Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/545,321

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR OPTIMIZING WORKLOAD DISTRIBUTION TO MINIMIZE ENTITLEMENTS COST

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Dec 19, 2023
Examiner
MILLS, PAUL V
Art Unit
2196
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
DELL PRODUCTS, L.P.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
53%
Grant Probability
Moderate
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 2m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 53% of resolved cases
53%
Career Allow Rate
185 granted / 351 resolved
-2.3% vs TC avg
Strong +40% interview lift
Without
With
+39.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 2m
Avg Prosecution
22 currently pending
Career history
373
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
11.4%
-28.6% vs TC avg
§103
47.8%
+7.8% vs TC avg
§102
12.7%
-27.3% vs TC avg
§112
24.7%
-15.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 351 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
Detailed Action Status of Claims This action is in reply to the application filed on 12/19/2023 . Claim s 1-9 are currently pending and have been examined. 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. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale , or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim s 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Kouznetsov et al. ( US 2017 / 0097845 A1 ) . Claims 1, 4, and 7: Kouznetsov discloses the limitations as shown in the following rejections: A distributed ecosystem of information handling systems, comprising: a plurality of host systems; and a manager (VMM) comprising a program of instructions/ [ Claim 7: a non-transitory computer-readable medium; and computer-executable instructions carried on the computer-readable medium ] configured to, when read and executed by a processor of one of the plurality of host systems: determine workload requirements for a workload (VM or VM sub-group) to be executed on one of the plurality of host systems (¶0031-0033; 0036- 0037, 0041 ; FIG. 1; Kouznetsov claim 21 ). based on endpoint capabilities (e.g. host capacity) , current execution load, and a license status for an execution environment (e.g. guest OS) of the workload on each of the plurality of host systems, select a selected (with highest score) host system from the plurality of host systems to minimize a number of licenses required for the execution environment (¶ 0027, 003 2 -0035, 0040-0041, 0060 , 0064 ) disclosing VMs are grouped and assigned to hosts based on constraints and placement optimization policies, including objectives to lower needed licenses and costs thereof . Exemplary quotation: “licensing costs for some software used by VMs 18 are based on the amount of host resources on which the VMs 19 run…reducing the host resource footprint of the selected VMs 18 can reduce software license requirements. In this example, the Windows® VMs 18 are licensed based on their host footprint. Therefore, running the Windows® VMs 18 on fewer hosts results in lower software licensing costs” (¶0034-0035). place the workload for execution on the selected host system (¶0028, 0033, 0044, 0066, 0084) . Claims 2, 5, and 8: Kouznetsov discloses the limitations as shown in the rejections above. Kouznetsov further discloses wherein the workload requirements comprise one or more of hardware requirements, processing requirements, memory requirements, and required execution environment (OS type, Linux Windows, etc.) for the workload (¶0032, 0037, 0040-0041) . Claims 3, 6, and 9: Kouznetsov discloses the limitations as shown in the rejections above. Kouznetsov further discloses the endpoint capabilities comprise one or more of hardware capabilities, processing capabilities, memory capabilities, and required execution environment for the workload (¶0032, 0038, 0040-0041). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure: The following references are directed to workload placement including licensing considerations: US 20130042003 A1, US 20200379818 A1, US 20170200102 A1, US 20200026579 A1 , US 20110072431 A1, US 11416306 B1; “Intelligent and compliant dynamic software license consolidation in cloud environment” Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Paul Mills whose telephone number is 571-270-5482 . The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 11:00am-8:00pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, April Blair can be reached at 571-27 0 - 1014 . 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. 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. /P. M./ Paul Mills 03/09/2026 /APRIL Y BLAIR/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2196
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 19, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 09, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12572385
DYNAMIC SYSTEM POWER LOAD MANAGEMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12547456
FLEXIBLE LIMITERS FOR MANAGING RESOURCE DISTRIBUTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12530215
PROCESSING SYSTEM, RELATED INTEGRATED CIRCUIT, DEVICE AND METHOD FOR CONTROLLING COMMUNICATION OVER A COMMUNICATION SYSTEM HAVING A PHYSICAL ADDRESS RANGE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 20, 2026
Patent 12519865
MULTIPLE MODEL INJECTION FOR A DEPLOYMENT CLUSTER
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 06, 2026
Patent 12481522
USER-LEVEL THREADING FOR SIMULATING MULTI-CORE PROCESSOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 25, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
53%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+39.6%)
4y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 351 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month