DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. Claims 1–20 are presented for examination in a non-provisional application filed on 02/23/2024.
Priority
3. Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Korea (KR) on Mar. 22, 2023 (10-2023-0037049). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Examiner’s Remarks
4. Examiner refers to and explicitly cites particular pages, sections, figures, paragraphs or columns and lines in the references as applied to Applicant’s claims to the extent practicable to streamline prosecution.
Although the cited portions of the references are representative of the best teachings in the art and are applied to meet the specific limitations of the claims, other uncited but related teachings of the references may be equally applicable as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses to the rejections, the Applicant fully considers not only the cited portions of the references, but also the references in their entirety, as potentially teaching, suggesting or rendering obvious all or one or more aspects of the claimed invention.
Abbreviations
5. Where appropriate, the following abbreviations will be used when referencing Applicant’s submissions and specific teachings of the reference(s):
i. figure / figures: Fig. / Figs.
ii. column / columns: Col. / Cols.
iii. page / pages: p. / pp.
References Cited
6. (A) Hwang et al., US 2007/0239952 A1 (“Hwang”).
(B) Sundaresan et al., US 2016/0117184 A1 (“Sundaresan”).
(C) Ben-Shaul et al., US 2017/0366606 A1 (“Ben-Shaul”).
Notice re prior art available under both pre-AIA and AIA
7. 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 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.
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 of this title, 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.
A.
8. Claims 1, 3–8, 10–14, and 16–19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over (A) Hwang in view of (B) Sundaresan and (C) Ben-Shaul.
See “References Cited” section, above, for full citations of references.
9. Regarding claim 1, (A) Hwang teaches/suggests the invention substantially as claimed, including:
“An [[edge]] server, comprising:
create a virtual device ...
(¶ 40: first arranges a domain mirror agent at every site and lists them in a domain agent ...
When processing the remote mirroring request, the local domain mirror agent dynamically allocates a virtual mirror device for storing the mirrored data in the local domain site, establishes storage space mapping by locating appropriate remote domain sites for storing the mirrored data, and then conducts the mirror operation)
... create a virtual device of the additional ... server in response to a request of the actual device and create a virtual device, and
(¶ 39: when a host issues a request for remote mirroring to the local domain mirror agent, the domain mirror agent determines a configuration for carrying out the remote mirroring request, and transmits the configuration to all involved hosts in the remote domain sites via their domain mirror agents;
¶ 40: first arranges a domain mirror agent at every site and lists them in a domain agent ...
When processing the remote mirroring request, the local domain mirror agent dynamically allocates a virtual mirror device for storing the mirrored data in the local domain site, establishes storage space mapping by locating appropriate remote domain sites for storing the mirrored data, and then conducts the mirror operation)
wherein the virtual device synchronizes data with the actual device and the virtual device of the additional ... server in real time.”
(¶ 41: In addition to the allocation of the virtual mirror device, conducting the mirror operation, and checking data consistency;
¶ 45: virtual file system (VFS) issues an I/O request to the primary storage device. A mirror operator duplicates the I/O request to the secondary storage device in step 702).
Hwang does not teach, but —
(B) Sundaresan, in the context of Hwang’s teachings, however teaches or suggests:
“a memory configured to store at least one program; and
a processor configured to execute the program,
wherein the program is configured to:
(Fig. 6 and ¶ 90: Processing device 602 is configured to execute the processing logic (instructions 622) for performing the operations and steps discussed herein);
create a virtual device based on specification information of an actual device ...” and
(¶ 14: templating framework uses one or multiple device templates to define and generate virtual devices. Each template is a model of a device ( or a component, feature or feature set of a device) that captures the physical and behavioral attributes of the device;
¶ 34: Virtual device manager 128 generates an instance of a virtual device 185A-C for each physical device 135A-C;
¶ 35: Each virtual device 185A-185C is generated from one or a set of device templates. The created virtual device 185A-C inherits device attributes from each of the device templates used to create the virtual device. The virtual device 185A-C is then connected to a particular physical device 135A-C ( e.g., to an embedded system 150A-C of a particular physical device 135A-C), and may be used to monitor, interface with, and control that physical device);
“acquire specification information used to create a virtual device of the additional ... server”
(¶ 34: Virtual device manager 128 generates an instance of a virtual device 185A-C for each physical device 135A-C;
¶ 35: Each virtual device 185A-185C is generated from one or a set of device templates. The created virtual device 185A-C inherits device attributes from each of the device templates used to create the virtual device. The virtual device 185A-C is then connected to a particular physical device 135A-C ( e.g., to an embedded system 150A-C of a particular physical device 135A-C), and may be used to monitor, interface with, and control that physical device).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of (B) Sundaresan with those of (A) Hwang to create virtual mirror devices based on attributes of the physical device. The motivation or advantage to do so is to provide for the direct control and access (interfacing) of the mirrored physical device.
Hwang and Sundaresan do not teach “edge server”, “an additional edge server” and “synchronizes data with ... the additional edge server in real time.”
(C) Ben-Shaul, in the context of Hwang and Sundaresan’s teachings, however teaches or suggests:
“edge server”,
“an additional edge server” and
“synchronizes data with ... the additional edge server in real time”
(Fig. 1 and ¶ 55: on-prem edge proxy 125 re-routes data to and from on-prem storage disks 131 as needed AND to and from the cloud edge proxy 133;
¶ 251: a background process progressively synchronizes the content of the cloud storage with that of on-prem storage;
¶ 132: a real time transfer of an instance;
teaching real-time data transfer).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of (C) Ben-Shaul with those of (A) Hwang and B) Sundaresan to mirror data between edge servers. The motivation or advantage to do so is to provide for the replication (mirroring) of data or workloads to and from cloud storage.
10. Regarding claim 3, Hwang, Sundaresan, and Ben-Shaul teach or suggest:
“the virtual device is created to include at least one virtual device, and
(Hwang, ¶ 40, When processing the remote mirroring request, the local domain mirror agent dynamically allocates a virtual mirror device for storing the mirrored data in the local domain site, establishes storage space mapping by locating appropriate remote domain sites for storing the mirrored data, and then conducts the mirror operation)
the program is configured to manage a list of the at least one virtual device and periodically check a state of each of the at least one virtual device included in the list”
(Hwang, ¶ 35: A domain mirror agent also periodically examines storage resource allocation of the local storage servers and the networking status between the local storage servers and other sites. The system 500 may further include an examination mechanism to ensure the data consistency between the mirrored data delivered by the local domain mirror agent and obtained by at least a remote domain site;
Sundaresan, ¶ 29: Moreover, values, states and other information of the embedded systems 150A-C may change based on environmental conditions of the embedded systems. By maintaining or periodically establishing sessions with the embedded systems 150A-C, the WAN accessible services 130 may maintain up-to-date information on the devices 135A-C, and such up-to-date information may be reflected in a virtual device 185A-C;
Ben-Shaul, ¶ 170: local edge proxy has a list of computing instances that are capable of provisioning).
11. Regarding claim 4, Hwang and Sundaresan teach or suggest:
“wherein the program is configured to delete or update the corresponding virtual device based on a result of checking the state of each of the at least one virtual device”
(Hwang, ¶ 35: A domain mirror agent also periodically examines storage resource allocation of the local storage servers and the networking status between the local storage servers and other sites. The system 500 may further include an examination mechanism to ensure the data consistency between the mirrored data delivered by the local domain mirror agent and obtained by at least a remote domain site;
Sundaresan, ¶ 29: Moreover, values, states and other information of the embedded systems 150A-C may change based on environmental conditions of the embedded systems. By maintaining or periodically establishing sessions with the embedded systems 150A-C, the WAN accessible services 130 may maintain up-to-date information on the devices 135A-C, and such up-to-date information may be reflected in a virtual device 185A-C;
¶ 80: processing logic disconnects the virtual device from the physical device. Processing logic additionally terminates the virtual device. The method may then return to block 455 to determine the new associated device templates and create a new virtual device for the physical device).
12. Regarding claim 5, Hwang and Ben-Shaul teach or suggest:
“wherein the virtual device transfers real-time data to the virtual device present in an additional edge while synchronizing real-time data with the actual device”
(Hwang, ¶ 40: When processing the remote mirroring request, the local domain mirror agent dynamically allocates a virtual mirror device for storing the mirrored data in the local domain site, establishes storage space mapping by locating appropriate remote domain sites for storing the mirrored data, and then conducts the mirror operation)
¶ 41: In addition to the allocation of the virtual mirror device, conducting the mirror operation, and checking data consistency;
¶ 45: virtual file system (VFS) issues an I/O request to the primary storage device. A mirror operator duplicates the I/O request to the secondary storage device in step 702;
Ben-Shaul, Fig. 1 and ¶ 55: on-prem edge proxy 125 re-routes data to and from on-prem storage disks 131 as needed AND to and from the cloud edge proxy 133;
¶ 251: a background process progressively synchronizes the content of the cloud storage with that of on-prem storage;
¶ 132: a real time transfer of an instance;
teaching real-time data transfer).
13. Regarding claim 6, Hwang and Ben-Shaul teach or suggest:
“wherein the virtual device transfers real-time data to the actual device while synchronizing data with the virtual device present in an additional edge in real time”
(Hwang, ¶ 40: When processing the remote mirroring request, the local domain mirror agent dynamically allocates a virtual mirror device for storing the mirrored data in the local domain site, establishes storage space mapping by locating appropriate remote domain sites for storing the mirrored data, and then conducts the mirror operation)
¶ 41: In addition to the allocation of the virtual mirror device, conducting the mirror operation, and checking data consistency;
¶ 45: virtual file system (VFS) issues an I/O request to the primary storage device. A mirror operator duplicates the I/O request to the secondary storage device in step 702;
Ben-Shaul, Fig. 1 and ¶ 55: on-prem edge proxy 125 re-routes data to and from on-prem storage disks 131 as needed AND to and from the cloud edge proxy 133;
¶ 251: a background process progressively synchronizes the content of the cloud storage with that of on-prem storage;
¶ 132: a real time transfer of an instance;
teaching real-time data transfer).
14. Regarding claim 7, Hwang and Ben-Shaul teach or suggest:
“a buffer configured to store device data received from the actual device or the virtual device of an additional edge”
(Hwang, ¶ 40: When processing the remote mirroring request, the local domain mirror agent dynamically allocates a virtual mirror device for STORING THE MIRRORED DATA in the local domain site, establishes storage space mapping by locating appropriate remote domain sites for storing the mirrored data, and then conducts the mirror operation;
Ben-Shaul, ¶ 89: storage target 319 retrieves I/Os from the secure cache;
teaching one type of memory for caching or buffering data)
15. Regarding claims 8 and 10–13, they are a set of corresponding method claims reciting similar limitations of commensurate scope as the system (server) of claims 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6, and 7, respectively. Therefore, they are rejected on the same basis as claims 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6, and 7 above, including the following rationale:
Hwang and Ben-Shaul, in combination, teach or suggest:
“performing real-time mirroring with a virtual device created in an additional edge through the created virtual device”
(Hwang, ¶ 40: When processing the remote mirroring request, the local domain mirror agent dynamically allocates a virtual mirror device for storing the mirrored data in the local domain site, establishes storage space mapping by locating appropriate remote domain sites for storing the mirrored data, and then conducts the mirror operation)
¶ 41: In addition to the allocation of the virtual mirror device, conducting the mirror operation, and checking data consistency;
¶ 45: virtual file system (VFS) issues an I/O request to the primary storage device. A mirror operator duplicates the I/O request to the secondary storage device in step 702;
Ben-Shaul, Fig. 1 and ¶ 55: on-prem edge proxy 125 re-routes data to and from on-prem storage disks 131 as needed AND to and from the cloud edge proxy 133;
¶ 251: a background process progressively synchronizes the content of the cloud storage with that of on-prem storage;
¶ 132: a real time transfer of an instance;
teaching real-time data transfer).
16. Regarding claims 14 and 16–19, they are a set of corresponding method claims reciting similar limitations of commensurate scope as the system (server) of claims 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6, and 7, respectively. Therefore, they are rejected on the same basis as claims 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6, and 7 above, including the following rationale:
Hwang and Ben-Shaul, in combination, teach or suggest:
“performing real-time mirroring with a virtual device created in an additional edge through the created virtual device”
(Hwang, ¶ 40: When processing the remote mirroring request, the local domain mirror agent dynamically allocates a virtual mirror device for storing the mirrored data in the local domain site, establishes storage space mapping by locating appropriate remote domain sites for storing the mirrored data, and then conducts the mirror operation)
¶ 41: In addition to the allocation of the virtual mirror device, conducting the mirror operation, and checking data consistency;
¶ 45: virtual file system (VFS) issues an I/O request to the primary storage device. A mirror operator duplicates the I/O request to the secondary storage device in step 702;
Ben-Shaul, Fig. 1 and ¶ 55: on-prem edge proxy 125 re-routes data to and from on-prem storage disks 131 as needed AND to and from the cloud edge proxy 133;
¶ 251: a background process progressively synchronizes the content of the cloud storage with that of on-prem storage;
¶ 132: a real time transfer of an instance;
teaching real-time data transfer).
Allowable Subject Matter
17. Claims 2, 9, and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if 1) rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim.
The following is the Examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior art of record, when viewed individually or in combination, does not expressly teach nor render obvious the features of dependent claims 2, 9, and 15 when viewed as a whole, specific to the limitation(s) of:
“wherein the specification information includes information for resource and real-time synchronization for the actual device synchronized with the virtual device in real time.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
(a) Tripathy et al., US 2018/0067653 A1, teaching deduplicating multi-device plugin.
(b) Cox et al., US 8,862,541 B1, teaching N-site asynchronous replication of data.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN C WU whose telephone number is (571)270-5906. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 8:30 A.M. to 5:00 P.M..
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, Aimee J. Li can be reached on (571)272-4169. 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.
/BENJAMIN C WU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2195
July 23, 2026
Prosecution Insights