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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on January 13, 2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,204,793. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the previously patented application anticipates the instant application.
19/019,439
12,204,793
1. A multi-platform data storage system for facilitating sharing of containers including one or more virtual storage resources, the multi-platform data storage system comprising: a storage interface configured to enable access to a plurality of storage platforms that use one or more different storage access or management protocols, the plurality of storage platforms storing data objects in physical data storage; and a storage mobility and management layer providing virtual management of virtual storage resources corresponding to one or more data objects stored in the plurality of storage platforms, the storage mobility and management layer including at least a transfer module coupled to at least one network and configured to transfer at least one of the data objects, wherein the transfer module transfers the at least one of the data objects between the multi-platform data storage system and another data storage system, and wherein the transfer module is configured to
provide transfer of the data objects as well as metadata therefor over a de-centralized network.
1. A multi-platform data storage system for facilitating sharing of containers including one or more virtual storage resources, the multi-platform data storage system comprising: a storage interface configured to enable access to a plurality of storage platforms that use one or more different storage access or management protocols, the plurality of storage platforms storing data objects in physical data storage; and a storage mobility and management layer providing virtual management of virtual storage resources corresponding to one or more data objects stored in the plurality of storage platforms, the storage mobility and management layer including at least a transfer module coupled to at least one network and configured to transfer at least one of the data objects, wherein the transfer module transfers the at least one of the data objects between the multi-platform data storage system and another data storage system, and wherein the transfer module provides peer-to-peer transfer of the data objects as well as metadata therefor over a peer-to-peer, de-centralized network.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yadav et al. (US# 8,892,527).
Regarding claim 1, Yadav et al. teaches a multi-platform data storage system for facilitating sharing of containers [fig. 6] including one or more virtual storage resources, the multi-platform data storage system [fig. 3; col. 11, lines 37-55] comprising: a storage interface configured to enable access to a plurality of storage platforms that use one or more different storage access or management protocols, the plurality of storage platforms storing data objects in physical data storage [Fig. 3 including (305) (c7, line 64 – c8, line 2) and 340(c10, lines 14-21 and 25-28)]; and a storage mobility and management layer providing virtual management of virtual storage resources corresponding to one or more data objects stored in the plurality of storage platforms [translation layers for requests from user to disk: 310-305-300-340-315-320; c10, lines 10-21 & 38-55; Fig.3], the storage mobility and management layer including at least a transfer module coupled to at least one network and configured to transfer at least one of the data objects [Fig. 3, (300)], wherein the transfer module transfers the at least one of the data objects between the multi-platform data storage system and another data storage system [Fig. 3, (300)] and wherein the transfer module is configured to provide transfer of the data objects as well as metadata therefor over a de-centralized network [Fig. 9; c3, lines 57-64 & c10, lines 6-14].
Regarding claim 2, Yadav et al. teaches a multi-platform data storage system for accessing a plurality of storage platforms that use different storage access or storage management protocols, the multi-platform data storage system comprising: a storage mobility and management layer providing virtual management of data stored in the plurality of storage platforms [translation layers for requests from user to disk: 310-305-300-340-315-320; c10, lines 10-21 & 38-55; Fig.3]; and a storage protocol converter operatively coupled between the storage mobility and management layer and the plurality of storage platforms, wherein during access or management communication from the storage mobility and management layer to a particular one of the storage platforms, the storage protocol converter operates to convert the access and/or management communication from a layer protocol used by the storage mobility and management layer to the storage access protocol used by the particular one of the storage platforms [c10, lines 29-37]; vdisk command translation],wherein the storage mobility and management layer is configured to form a virtual storage resource (VSR) from a plurality of virtual data blocks (VDB), and maintain a mapping of the virtual data blocks to the virtual storage resource [c4, lines 5-14].
Regarding claim 3, Yadav et al. teaches a multi-platform data storage system for maintaining containers including one or more virtual storage resources, the multi-platform data storage system comprising: a storage interface configured to enable access to a plurality of storage platforms that use different storage access and storage management protocols, the plurality of storage platforms storing data objects in physical data storage [fig. 3; col. 11, lines 37-55;a storage mobility and management layer providing virtual management of virtual storage resources corresponding to one or more data objects stored in the plurality of storage platforms [translation layers for requests from user to disk: 310-305-300-340-315-320; c10, lines 10-21 & 38-55; Fig.3]; and a virtual resource management sub-system that manages containers configured to contain one or more of the virtual storage resources, wherein the virtual resource management sub-system permits sharing of the containers with one or more other multi- platform data storage systems via one or more networks [c7, lines 60-64; c8, lines 7-17; sharing via NFS and CIPS], wherein the one or more virtual storage resources contained in a selected one of the containers comprise files having unique file names (identifiers) [c3, line 57 – c4, line 14], and wherein the virtual resource management sub-system is configured to create a new version (special) of a corresponding one of the files when associated metadata for the corresponding one of the files has changed [exceed pre-defined sharing threshold establishes new “special” data version, c3, lines 14-26; claim language does not recite what happens to original version of data].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Brian R. Peugh whose telephone number is (571) 272-4199. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 7:30am to 3:30pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Rocio Del Mar Perez-Velez, phone number 571-270-5935, can be reached. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 703-872-9306.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or proceeding should be directed to the receptionist whose telephone number is 571-272-2100.
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 http://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).
/BRIAN R PEUGH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2133