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 .
This application has been examined. Claims 1-20 are pending.
The Group and/or Art Unit location of your application in the PTO has changed. To aid in correlating any papers for this application, all further correspondence regarding this application should be directed to Group Art Unit 2175.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-10, 12-17, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Deviprasad et al. (US Pub No. 2023/0224257).
In regard to claims 1, 8, 15, Deviprasad et al. disclose a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium including instructions that, when executed by a processing device (see ¶ 95); a system, a method comprising: receiving a state declaration associated with a target computing system, wherein the state declaration is in a standard format (as shown in Fig. 2, which is reproduced below for ease of reference and convenience, Deviprasad discloses interface 201 may receive and/or generate a standard template definition for a virtualized instance of a VNF, service, and/or application. The standard template format 301 includes a first set of declarations that define nodes, relationships, functions, services, operation, and/or other configuration of the virtualized instance See ¶ 27, 36);
PNG
media_image1.png
1097
803
media_image1.png
Greyscale
translating, by a processing device, the state declaration into configuration operations associated with the target computing system (in Deviprasad, generating the cloud-specific adaptation may include converting and/or mapping the standard template definition to a cloud-specific definition of the selected virtualized environment 103. See ¶ 35); generating a set of scripts to perform the configuration operations on the target computing system (in Deviprasad, cloud-specific orchestrator 205 may provide the one or more identifiers for a selected virtualized environment 103 and/or allocated set of resources to the multi-cloud adapter in order to select and/or receive the cloud-specific templates, artifacts (i.e. scripts, configuration files, etc), APIs, and/or other operations for adapting). See ¶ 13, 39); and deploying the set of scripts to the target computing system to configure the target computing system according to the state declaration (in Deviprasad, cloud-specific orchestrator 205 may convert the standard template definition for a particular virtualized instance of a VNF, service, and/or application to a first format, may use a first set of cloud-specific artifacts, may invoke calls from a first cloud-specific API, and/or may perform a first set of other cloud-specific operations in order to deploy and run that virtualized instance on resources of first virtualized environment 103-1. Similarly, cloud-specific orchestrator 205 may convert the standard template definition for the particular virtualized instance to a second format, may use a second set of cloud-specific artifacts, may invoke calls from a second cloud-specific API, and/or may perform a second set of other cloud-specific operations in order to deploy and run that virtualized instance on resources of second virtualized environment 103-2. See ¶ 40).
In regard to claims 2, 9, 16, Deviprasad et al. disclose wherein translating the state declaration to the configuration operations for the target computing system comprises: determining configuration rules of the target computing system associated with each definition provided by the state declaration (in Deviprasad, the service orchestrator 203 may inspect, parse, etc. the received standard template definition to determine resource requirements, connectivity requirements, and/or other requirements for deploying and/or running the virtualized instance that is defined therein. See ¶ 29, 66); and translating the state declaration based on the configuration rules for each definition of the state declaration (in Deviprasad, cloud-specific orchestrator 205 may convert the standard template definition for a particular virtualized instance of a VNF, service, and/or application to a first format, may use a first set of cloud-specific artifacts, may invoke calls from a first cloud-specific API, and/or may perform a first set of other cloud-specific operations in order to deploy and run that virtualized instance on resources of first virtualized environment 103-1. Similarly, cloud-specific orchestrator 205 may convert the standard template definition for the particular virtualized instance to a second format, may use a second set of cloud-specific artifacts, may invoke calls from a second cloud-specific API, and/or may perform a second set of other cloud-specific operations in order to deploy and run that virtualized instance on resources of second virtualized environment 103-2. ¶ 40).
In regard to claims 3, 10, 17, Deviprasad et al. disclose wherein the standard format of the state declaration comprises a format associated with a cloud native architecture (in Deviprasad, the single definition may contain declarations for the artifacts that implement services and/or functions of the virtualized instance, declarations for configuring the virtualized environment resources used to execute the artifacts, declarations for configuring the virtualized instance operation, and/or other declarations in a first format that differ from cloud-specific and/or cloud-agnostic formats supported by different virtualized environments for the deployment, configuration, and/or execution of virtualized instances on shared resources of those different virtualized environments. See ¶ 12-13).
In regard to claims 5, 12, 19, Deviprasad et al. disclose wherein translating the state declaration to the set of configuration operations for the target computing system comprises: providing the state declaration to a machine learning model trained to infer the set of configuration operations based on statements provided by the state declaration (in Deviprasad, service orchestrator 203 may receive additional constraints, which may be specified by a user and/or automatically generated (e.g., via one or more machine learning techniques or other suitable techniques), such as constraints relating to the deployment and/or execution of the virtualized instance. See ¶ 29).
In regard to claims 6, 13, 20, Deviprasad et al. disclose wherein the target computing system comprises a legacy computing system or a non-cloud native computing system (in Deviprasad, UE 701 may be, or may include, a radiotelephone, a personal communications system (“PCS”) terminal (e.g., a device that combines a cellular radiotelephone with data processing and data communications capabilities), a personal digital assistant (“PDA”) (e.g., a device that may include a radiotelephone, a pager, Internet/intranet access, etc.), a smart phone, a laptop computer, a tablet computer. See figure 7, ¶ 69-72).
In regard to claim 7, Deviprasad et al. disclose wherein deploying the set of scripts to the target computing system comprises: distributing the set of scripts to an execution node of an automation system associated with the target computing system (in Deviprasad, configured with a mapping that converts each NSD or VNFD entry or a first set of declarations from the first format of the standard template definition to a corresponding entry or a second set of declarations in a second format that is cloud-specific and/or supported by the selected virtualized environment 103, that links an artifact referenced in the NSD. See ¶ 47); and causing, by the execution node, the set of scripts to be executed by the target computing system (in Deviprasad, configured with a mapping that converts each NSD or VNFD entry or a first set of declarations from the first format of the standard template definition to a corresponding entry or a second set of declarations in a second format that is cloud-specific and/or supported by the selected virtualized environment 103, that links an artifact referenced in the NSD or VNFD to a virtualized environment specific or supported instance of that artifact, that maps calls for deploying, configuring, instantiating, and/or controlling the virtualized instance to corresponding calls from the cloud-specific API, and/or that translates other operations associated with the virtualized instance deployment and/or execution to corresponding cloud-specific operations defined and/or supported by the selected virtualized environment 103. In other words, the second set of declarations may configure the topology, interfaces, relationships, connectivity, services, functions, operational behavior, and/or other parameters of the virtualized instance in a format that may be parsed and/or processed by orchestrator, processes, services, etc. of the selected virtualized environment 103. See ¶ 47).
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, 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 t which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 4, 11, 18 are rejected under AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Deviprasad et al. in view of Ivanova et al. (US Pub No. 2025/0004743).
In order to expedite and avoid piecemeal prosecution, the following rejection is made to the extent that the claims are understood, by considering those elements which are understood and interpreting their function in a manner which is consistent with the recited goals of the claims, and then applying the best available art.
The examiner relies on the entire teachings of Deviprasad and Ivanova references; the applicant should carefully consider the entire teachings of the above-mentioned references to better understand the examiner’s position.
In regard to claims 4, 11, 18, Deviprasad et al. disclose the claimed subject matter as discussed above except the teaching of wherein the standard format of the state declaration comprises a ConfigMap state declaration. In the same field of endeavor, Ivanova et al. disclose a system and method for configuring platform services associated with a container orchestration system that the applicator can collect a number of ConfigMaps from Kubernetes for applicable platform services. The applicator can determine mappings between the ConfigMaps and the application services. Each application service can be associated with more than one ConfigMap. The different ConfigMaps can correspond to different versions of a given platform service (as shown in Fig. 3, which is reproduced below for ease of reference and convenience, Ivanova discloses the request engine 446 can include a combination of hardware and program instructions that is configured to receive a request to configure a platform service associated with a container orchestration system. In some embodiments, the ConfigMap engine 448 can include a combination of hardware and program instructions that is configured to collect a plurality of ConfigMaps from a deployment chart of an application service managed by the container orchestration system, wherein each of the plurality of ConfigMaps includes platform service configuration data associated with a different version of the platform service. See ¶ 32, 38).
PNG
media_image2.png
1140
785
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Deviprasad to including the mechanism of delivery for clouding platforms, as taught by Ivanova, in order to provide for a practical adaption to evolving deployment environments.
Examiner's note:
Examiner has cited particular columns and line numbers in the references applied to the claims above for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings of the art and are applied to specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the Applicant in preparing responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passages as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Conclusion
All claims are rejected.
The prior arts made of record and not relied upon are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Colcord et al. (US No. 12,530,359) disclose a data analytics system can be configurable to, in response to receiving first instructions from a first target system of a first client, the first target system separate from the data analytics system, create a first pipeline between the append-only first data store and the second data store. The first pipeline can be configured according to the first instructions to generate a client-specific data object and store the client-specific data object in the second data store.
Sauer (US No. 12,393,413) discloses an application stack templates and mapping data of application integration topology, and processors configured to: display a graphical user interface; generate a logical graph defining data flow between applications based on user actions and mapping data; select a subgroup of stack templates; convert the logical graph into a metadata dataset with application parameters; modify template variables with respective parameters.
Juneja et al. (US Pub No. 2025/0021343) disclose a configuration data management system may enable ConfigMaps to be added to an application pod of a virtual software environment without restarting the application pod, a ConfigMap including a data object containing configuration data. The configuration data management process may monitor for creation of a first ConfigMap in the virtual software environment, append a name of the first ConfigMap to a data element name from the first ConfigMap to produce an appended data element.
Roy et al. (US Pub No. 2024/0143318) disclose the continuous deployment module detects modification of a configuration deployment file on the source repository, and deploys at least one microservice application on the target platform based on a directory in the source repository in which the modified configuration deployment file was detected.
Griffin et al. (US Pub No. 2024/0069883) disclose the package set metadata that identifies a plurality of packages to be included in a container image based on a package set is accessed. A container configuration file referencing the plurality of packages is generated based at least in part on the package set metadata. The container configuration file includes one or more commands complying with a container builder syntax that are implementable by a container builder to generate a container image including the plurality of packages.
Cao et al. (US No. 11,748,155) disclose the The script file specifies a plurality of tasks forming a plan and an order of execution for the plurality of tasks. The script file is compiled to generate compiled code. The compiled code is executed to generate an in-memory representation of the plan.
Bregman et al. (US Pub No. 2019/0190776) disclose the state daemon records a first configuration instruction associated with a first modification to the first deployment state, where the first node is in a second deployment state after the first modification. The configuration generator generates a first configuration based on the second deployment state including the first configuration instruction. The first configuration is stored to a configuration repository, where the first configuration is deployed to a second node converting the second node to the second deployment state.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to examiner Raymond Phan, whose telephone number is (571) 272-3630. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 6:30AM- 3:00PM. The Group Fax No. (571) 273-8300.
Communications via Internet e-mail regarding this application, other than those under 35 U.S.C. 132 or which otherwise require a signature, may be used by the applicant and should be addressed to [raymond.phan@uspto.gov].
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, Andrew Jung can be reached at (571) 270-3779. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
All Internet e-mail communications will be made of record in the application file. PTO employees do not engage in Internet communications where there exists a possibility that sensitive information could be identified or exchanged unless the record includes a properly signed express waiver of the confidentiality requirements of 35 U.S.C. 122. This is more clearly set forth in the Interim Internet Usage Policy published in the Official Gazette of the Patent and Trademark on February 25, 1997 at 1195 OG 89.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see hop://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application should be directed to the TC 2100 central telephone number is (571) 272-2100.
/RAYMOND N PHAN/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2175