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 .
This office action is in response the claim amendment filed on January 6, 2026, in which claims 1-20 are presented for further examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on January 06, 2026, with respect to claims 1-20 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC 101 and 103 rejections have been withdrawn in light of the claim amendment filed on January 6, 2026 and in light of the Ex Parte Desjardins argued by the applicant (pages 4-9).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
The 35 USC 101 rejection set forth in the last office action has been withdrawn in light of the Ex Parte Desjardin.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The 35 USC 103 rejection set forth in the last office action has been withdrawn in light of the claim amendment filed on January 6, 2026.
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 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,181,995. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-20 under examination are anticipated, respectively, by claims 1-20 of the reference Patent. Every limitations in the instant application under examination claims is recited in the conflicting reference patent claims, and the differences or additional limitations between the claims are highlighted below by underlining all limitations. Therefore, one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the independent claims 1, 11 and 17 of the instant application to determine that a threshold time period has elapsed; upon determine that the threshold time period has elapsed, deduplicate a set of records included in a first partition of the event log to generate a deduplicated set of records, wherein: the deduplicated set of records includes the record, and the deduplicating is based on a set of idempotency tokens; and generate an updated count value based on the deduplicated set of records, wherein the updated count vale is included in the counter value, in order to ensure that a global event counter enables the distributed computing system to quickly maintain various types of counts by maintaining and aggregating an immutable log of events from multiple devices that is used to periodically rollup a counter value so as to avoid overcounting or undercounting of events that are being counted through deduplication through the idempotency tokens.
Claims 2-10, 12-16 and 18-20 are also rejected for incorporating the deficiency of their respective base claims by dependency.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20190205221 (involved in storing, in an error queue (260), an error record that includes an aggregate identifier (AgID) for an event, when a particular event record requires a particular service, but that service has failed for the event. Storing an error record in the error queue causes the service to notify a remediation team to fix the failed event. All events with the AgID in the error record are put on hold and an error record is created for each of these events. The remediation team generates a fixed version of the event record and causes the system to retry the failed service for the event based on the fixed version. If the fixed version of the event is successfully processed, then any other events with the same AgID that have error records in the error queue, are routed in order of enqueue time through the event processor to be handled.)
US 20180165173 (involved in receiving event messages from event-message sources within a distributed computer system. The distributed computer system assigns event-message types to the received event messages, counts event-message-type co-occurrences in time within the received messages, determines and stores pairs of related event-message types in the memory from the counted event-message-type co-occurrences and selects determined pair of related event-message types from set of event messages and related event-message types that are output to set of an automated analysis subsystem, a display device, and a system monitor.)
US 20140337491 (involved in comparing a local timestamp of an event with a remote timestamp of the event. The event is stored in a queue in a repository cluster to be read by a remote client. The local timestamp of the event is updated, if the comparing indicates that the remote timestamp is more recent than the local timestamp. The local timestamp is updated based on a current time of the system. The local timestamp and the remote timestamp are stored as an action log entry that corresponds to the event.)
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 JEAN M CORRIELUS whose telephone number is (571)272-4032. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:30a-10p(Midflex).
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, Ann J Lo can be reached at (571)272-9767. 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.
/JEAN M CORRIELUS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2159 March 4, 2026