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 .
Detailed Action
This office action is in response to the listing of claims filed on September 30, 2024. Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3 of U.S. Patent No. 10,868,863. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both sets of clams are substantially similar in their claimed approach to designating a leader node. These similarities are illustrated in the table below comparing an independent claim of the present application against an independent claim of the patent.
Present Application
Claim 1
Patent 10,868,863
Claim 1
A database system comprising: a coding cluster for storing data, wherein the coding cluster includes a plurality of nodes, wherein each node of the plurality of nodes includes: a computing resource; and a network interface coupled to the computing resource that facilitates communication with other nodes of the plurality of nodes;
A database management system comprising:
a plurality of coding clusters of the database management system, wherein a coding cluster of the plurality of coding clusters stores data and includes:
a plurality of nodes, wherein each node of the plurality of nodes includes a server having a network interface,
wherein a majority of the plurality of nodes select, via a consensus protocol, one of the plurality of nodes as a designated leader node and wherein the plurality of nodes includes at least two other nodes;
…wherein the plurality of nodes include a designated leader node and at least two other nodes…wherein, in response to an election event, a majority of the plurality of nodes elect a new designated leader node to become the designated leader node using a consensus protocol…
and wherein the designated leader node performs operations that include maintaining a collection of coding lines associated with the plurality of nodes, the collection of coding lines including an inventory of open coding lines of the collection of coding lines having at least one open coding block and wherein the maintaining the collection of coding lines maintains at least one open coding line for each node of the plurality of nodes.
…wherein the designated leader node creates a collection of coding lines that are associated with the plurality of nodes, maintains the collection of coding lines, maintains an inventory of open coding lines of the collection of coding lines, and creates, in response to a request from one of the at least two other nodes, a new open coding line to add to the collection of coding lines,
wherein the maintaining includes keeping open a minimum number of coding lines of the collection of coding lines…
While both sets of claims recite the use of consensus protocol in designating a leader and also teach maintaining open coding lines, the patent does not explicitly cite maintaining at least one open coding line for each node. The patent however does claim that the nodes request new open coding line. The patent also explains the leader node maintains the open coding lines. Since the leader node in the patent does maintain the open coding lines and a new open coding line is requested by a node, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date, that the new open coding line would be maintained by the designated leader node for the requesting node since the requesting nodes are associated with open coding lines and all open coding lines are maintained by the leader.
Claims 2-20 are similarly rejected for being substantially similar to patented claims 1-3.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,334,257. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both sets of clams are substantially similar in their claimed approach to designating a leader node. These similarities are illustrated in the table below comparing an independent claim of the present application against an independent claim of the patent.
Present Application
Claim 1
Patent 11,334,257
Claim 1
A database system comprising: a coding cluster for storing data, wherein the coding cluster includes a plurality of nodes, wherein each node of the plurality of nodes includes: a computing resource; and a network interface coupled to the computing resource that facilitates communication with other nodes of the plurality of nodes;
A database management system comprising:
a plurality of coding clusters for storing data, wherein a coding cluster of the plurality of coding clusters includes: a plurality of nodes, wherein each node of the plurality of nodes includes a server having a network interface; a high-speed hardware switch coupled to the network interface of each node of the plurality of nodes, wherein the high-speed hardware switch allows each node to communicate with other nodes of the plurality of nodes;
wherein a majority of the plurality of nodes select, via a consensus protocol, one of the plurality of nodes as a designated leader node and wherein the plurality of nodes includes at least two other nodes;
… wherein the plurality of nodes include a designated leader node and at least two other nodes, wherein the designated leader node performs operations that include… wherein, in response to an election event, a majority of the plurality of nodes elect a new designated leader node to become the designated leader node using a consensus protocol.
and wherein the designated leader node performs operations that include maintaining a collection of coding lines associated with the plurality of nodes, the collection of coding lines including an inventory of open coding lines of the collection of coding lines having at least one open coding block and wherein the maintaining the collection of coding lines maintains at least one open coding line for each node of the plurality of nodes.
…wherein the plurality of nodes include a designated leader node and at least two other nodes, wherein the designated leader node performs operations that include:
creating a collection of coding lines that are associated with the plurality of nodes;
maintaining the collection of coding lines including an inventory of open coding lines of the collection of coding lines;
creating, in response to a request from one of the at least two other nodes, a new open coding line to add to the collection of coding lines; and
maintaining a minimum number of open coding lines of the collection of coding lines;
While both sets of claims recite the use of consensus protocol in designating a leader and also teach maintaining open coding lines, the patent does not explicitly cite maintaining at least one open coding line for each node. The patent however does claim that the nodes request new open coding line. The patent also explains the leader node maintains the open coding lines. Since the leader node in the patent does maintain the open coding lines and a new open coding line is requested by a node, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date, that the new open coding line would be maintained by the designated leader node for the requesting node since the requesting nodes are associated with open coding lines and all open coding lines are maintained by the leader.
Claims 2-20 are similarly rejected for being substantially similar to patented claims 1-20.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,599,278. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both sets of clams are substantially similar in their claimed approach to designating a leader node. These similarities are illustrated in the table below comparing an independent claim of the present application against an independent claim of the patent.
Present Application
Claim 1
Patent 11,599,278
Claim 1
A database system comprising: a coding cluster for storing data, wherein the coding cluster includes a plurality of nodes, wherein each node of the plurality of nodes includes: a computing resource; and a network interface coupled to the computing resource that facilitates communication with other nodes of the plurality of nodes;
A database management system comprising:
a plurality of coding clusters for storing data, wherein a coding cluster of the plurality of coding clusters includes a plurality of nodes, wherein each node of the plurality of nodes includes:
a server having a network interface; and
a hardware switch coupled to the network interface, wherein the hardware switch allows each node to communicate with other nodes of the plurality of nodes;
wherein a majority of the plurality of nodes select, via a consensus protocol, one of the plurality of nodes as a designated leader node and wherein the plurality of nodes includes at least two other nodes;
wherein the plurality of nodes include a designated leader node and at least two other nodes…wherein, in response to an election event, a majority of the plurality of nodes select, via a consensus protocol, a new designated leader node to replace the designated leader node.
and wherein the designated leader node performs operations that include maintaining a collection of coding lines associated with the plurality of nodes, the collection of coding lines including an inventory of open coding lines of the collection of coding lines having at least one open coding block and wherein the maintaining the collection of coding lines maintains at least one open coding line for each node of the plurality of nodes.
…wherein the designated leader node performs operations that include maintaining a collection of coding lines associated with the plurality of nodes, the collection of coding lines including an inventory of open coding lines of the collection of coding lines having at least one open coding block and wherein the maintaining the collection of coding lines maintains at least one open coding line for each node of the plurality of nodes;
While both sets of claims recite the use of consensus protocol in designating a leader and also teach maintaining open coding lines, the patent does not explicitly cite each node including a computing resource. The patent however does claim that the nodes include a server having a network interface and a hardware switch coupled to the network interface. It is well known to one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date, that the patented claims’ server and hardware switch are computing resources, especially since the patented claims state that the nodes use the switch, server, and network interface combination to communicate with the plurality of other nodes and to maintain open coding lines, and to partake in the consensus protocol.
Claims 2-20 are similarly rejected for being substantially similar to patented claims 1-20.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,868,623. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both sets of clams are substantially similar in their claimed approach to designating a leader node. These similarities are illustrated in the table below comparing an independent claim of the present application against an independent claim of the patent.
Present Application
Claim 1
Patent 11,868,623
Claim 1
A database system comprising: a coding cluster for storing data, wherein the coding cluster includes a plurality of nodes, wherein each node of the plurality of nodes includes: a computing resource; and a network interface coupled to the computing resource that facilitates communication with other nodes of the plurality of nodes;
A database management system comprising:
a coding cluster for storing data, wherein the coding cluster includes a plurality of nodes, wherein each node of the plurality of nodes includes: a server having a network interface; and
a switch coupled to the network interface, wherein the switch allows each node to communicate with other nodes of the plurality of nodes;
wherein a majority of the plurality of nodes select, via a consensus protocol, one of the plurality of nodes as a designated leader node and wherein the plurality of nodes includes at least two other nodes;
wherein, in response to an election event, a majority of the plurality of nodes select via a consensus protocol, one of the plurality of nodes as a designated leader node and wherein the plurality of nodes includes at least two other nodes;
and wherein the designated leader node performs operations that include maintaining a collection of coding lines associated with the plurality of nodes, the collection of coding lines including an inventory of open coding lines of the collection of coding lines having at least one open coding block and wherein the maintaining the collection of coding lines maintains at least one open coding line for each node of the plurality of nodes.
and wherein the designated leader node performs operations that include maintaining a collection of coding lines associated with the plurality of nodes, the collection of coding lines including an inventory of open coding lines of the collection of coding lines having at least one open coding block and wherein the maintaining the collection of coding lines maintains at least one open coding line for each node of the plurality of nodes.
While both sets of claims recite the use of consensus protocol in designating a leader and also teach maintaining open coding lines, the patent does not explicitly cite each node including a computing resource. The patent however does claim that the nodes include a server having a network interface and a hardware switch coupled to the network interface. It is well known to one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date, that the patented claims’ server and hardware switch are computing resources, especially since the patented claims state that the nodes use the switch, server, and network interface combination to communicate with the plurality of other nodes and to maintain open coding lines, and to partake in the consensus protocol.
Claims 2-20 are similarly rejected for being substantially similar to patented claims 1-20.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,131,036. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both sets of clams are substantially similar in their claimed approach to designating a leader node. These similarities are illustrated in the table below comparing an independent claim of the present application against an independent claim of the patent.
Present Application
Claim 1
Patent 12,131,036
Claim 1
A database system comprising: a coding cluster for storing data, wherein the coding cluster includes a plurality of nodes, wherein each node of the plurality of nodes includes: a computing resource; and a network interface coupled to the computing resource that facilitates communication with other nodes of the plurality of nodes;
A database system comprising: a coding cluster for storing data, wherein the coding cluster includes a plurality of nodes, wherein each node of the plurality of nodes includes: a server having a network interface; and a switch coupled to the network interface, wherein the switch allows each node to communicate with other nodes of the plurality of nodes;
wherein a majority of the plurality of nodes select, via a consensus protocol, one of the plurality of nodes as a designated leader node and wherein the plurality of nodes includes at least two other nodes;
wherein a majority of the plurality of nodes elect, via a consensus protocol, one of the plurality of nodes as a designated leader node and wherein the plurality of nodes includes at least two other nodes;
and wherein the designated leader node performs operations that include maintaining a collection of coding lines associated with the plurality of nodes, the collection of coding lines including an inventory of open coding lines of the collection of coding lines having at least one open coding block and wherein the maintaining the collection of coding lines maintains at least one open coding line for each node of the plurality of nodes.
and wherein the designated leader node performs operations that include maintaining a collection of coding lines associated with the plurality of nodes, the collection of coding lines including an inventory of open coding lines of the collection of coding lines having at least one open coding block and wherein the maintaining the collection of coding lines maintains at least one open coding line for each node of the plurality of nodes.
While both sets of claims recite the use of consensus protocol in designating a leader and also teach maintaining open coding lines, the patent does not explicitly cite each node including a computing resource. The patent however does claim that the nodes include a server having a network interface and a hardware switch coupled to the network interface. It is well known to one skilled in the art, before the effective filing date, that the patented claims’ server and hardware switch are computing resources, especially since the patented claims state that the nodes use the switch, server, and network interface combination to communicate with the plurality of other nodes and to maintain open coding lines, and to partake in the consensus protocol.
Claims 2-20 are similarly rejected for being substantially similar to patented claims 1-20.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AZIZUL Q CHOUDHURY whose telephone number is (571)272-3909. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, EMMANUEL MOISE can be reached at (571) 272-3865. 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.
/AZIZUL CHOUDHURY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455