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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 06/20/2025, with respect to the combination of prior arts have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection has been withdrawn.
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.
Claim 1-20 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.
Regarding claim 1, 7, and 17, The limitations recite
1/”…a second area in a range different from the first area…”.
However, it is not clear what range refers to. It is not clear if the range is geographical location indicator, distance separation measure between the first and the second area, overlap extent between the two areas or other thing. The disclosure is silent with respect to what range pertains to, hence making it difficult for the person having ordinary skill in the art to determine the limits and bounds of the limitation as a result rendering the claims indefinite.
2/ “…failure frequency…”.
However, it is not clear what failure frequency pertains to. It is not clear if the failure frequency is based on downtime percentage, number of outage per-time or other attribute. The disclosure simply mentions failure frequency and does not characterize what it pertains to hence making of it to a PHOSITA to determine the limits and bounds of the claim hence rendering the claims indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claims 1, the claim claims:
A system that comprises a single component and performs
-managing a plurality of first data centers included in a first area;
-managing a plurality of second data centers included in a second area in a range different from the first area; and
-selecting a data center candidate in which a first virtual node is to be deployed from among the plurality of first data centers and a data center candidate in which a second virtual node is to be deployed from among the plurality of second data centers …
However, nowhere on the disclosure it is indicated that a single component system that
-manage a plurality of first data centers included in a first area;
-manage a plurality of second data centers included in a second area in a range different from the first area, and
-select a data center candidate in which a first virtual node is to be deployed from among the plurality of first data centers and a data center candidate in which a second virtual node is to be deployed from among the plurality of second data centers…. Then:
-specify the first data center in which the first virtual node is to be deployed based on the candidate in which the first virtual node is to be deployed and a failure frequency in the plurality of first data centers, and specify the second data center in which the second virtual node is to be deployed based on the candidate in which the second virtual node is to be deployed and a failure frequency in the plurality of second data centers.
The disclosure as indicated below:
“[0110] A management system including: [0111] first management means for managing a plurality of first data centers included in a first area; [0112] second management means for managing a plurality of second data centers included in a second area in a range different from the first area; and [0113] third management means for selecting a data center candidate in which a first virtual node is to be deployed from among the plurality of first data centers and a data center candidate in which a second virtual node is to be deployed from among the plurality of second data centers based on communication performance information between a first data center and a second data center, in which [0114] the first management means specifies the first data center in which the first virtual node is to be deployed based on the candidate in which the first virtual node is to be deployed, and [0115] the second management means specifies the second data center in which the second virtual node is to be deployed based on the candidate in which the second virtual node is to be deployed”.
No where in the disclosure it is disclosed that a single component of a single component system performing all the functions of the claim as claimed. Rather, as indicated in the above excerpt, the disclosure discloses a system comprises three managing components that has the third management means that selects the candidate DC from the first area and the second candidate DC from the second area;
The first managing means managing the first area and specify the candidate DC, The second managing means managing the second area and specify the second candidate DC.
The claim limitation above lack written description support of a single component system performing the claim steps.
2. Further, nowhere it is explicitly disclosed that specify a data center based on failure frequency as claimed below:
-specify the first data center in which the first virtual node is to be deployed based on …a failure frequency in the plurality of first data centers, and
-specify the second data center in which the second virtual node is to be deployed based on … a failure frequency in the plurality of second data centers.
The disclosure does not explicitly describe specify the first or the second data center based on failure frequency.
The disclosure describe the following:
“[0040] For example, the management means 110 may select at least one data center pair in which a transmission time of the measurement data is shorter than a predetermined time from among a plurality of pairs obtained by combining any of the plurality of data centers 12 and any of the plurality of data centers 22. In this case, the management means 11 may specify one data center from the data centers included in the selected pair, and deploy the virtual node to the specified data center 12. The management means 21 may specify the data center in which a virtual node is to be deployed from the sent pair of data centers 22”.
Further failure frequency is indicated in [0032], [0120], and [0141]. Nowhere in theses excerpt it is indicated determining (specifying) the first or the second datacenter based on failure frequency.
-Regarding claim 7, Claim 7 is similar with claim 1 and similar analysis applies for claim 7.
-Regarding claim 17, Claim 17 recites:
“wherein the first data center in which the first virtual node is to be deployed is specified based on … a failure frequency in the plurality of first data centers, and “
“the second data center in which the second virtual node is to be deployed is specified based on … a failure frequency in the plurality of second data centers”.
The disclosure does not explicitly describe specify the first or the second data center based on failure frequency.
The disclosure describe the following:
“[0040] For example, the management means 110 may select at least one data center pair in which a transmission time of the measurement data is shorter than a predetermined time from among a plurality of pairs obtained by combining any of the plurality of data centers 12 and any of the plurality of data centers 22. In this case, the management means 11 may specify one data center from the data centers included in the selected pair, and deploy the virtual node to the specified data center 12. The management means 21 may specify the data center in which a virtual node is to be deployed from the sent pair of data centers 22”.
Further failure frequency is indicated in [0032], [0120], and [0141]. Nowhere in theses excerpt it is indicated determining (specifying) the first or the second datacenter based on failure frequency.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
-US PG. no. 20210026678.
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 MESSERET F. GEBRE whose telephone number is (571)272-8272. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am-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, Oscar Louie can be reached on 5712701684. 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.
/MESSERET F GEBRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2445