with a client instance (e.g. Terry, see Figure 1 which discloses a processor and memory.); and
a processor coupled to the memory, wherein when executed by the processor (e.g. Terry, see Figure 1 which discloses a processor and memory.), the client instance causes the processor to:
receiving a modification of a record at an application of a plurality of applications from an associated buffer of a plurality of buffers (e.g. Terry, see paragraphs [0052-0055], which discloses playing video images containing video data, which is compressed into multiple streams of video data, where each stream corresponds to one or more bugger, where when the video data changes, the buffer must be large enough to accommodate the change.), wherein the modification to the record is to be incorporated in a snapshot of a dataset co-located in memory at the application (e.g. Terry, see paragraphs [0165-0167], which discloses the use of window size changes to control the position of the window, where a series of snapshots of a window moving across the display.), and wherein the snapshot is replicated across the plurality of applications and comprises a compressed plurality of records;
storing information associated with the modification in a portion of memory accessible to the application that is separate from the snapshot (e.g. Terry, see paragraphs [0248-0249], which discloses a server having a data store containing data for one or more coordinated video presentations.);
Terry does not explicitly disclose receiving a request to retrieve the record from the snapshot associated with the application; responsive to a determination that the record is available in the portion of memory, accessing the portion of the memory to respond to the request; receiving an updated snapshot, wherein the updated snapshot incorporates the modification to the record; and replacing the snapshot with the updated snapshot.
Koszewnik teaches receiving a modification of a set of data values of a first data record included in a plurality of data records (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0034-0038], which discloses after generating the record lists, the write state application generates state files N associated with the current state N, which includes a snapshot N, a delta file, and a reverse delta file. The write state generates the snapshot N (e.g. modified set of data values of the first data record (initial state) based on the compressed data included in the records that represent the current state N.);
receiving a request to retrieve the first data record from the snapshot associated with the application (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0032-0035], which discloses generating a records lists from the application.);
responsive to a determination that the first data record is available in the portion of memory, accessing the portion of the memory to respond to the request (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0032-0035], which discloses generating a record list from the application, where the state files include a snapshot, a delta file, and a reverse delta file. The snapshot represents the state associated with the current version N.);
receiving an updated snapshot (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraph [0037, 0041-0043], which discloses the write state application performs validation operations on the state files N, where the delta file to the snapshot generates a forward snapshot. The Examiner notes the forward snapshot is the updated snapshot. It also generates a reverse delta file to the snapshot to generate a reverse snapshot.), wherein the updated snapshot incorporates the modification of the first data record (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0034-0039, 0041-0043], which discloses the write state application performs validation operations on the state files N, where the delta file to the snapshot generates a forward snapshot and the first data record is what is associated with the initial state.); and
replacing the snapshot with the updated snapshot (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0093-0094], which discloses the write state application performs validation operations on the state files, where the delta file to the snapshot generates a forward snapshot. If the write state application determines that the state files are valid, then the write state application copies the state files N to the central file store, thereby replacing the old state files.).
Terry is directed to coordinated video presentation. Koszewnik is directed to generating snapshots of datasets. Both are analogous art because they are directed to modifying snapshots and therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Terry with the teachings of Koszewnik to include the claimed features with the motivation to improve consistency of snapshots.
As per claims 2 and 14, the modified teachings of Terry with Koszewnik teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, and the non-transitory computer readable media 12, respectively, wherein the dataset comprises metadata describing various characteristics of videos (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0030-0031], which discloses source dataset includes metadata associated with movies, and the data model includes a schema that defines a structure for a record of a type of movie object.).
As per claims 3 and 15, the modified teachings of Terry with Koszewnik teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1 and the non-transitory computer readable media of claim 12, respectively, wherein the modification of the first data record includes at least one of adding, modifying, deleting or conditionally updating the first data record (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0030-0031], which discloses the write state application generates and/or updates one or more record lists based on the schemas and the source data values.).
As per claims 4, 16, and 19, the modified teachings of Terry with Koszewnik teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, the non-transitory computer readable media of claim 12, and the system of claim 18, respectively, wherein the portion of memory comprises a hash table of updates to records in the snapshot that have not been reflected in the plurality of data records included in the snapshot (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0056-0061], which discloses the record initially includes ordinal compressed data, and a state flag, where the ordinal is a number that uniquely identifies a particular record with respect to other records.).
As per claims 5 and 20, the modified teachings of Terry with Koszewnik teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 4 and the system of claim 18, respectively, wherein the hash table is indexed based on unique identifiers of records in the hash table (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0056-0061], which discloses the record initially includes ordinal compressed data, and a state flag, where the ordinal is a number that uniquely identifies a particular record with respect to other records.).
As per claim 6, the modified teachings of Terry with Koszewnik teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the portion of memory is accessed prior to accessing the snapshot co-located in memory with the application (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0050-0053], which discloses the techniques described may be performed and managed in-memory datasets.).
As per claim 7, the modified teachings of Terry with Koszewnik teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of buffers comprises a circular array of fixed size (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0060-0066], which discloses buffer size of the compressed data corresponding to the record list type based on the ordinal number.).
As per claim 9, the modified teachings of Terry with Koszewnik teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of applications is associated with a content streaming platform (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0060-0066], which discloses buffer size of the compressed data corresponding to the record list type based on the ordinal number.).
As per claim 10, the modified teachings of Terry with Koszewnik teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining a tag associated with the updated snapshot, wherein the updated snapshot is tagged with an offset value indicating that the record associated with the entry has been incorporated into the updated snapshot (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0060-0066], which discloses the write application sets the state flag to true to indicate that the record represents source data values that are included in the source dataset associated with state 1.); and
removing the record from the portion of memory (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0060-0066], which discloses the write state application generates the delta file that specifies instructions to transition from the state 0 to state 1.).
As per claim 11, the modified teachings of Terry with Koszewnik teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein receiving the updated snapshot and replacing the snapshot is performed at periodic intervals (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0060-0066], which discloses updating the record lists to represent the source dataset when the source data set is in the state of 1, the write state application generates the snapshot that represents the state of 1 of the source dataset.).
As per claim 21, the modified teachings of Terry with Koszewnik teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the modification of the first data record is associated with a write operation received for the first data record (e.g. Koszewnik, see paragraphs [0060-0066], which discloses updating the record lists to represent the source dataset when the source data set is in the state of 1, the write state application generates the snapshot that represents the state of 1 of the source dataset.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. See attached PTO-892 that includes additional prior art of record describing the general state of the art in which the invention is directed to.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARHAN M SYED whose telephone number is (571)272-7191. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30AM-5:30PM.
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, Apu Mofiz can be reached at 571-272-4080. 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.
/FARHAN M SYED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2161 June 18, 2026
Prosecution Insights