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 .
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 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,204,536; claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 11,341,131; claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 10,956,415; claims 1-26 of U.S. Patent No. 11,663,227; claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 11,281,706; claims 1-25 of U.S. Patent No 10,353,965; claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 10,726,009; claims 1-27 of U.S. Patent No. 11,163,758; claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 11,461,334; claims 1-29 of U.S. Patent No. 11,416,528; and claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 10,795,884 . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the patent and is covered by the patent since the patent and the application are claiming common subject matter.
Instant Application 18/978,410
Patent No. 12,204,536
1. A method, comprising:
receiving a query, wherein the query identifies a set of data and a manner of processing the set of data;
identifying a plurality of distinct storage locations storing a plurality of portions of the set of data, wherein a particular storage location of the plurality of distinct storage locations stores a particular portion of the plurality of portions of the set of data;
identifying metadata associated with the plurality of distinct storage locations;
determining a plurality of execution resources to allocate to process the plurality of portions of the set of data;
assigning each portion of the plurality of portions of the set of data to an execution resource of the plurality of execution resources based on the metadata associated with the plurality of distinct storage locations; and
exporting the plurality of portions of the set of data from the plurality of distinct storage locations to a plurality of worker nodes based on the assigning, wherein the plurality of worker nodes process the plurality of portions of the set of data and provide query results based on the query.
1.A method, comprising: receiving a query, wherein the query identifies a set of data and a manner of processing the set of data; determining a query-resource allocation by identifying a portion of the query and determining an allocation of compute resources for the portion of the query based on at least one of: an identification of components of a distributed query system that are to execute the portion of the query, a quantity of records to be processed as a result of the portion of the query, a prioritization level of the query, or a query allocation threshold; scheduling the query for execution based on the query-resource allocation and a compute resource availability, wherein the query-resource allocation indicates a quantity of compute resources of the distributed query system to use to execute the query and the compute resource availability indicates a quantity of compute resources of the distributed query system that are available to execute the query; and initiating execution of the query based on the scheduling.
Instant Application 18/978,410
Patent No. 11,341,131
1. A method, comprising:
receiving a query, wherein the query identifies a set of data and a manner of processing the set of data;
identifying a plurality of distinct storage locations storing a plurality of portions of the set of data, wherein a particular storage location of the plurality of distinct storage locations stores a particular portion of the plurality of portions of the set of data;
identifying metadata associated with the plurality of distinct storage locations;
determining a plurality of execution resources to allocate to process the plurality of portions of the set of data;
assigning each portion of the plurality of portions of the set of data to an execution resource of the plurality of execution resources based on the metadata associated with the plurality of distinct storage locations; and
exporting the plurality of portions of the set of data from the plurality of distinct storage locations to a plurality of worker nodes based on the assigning, wherein the plurality of worker nodes process the plurality of portions of the set of data and provide query results based on the query.
1. A method, comprising: receiving a query, wherein the query identifies a set of data and a manner of processing the set of data; determining a query-resource allocation for one or more portions of the query; determining compute resource availability for the one or more portions of the query; and scheduling the query based on the query-resource allocation and the determined compute resource availability.
Instant Application 18/978,410
Patent No. 10,956,415
1. A method, comprising:
receiving a query, wherein the query identifies a set of data and a manner of processing the set of data;
identifying a plurality of distinct storage locations storing a plurality of portions of the set of data, wherein a particular storage location of the plurality of distinct storage locations stores a particular portion of the plurality of portions of the set of data;
identifying metadata associated with the plurality of distinct storage locations;
determining a plurality of execution resources to allocate to process the plurality of portions of the set of data;
assigning each portion of the plurality of portions of the set of data to an execution resource of the plurality of execution resources based on the metadata associated with the plurality of distinct storage locations; and
exporting the plurality of portions of the set of data from the plurality of distinct storage locations to a plurality of worker nodes based on the assigning, wherein the plurality of worker nodes process the plurality of portions of the set of data and provide query results based on the query.
1. A method, comprising: receiving, at a data intake and query system, a query identifying a set of data to be processed and a manner of processing the set of data; identifying a search parameter in the query associated with a search of an external data system; parsing a configuration file based on the search parameter; identifying the external data system and a subquery for the external data system based on said parsing the configuration file, the subquery identifying at least a subset of data of the set of data stored by the external data system; defining, by the first data intake and query system, a query processing scheme for obtaining and processing the set of data based on the query and the subquery, wherein defining the query processing scheme comprises generating instructions for one or more worker nodes to receive and process results of the subquery to form processed results and to provide the processed results to the data intake and query system; and executing the query based on the query processing scheme.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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 to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bitincka et al. (Patent No. 8,793,225, hereinafter Bitincka) and Baum et al. (Publication No. 2013/0060783, hereinafter Baum).
Regarding Claims 1, 12, and 20, Bitincka teaches receiving a query, wherein the query identifies a set of data and a manner of processing the set of data (column 4, lines 59-67 and column 5, lines 31-40, a search scheme (e.g., local indexers or External Resource Providers, e.g., internal storage system via the indexers; e.g., external data storage system via the ERPs is defined);
identifying a plurality of distinct storage locations storing a plurality of portions of the set of data, wherein a particular storage location of the plurality of distinct storage locations stores a particular portion of the plurality of portions of the set of data (column 4, lines 59-67 and column 5, lines 31-40, a search scheme (e.g., local indexers or External Resource Providers, e.g., internal storage system via the indexers; e.g., external data storage system via the ERPs is defined);
identifying metadata associated with the plurality of distinct storage locations (column 4, lines 59-67 and column 5, lines 31-40, a search scheme (e.g., local indexers or External Resource Providers, e.g., internal storage system via the indexers; e.g., external data storage system via the ERPs is defined);
determining a plurality of execution resources to allocate to process the plurality of portions of the set of data (column 4, lines 59-67 and column 5, lines 31-40, a search scheme (e.g., local indexers or External Resource Providers, e.g., internal storage system via the indexers; e.g., external data storage system via the ERPs is defined).
However, Bitincka does not expressly teach assigning each portion of the plurality of portions of the set of data to an execution resource of the plurality of execution resources based on the metadata associated with the plurality of distinct storage locations; and
exporting the plurality of portions of the set of data from the plurality of distinct storage locations to a plurality of worker nodes based on the assigning, wherein the plurality of worker nodes process the plurality of portions of the set of data and provide query results based on the query.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the concept of Bitincka’s method with Baum’s method because Baum’s method enables the ability to organize, index, search, and present time series data based on searches, time series data being sequences of time stamped records occurring in one or more usually continuous streams representing some type of activity.
Baum teaches assigning each portion of the plurality of portions of the set of data to an execution resource of the plurality of execution resources based on the metadata associated with the plurality of distinct storage locations ([0034]); and exporting the plurality of portions of the set of data from the plurality of distinct storage locations to a plurality of worker nodes based on the assigning, wherein the plurality of worker nodes process the plurality of portions of the set of data and provide query results based on the query ([0034].
Regarding Claim 2, Bitincka teaches wherein the query is a subquery of a query received by a data intake and query system data (column 4, lines 59-67 and column 5, lines 31-40, a search scheme (e.g., local indexers or External Resource Providers, e.g., internal storage system via the indexers; e.g., external data storage system via the ERPs is defined).
11. Regarding Claims 3 and 13, Bitincka teaches wherein the plurality of distinct storage locations correspond to a plurality of file system directories data (column 4, lines 59-67 and column 5, lines 31-40, a search scheme (e.g., local indexers or External Resource Providers, e.g., internal storage system via the indexers; e.g., external data storage system via the ERPs is defined).
12. Claims 4 and 14, Bitincka teaches wherein exporting comprises processing the plurality of portions of the set of data based on the query to provide a plurality of processed portions of the set of data, and exporting the plurality of processed portions of the set of data based on the assigning data (column 4, lines 59-67 and column 5, lines 31-40, a search scheme (e.g., local indexers or External Resource Providers, e.g., internal storage system via the indexers; e.g., external data storage system via the ERPs is defined).
13. Regarding Claim 5, Bitincka teaches wherein the plurality of distinct storage locations are identified based on one or more query parameters of the query data (column 4, lines 59-67 and column 5, lines 31-40, a search scheme (e.g., local indexers or External Resource Providers, e.g., internal storage system via the indexers; e.g., external data storage system via the ERPs is defined).
14. Regarding Claim 6, Bitincka teaches wherein determining a plurality of execution resources comprises determining the plurality of execution resources based on an execution resource allocation policy data (column 4, lines 59-67 and column 5, lines 31-40, a search scheme (e.g., local indexers or External Resource Providers, e.g., internal storage system via the indexers; e.g., external data storage system via the ERPs is defined).
15. Regarding Claims 7 and 15, Bitincka teaches wherein determining a plurality of execution resources comprises allocating the plurality of execution resources based on a lesser of a quantity of the plurality of distinct storage locations, a quantity of available execution resources, and a threshold quantity data (column 4, lines 59-67 and column 5, lines 31-40, a search scheme (e.g., local indexers or External Resource Providers, e.g., internal storage system via the indexers; e.g., external data storage system via the ERPs is defined).
16. Regarding Claims 8 and 16, Bitincka teaches wherein the plurality of execution resources comprise a plurality of processors data (column 4, lines 59-67 and column 5, lines 31-40, a search scheme (e.g., local indexers or External Resource Providers, e.g., internal storage system via the indexers; e.g., external data storage system via the ERPs is defined).
17. Regarding Claims 9 and 17, Bitincka teaches wherein the assigning comprises assigning each of the plurality of portions of the set of data to an execution resource of the plurality of execution resources based on a quantity of events stored in a respective portion of the set of data data (column 4, lines 59-67 and column 5, lines 31-40, a search scheme (e.g., local indexers or External Resource Providers, e.g., internal storage system via the indexers; e.g., external data storage system via the ERPs is defined).
18. Regarding Claims 10 and 18, Bitincka teaches wherein the assigning comprises assigning each of the plurality of portions of the set of data to an execution resource of the plurality of execution resources based on a quantity of events stored in a respective portion of the set of data to reduce a difference between a largest quantity of events assigned to a first execution resource and a smallest quantity of events assigned to a second execution resource data (column 4, lines 59-67 and column 5, lines 31-40, a search scheme (e.g., local indexers or External Resource Providers, e.g., internal storage system via the indexers; e.g., external data storage system via the ERPs is defined).
19. Regarding Claims 11 and 19, Bitincka teaches wherein the assigning comprises assigning each of the plurality of portions of the set of data to an execution resource of the plurality of execution resources based on a quantity of events stored in a respective portion of the set of data to approximate an equal distribution of events to the plurality of execution resources data (column 4, lines 59-67 and column 5, lines 31-40, a search scheme (e.g., local indexers or External Resource Providers, e.g., internal storage system via the indexers; e.g., external data storage system via the ERPs is defined).
Conclusion
20. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHERYL R LEWIS whose telephone number is (571)272-4113. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 8am-5pm, EST.
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, Sanjiv Shah can be reached at 571-272-4098. 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.
/CHERYL LEWIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2166 August 23, 2025
Prosecution Insights