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 .
1. In response to the Office Action dated on 11/26/2026, applicant amend the application as follow:
Claims amended: 1 and 20
Claims canceled: 2-19
Claims newly added: 21-38
Claims pending: 1 and 20-38
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
3. Claims 1 and 21-38 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-12, 19 and 21-30 of copending Application No. 18/895,624 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both application language direct to similar concept energy utilization prediction for executing the query, using the past energy usage to produce an estimate of energy utilization consumption. The language in both applications are different but the concept remain the same. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify 624 to arrive the same invention as claimed.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
4. Claims 1 and 21-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1 (See MPEP 2106)
Claims are directed to a method, a system and a tangible , non-transitory computer readable medium which belongs to a statutory class.
Step 2A, Prong One:
Claims recite limitation:
“Determine, for an upcoming time period, pluralities of database tasks from the multitude of database tasks to be performed by the pluralities of processing core resources based on the system level energy efficiency strategy data, the plurality of data center level energy efficiency strategy data, the database task-parallelism data, and the processing core resource power consumption data, wherein a first plurality of database tasks of the pluralities of database tasks are for a first plurality of processing core resources of the pluralities of processing core resources, wherein the first plurality of database tasks is regarding a first query of a plurality of queries, and wherein the first plurality of processing core resources is of the first data” which is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation by Mental Process, but for the recitation of generic computer components. Nothing in the claim element precludes the steps from practically being performed in the human mind. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation by mental process, but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong Two:
Claims recite “processing cores resources of plurality of computing node of plurality of computing devices of plurality of computing cluster devices and instruction stored on memory to perform the method. These are generic computer components and program which use to perform abstract ideas.
The additional elements:
Access system level energy efficiency strategy data for the plurality of data centers, wherein a first data center level energy efficiency strategy data is regarding a first plurality of processing core resources of the pluralities of processing core resources;
access database task-parallelism data regarding processing core resource commitments for a multiple of database tasks in accordance with a plurality of desired database task performance levels, wherein, for a given database task of the multitude of database tasks, the database task-parallelism data includes a number of processing core resources of the pluralities of processing core resources to perform the given database task in accordance with a first desired database task performance level of the plurality of desired database task performance levels;
access processing core resource power consumption data that provides, for a processing core resource of the pluralities of processing core resources, data regarding power
consumption by the processing core resource when performing a database task of the multitude of database tasks, or portion thereof;
The limitation is thus insignificant extra-solution activity. Limitations that the courts have found not to be enough to qualify as "significantly more” when recited in a claim with a judicial exception include: i. Adding the words "apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, e.g., a limitation indicating that a particular function such as creating and maintaining electronic records is performed by a computer, as discussed in Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. at 2360, 110 USPQ2d at 1984 (see MPEP § 2106.05(f)). 2106.05(g)--Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity.
Step 2B:
The conclusions for the mere implementation using a computer are carried over and does not provide significantly more.
Looking at the claim as a whole does not change this conclusion and the claim is ineligible.
As to claims 21 and 31, the limitations:
“Inputting data of a dataset of a plurality of datasets” is
“Storing the data of the dataset of the plurality of datasets in short-term storage in accordance with a short-term storage scheme” is archived the data to later retrieval.
“Storing the data of the dataset of the plurality of datasets in long-term storage in accordance with a long-term storage scheme data rebuilding of a long-termed storage data segment of the dataset” is archived process to maintain data retrieval.
“Data transfer of the data of the dataset” is transferring data to second location.
“Performing a query optimization function of a plurality of query optimization functions on a query to at least partially optimize the query, wherein the query is one of a plurality of queries” is the and
“Executing at least a portion of an optimized query of a plurality of optimized queries” is the process of retrieval the information.
As to claims 22 and 32, the limitations: “the processing core resource power consumption data comprises one or more of: power consumption data for a read operation; power consumption data for a write operation; power consumption data for a data processing operation; and power consumption data for a data communication operation” is only further defined what processing core resource power consumption data is and insignificantly to amount significantly more.
As to claims 23 and 33, the limitations: the system level energy efficiency strategy data comprises one or more of: maximum peak power data for the database system; power consumption during a given period of time for the database system; and power consumption deviations during the given period of time for database system” is only further defined what system level energy efficiency strategy data is and insignificantly to amount significantly more.
As to claims 24 and 34, the limitations
“Maximum peak power data for the first data center; power consumption during a given period of time for the first data center; and power consumption deviations during the given period of time for the first data center” is further defined what the first data center level energy efficiency strategy is and insignificant to amount significantly more.
As to claims 25 and 35, the limitations
“First data that includes a first number of processing core resources of the pluralities of processing core resources to perform the given database task in accordance with a first iteration of the first desired database task performance level” is only further defined that the database task-performance data is and significantly to amount significantly more.
“Second data that includes a second number of processing core resources of the pluralities of processing core resources to perform the given database task in accordance with a second iteration of the first desired database task performance level” is only further defined that the database task-performance data is and significantly to amount significantly more.
As to claims 26 and 36, the limitations:
“determining a number of database tasks that are included in the plurality of queries; determining a time period for executing the number of database task” is a mental process.
“determining whether an estimated power consumption for executing the number of database tasks within the time period is compliant with the system level energy efficiency strategy data and with the plurality of data center level energy efficiency strategy data” is a mental process.
“when the estimated power consumption is compliant, equating the number of database tasks to the pluralities of database tasks” is a generalization process of using conditional statement when meets to perform or perform tasks and insignificantly to amount significantly more.
As to claims 27 and 37, the limitations
“When the estimated power consumption is not compliant with the system level energy efficiency strategy data, reduce a number of queries in the plurality of queries until the estimate power consumption is compliant with the system level energy efficiency strategy data” is a generalization process of using conditional statement to perform or perform tasks.
As to claims 28 and 38,the limitations “wherein the set of computing devices is further operable to: when the estimated power consumption is not compliant with the first data center level energy efficiency strategy data, adjust execution timing of the first plurality of database tasks until the estimate power consumption is compliant with the first data center level energy efficiency strategy data” is the general processing condition which to allow certain task to be performed based on the condition and which is insignificant to amount significantly more.
As to claims 29 and 39, the limitations”
“Determining, for the time period, a plurality of forecasted power data for the plurality of data centers based on the pluralities of database tasks, the database task-parallelism data, and the processing core resource power consumption data, wherein first forecasted power data of the plurality of power data is regarding the first data center” is a mental process.
“Combining the plurality of forecasted power data to produce the estimated power consumption” is generalization of calculation of putting two data into a one data.
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.
5. Claim(s) 1 and 20-25 and 30-35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (Pub. No. US 2018/0364361 A1) and Mcnamara et al. (Patent No. US 10,608,433 B1).
As to claim 1, Liu discloses a database system comprising:
A plurality of processing core resources (computing resources) (paragraph 0033)of pluralities of computing nodes (node) (paragraph 0056) of pluralities of computing devices of pluralities of data centers, wherein the plurality of data centers is located at a plurality of geolocations (geolocations) (paragraph 0025);
Wherein a set of computing devices of the pluralities of computing device cluster is operable to:
Access system level energy efficiency strategy data for the plurality of data centers (cloud) (paragraph 0037), wherein a first data center level energy efficiency strategy data is regarding a first plurality of processing core resources of the pluralities of processing core resources;
Access database task-parallelism data (plurality of tasks parallel processing) (paragraph 0023) regarding processing core resource commitments for a multiple of database tasks (plurality of tasks parallel processing) (paragraph 0023) in accordance with a plurality of desired database task performance levels, wherein, for a given database task of the multitude of database tasks, the database task-parallelism data includes a number of processing core resources of the pluralities of processing core resources to perform the given database task in accordance with a first desired database (database 114) (paragraph 0024) task performance level of the plurality of desired database task performance levels;
access processing core resource power consumption data that provides, for a processing core resource of the pluralities of processing core resources, data regarding power
consumption by the processing core resource when performing a database task of the multitude of database tasks, or portion thereof (these acquisition and localization operations are processor intensive and therefore require a lot of energy to perform. For devices that wish to minimize power consumption, this may be problematic) (paragraph 0029);
Liu does not explicitly disclose determine, for an upcoming time period, pluralities of database tasks from the multitude of database tasks to be performed by the pluralities of processing core resources based on the system level energy efficiency strategy data, the plurality of data center level energy efficiency strategy data, the database task-parallelism data, and the processing core resource power consumption data, wherein a first plurality of database tasks of the pluralities of database tasks are for a first plurality of processing core resources of the pluralities of processing core resources, wherein the first plurality of database tasks is regarding a first query of a plurality of queries, and wherein the first plurality of processing core resources is of the first data.
Mcnamara discloses determine, for an upcoming time period, pluralities of database tasks from the multitude of database tasks to be performed by the pluralities of processing core resources based on the system level energy efficiency strategy data, the plurality of data center level energy efficiency strategy data, the database task-parallelism data, and the processing core resource power consumption data, wherein a first plurality of database tasks of the pluralities of database tasks are for a first plurality of processing core resources of the pluralities of processing core resources, wherein the first plurality of database tasks is regarding a first query of a plurality of queries, and wherein the first plurality of processing core resources is of the first data (the control system is further configured to, responsive to receiving the power option data, determine a performance strategy for the set of computing systems based on a combination of at least a portion of the power option data and at least one condition in the set of conditions. The performance strategy comprises a power consumption target for the set of computing systems for each time interval in the set of time intervals, where each power consumption target is equal or greater than the minimum power threshold associated with each time interval. The control system is also configured to provide instructions to the set of computing system to perform one or more computational operations based on the performance strategy) (col. 6, lines 53-65). This suggests determine, for an upcoming time period, pluralities of database tasks from the multitude of database tasks to be performed by the pluralities of processing core resources based on the system level energy efficiency strategy data, the plurality of data center level energy efficiency strategy data, the database task-parallelism data, and the processing core resource power consumption data, wherein a first plurality of database tasks of the pluralities of database tasks are for a first plurality of processing core resources of the pluralities of processing core resources, wherein the first plurality of database tasks is regarding a first query of a plurality of queries, and wherein the first plurality of processing core resources is of the first data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify teaching of Liu to include determine, for an upcoming time period, pluralities of database tasks from the multitude of database tasks to be performed by the pluralities of processing core resources based on the system level energy efficiency strategy data, the plurality of data center level energy efficiency strategy data, the database task-parallelism data, and the processing core resource power consumption data, wherein a first plurality of database tasks of the pluralities of database tasks are for a first plurality of processing core resources of the pluralities of processing core resources, wherein the first plurality of database tasks is regarding a first query of a plurality of queries, and wherein the first plurality of processing core resources is of the first data as disclosed by Mcnarama in order to provide energy efficiency for executing processes.
As to claim 21. (New) Liu discloses the database system of claim 1, wherein a database task of the multitude of database tasks is of a category of database tasks, wherein the category comprises:
inputting data of a dataset of a plurality of datasets;
storing the data of the dataset of the plurality of datasets in short-term storage in accordance with a short-term storage scheme (caches) (paragraph 0119);
storing the data of the dataset of the plurality of datasets in long-term storage in accordance with a long-term storage scheme data rebuilding of a long-termed storage data segment of the dataset (database) (paragraph 0025);
data transfer of the data of the dataset (data transfer module) (paragraph 0057);
performing a query optimization function of a plurality of query optimization functions on a query to at least partially optimize the query, wherein the query is one of a plurality of queries (optimization) (paragraph 0027); and
executing at least a portion of an optimized query of a plurality of optimized queries (some or all operations may be executed in different order, be combined or omitted or be executed in parallel) (paragraph 0038).
As to claim 22. (New) Liu discloses the database system of claim 1, wherein the processing core resource power consumption data comprises one or more of:
power consumption data for a read operation;
power consumption data for a write operation;
power consumption data for a data processing operation (in parallel computing, there are two types of problem task-parallel problem and data-parallel problem…) (paragraph 0065); and
power consumption data for a data communication operation.
As to claim 23. (New) Liu discloses the database system of claim 1, wherein the system level energy efficiency strategy data comprises one or more of: maximum peak power data for the database system; power consumption during a given period of time for the database system; and power consumption deviations during the given period of time for database system (peak) (paragraph 0071).
As to claim 24. (New) Liu discloses the database system of claim 1, wherein the first data center level energy efficiency strategy data comprises one or more of: maximum peak power data for the first data center; power consumption during a given period of time for the first data center; and power consumption deviations during the given period of time for the first data center (peak) (paragraph 0071).
As to claim 25. (New) Liu discloses the database system of claim 1, wherein, for the given database task, the database task-performance data further comprises:
first data that includes a first number of processing core resources of the pluralities of processing core resources to perform the given database task in accordance with a first iteration of the first desired database task performance level (performance) (paragraph 0044);
second data that includes a second number of processing core resources of the pluralities of processing core resources to perform the given database task in accordance with a second iteration of the first desired database task performance level (performance) (paragraph 0044);
Claim 31 is rejected under the same reason as to claim 21.
Claim 32 is rejected under the same reason as to claim 22.
Claim 33 is rejected under the same reason as to claim 23.
Clam 34 is rejected under the same reason as to claim 24.
Claim 35 is rejected under the same reason as to claim 25.
6. Claim(s) 26 and 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (Pub. No. US 2018/0364361 A1) and Mcnamara et al. (Patent No. US 10,608,433 B1) and further in view of Ibarra (Patent No. US 10/985,984 B1).
As to claim 26. (New) Liu discloses the database system of claim 1 excepting for wherein the set of computing devices is further operable to determine the pluralities of database tasks by: determining a number of database tasks that are included in the plurality of queries; determining a time period for executing the number of database tasks; determining whether an estimated power consumption for executing the number of database tasks within the time period is compliant with the system level energy efficiency strategy data and with the plurality of data center level energy efficiency strategy data; when the estimated power consumption is compliant, equating the number of database tasks to the pluralities of database tasks. However, Liu discloses wherein the set of computing devices is further operable to determine the pluralities of database tasks by: determining a number of database tasks that are included in the plurality of queries (the device, after receiving the portion, stores the packet(s) and returns to a low power state, during which it does not receive any additional data transmission from the gateway. Upon waking up for a second time, at routine interval, and performing its set task(s) the device once against queries) (col. 2, lines 46-53); determining a time period for executing the number of database tasks; determining whether an estimated power consumption for executing the number of database tasks within the time period is compliant with the system level energy efficiency strategy data and with the plurality of data center level energy efficiency strategy data; when the estimated power consumption is compliant, equating the number of database tasks to the pluralities of database tasks (further, the power consumption of the node can be normalized and contained, such that the node does not exceed an average power consumption rate, or at any point exceed…) (col. 13, lines 57-63). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify teaching of Liu to include wherein the set of computing devices is further operable to determine the pluralities of database tasks by: determining a number of database tasks that are included in the plurality of queries; determining a time period for executing the number of database tasks; determining whether an estimated power consumption for executing the number of database tasks within the time period is compliant with the system level energy efficiency strategy data and with the plurality of data center level energy efficiency strategy data; when the estimated power consumption is compliant, equating the number of database tasks to the pluralities of database tasks as disclosed by Ibarra to provide enough power to execute queries.
Claim 36 is rejected under the same reason as to claim 26.
7. Claim(s) 27 and 37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (Pub. No. US 2018/0364361 A1) and Mcnamara et al. (Patent No. US 10,608,433 B1) and further in view of Chawla (Pub. No. US 2011/01599884 A1).
As to claim 27. (New) Liu discloses the database system of claim 26 excepting for wherein the set of computing devices is further operable to: when the estimated power consumption is not compliant with the system level energy efficiency strategy data, reduce a number of queries in the plurality of queries until the estimate power consumption is compliant with the system level energy efficiency strategy data. However, Chawla discloses wherein the set of computing devices is further operable to: when the estimated power consumption is not compliant with the system level energy efficiency strategy data, reduce a number of queries in the plurality of queries until the estimate power consumption is compliant with the system level energy efficiency strategy data (by reducing location request or queries sent by the application(s) or the mobile positioning system on the device, the invention enables such a solution with significantly reduced power consumption requirements for the GPS or A-GPS chipset embedded in the device, and reduces computing resource requirements in the mobile positioning system) (paragraph 0014). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify teaching of Liu to include wherein the set of computing devices is further operable to: when the estimated power consumption is not compliant with the system level energy efficiency strategy data, reduce a number of queries in the plurality of queries until the estimate power consumption is compliant with the system level energy efficiency strategy data as disclosed by Chalaw in order use the power efficiently.
Claim 37 is rejected under the same reason as to claim 27.
8. Claim(s) 28 and 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (Pub. No. US 2018/0364361 A1) and Mcnamara et al. (Patent No. US 10,608,433 B1) and further in view of Pederson (Pub. No US 2022/0245466 A1).
As to claim 28. (New) Liu discloses the database system of claim 26 excepting for wherein the set of computing devices is further operable to: when the estimated power consumption is not compliant with the first data center level energy efficiency strategy data, adjust execution timing of the first plurality of database tasks until the estimate power consumption is compliant with the first data center level energy efficiency strategy data. However, Pederson discloses wherein the set of computing devices is further operable to: when the estimated power consumption is not compliant with the first data center level energy efficiency strategy data, adjust execution timing of the first plurality of database tasks until the estimate power consumption is compliant with the first data center level energy efficiency strategy data (…. Dynamically changing task execution agent assets attributes values describing task execution agent characteristics and operational status including maintenance histories and schedule maintenance requirements, wherein said dynamically changing task execution agent attributes may include task execution times task waiting times, or task execution agent availability…) (claim 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify teaching of Liu to include wherein the set of computing devices is further operable to: when the estimated power consumption is not compliant with the first data center level energy efficiency strategy data, adjust execution timing of the first plurality of database tasks until the estimate power consumption is compliant with the first data center level energy efficiency strategy data as disclosed by Pederson in order to provide estimate power consumption for future query.
Claim 38 is rejected under the same reason as to clam 28.
9. Claim(s) 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu et al. (Pub. No. US 2018/0364361 A1) and Mcnamara et al. (Patent No. US 10,608,433 B1) and further in view of Sen et al. (Pub. No. US 2014/0281645 A1).
As to claim 29. (New) Liu discloses the database system of claim 26 excepting for wherein the set of computing devices is further operable to generate the estimated power consumption by: determining, for the time period, a plurality of forecasted power data for the plurality of data centers based on the pluralities of database tasks, the database task-parallelism data, and the processing core resource power consumption data, wherein first forecasted power data of the plurality of power data is regarding the first data center; and combining the plurality of forecasted power data to produce the estimated power consumption. However, Sen discloses wherein the set of computing devices is further operable to generate the estimated power consumption by: determining, for the time period, a plurality of forecasted power data for the plurality of data centers based on the pluralities of database tasks, the database task-parallelism data, and the processing core resource power consumption data, wherein first forecasted power data of the plurality of power data is regarding the first data center; and combining the plurality of forecasted power data to produce the estimated power consumption (the provide data, including consumption data, associated geographic location data, and any other data used for estimating, actuating and forecasting a list of power consumption choices for each consumption device may be provided to the system 100) (Paragraph 0063). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify teaching of Liu to include the set of computing devices is further operable to generate the estimated power consumption by: determining, for the time period, a plurality of forecasted power data for the plurality of data centers based on the pluralities of database tasks, the database task-parallelism data, and the processing core resource power consumption data, wherein first forecasted power data of the plurality of power data is regarding the first data center; and combining the plurality of forecasted power data to produce the estimated power consumption as disclosed by Sen in order to predict further consumption.
Conclusion
10. 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 BAOQUOC N TO whose telephone number is (571)272-4041. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9AM - 6PM.
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, Boris Gorney can be reached at 571-270-5626. 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.
BAOQUOC N. TO
Examiner
Art Unit 2154
/BAOQUOC N TO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2154
Prosecution Insights