DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
This Office action is in response to communications dated 7/1/2026.
Claims 1-5, and 10-14 are amended.
Claims 19-21 are cancelled.
Claims 22-23 are added.
Claims 1-18 and 22-23 are pending.
Claims 1-18 and 22-23 are rejected.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U. S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The Examiner thanks Applicant for helping to ensure the clarity of the record by amending claims rejected under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) in the non-final Office action dated 4/1/2026 and therefore respectfully withdraws the rejections of claims 1-9 and 10-18 under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) made therein.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-18 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPGPUB 2011/0246740 (“Yata”) in view of U.S. Patent No. 11,853,656 (“Naamad”)and further in view of USPGPUB 2007/0239793 (“Tyrrell”).
As per claim 1, Yata substantially teaches a system (Yata, FIG. 2) comprising:
a first storage pool comprising a first storage medium, wherein the first storage medium is of a first storage medium type, wherein the first storage medium is configured to carry first storage volumes whose first access attributes are the first storage medium type: (Yata, Abstract; FIG. 2, reference numerals 205A and 206A; and paragraph 0091-0097, where Pool A 205A of Yata is a storage pool that comprises Tier A 206A, which may comprise a set of storage devices of a same type (e.g., SSDs). The Examiner notes that SSDs by definition have attributes that are specific to an SSD storage device. Yata therefore substantially teaches a first storage pool comprising a first storage medium, wherein the first storage medium is of a first storage medium type, wherein the first storage medium is configured to carry first storage volumes whose first access attributes are the first storage medium type);
a second storage pool comprising a second storage medium, wherein the second storage medium is of the first storage medium type, wherein the second storage medium is configured to carry second storage volumes whose second access attributes are of the first storage medium type, wherein the second storage medium is further configured to carry third storage volumes whose third access attributes are of a second storage medium type: (Yata, Abstract; FIG. 2, reference numerals 205B, 206C, 207D, and 207E; and paragraphs 0091-0097, where Pool B 205B of Yata is a second storage pool comprised of Tier C 206C, which may be comprised of a set of storage devices of a same type (e.g., Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) storage) that are store volumes on pool volume D 207D and pool volume F 207E (i.e., a set of second storage volumes). The Examiner notes that Tier C 206C may comprise the same or different storage devices, which means that Tier C 206C may comprise storage devices that have different storage devices attributes (i.e., storage volumes whose second access attributes are the first storage medium type and third storage volumes whose access attributes are of a second storage medium type). The Examiner notes that SAS storage by definition has attributes that are specific to an SAS storage device, and SSDs have different storage attributes that are specific to SAS storage devices. Yata therefore substantially teaches a second storage pool comprising a second storage medium, wherein the second storage medium is of the first storage medium type, wherein the second storage medium is configured to carry second storage volumes whose second access attributes are of the first storage medium type, wherein the second storage medium is further configured to carry third storage volumes whose third access attributes are of a second storage medium type); and
wherein a second storage performance of the second storage medium type is lower than a first storage performance of the first storage medium type: (Yata, Abstract; FIG. 2, reference numerals 205B, 206C, 207D, and 207E; and paragraphs 0091-0097, where Pool B 205B of Yata is a second storage pool comprised of Tier C 206C, which may be comprised of a set of storage devices of a same type (e.g., Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) storage) that are store volumes on pool volume D 207D and pool volume F 207E (i.e., a set of second storage volumes). The Examiner notes that Tier C 206C may comprise the same or different storage devices, which means that Tier C 206C may comprise storage devices that have different storage devices attributes (i.e., storage volumes whose second access attributes are the first storage medium type and third storage volumes whose access attributes are of a second storage medium type). The Examiner notes that SAS storage by definition have attributes that are specific to an SAS storage device, and SSDs have different storage attributes that are specific to SSDs. Yata therefore substantially teaches wherein a second storage performance of the second storage medium type is lower than a first storage performance of the first storage medium type);
a third storage pool comprising a third storage medium, wherein the third storage medium is of the second storage medium type, and wherein the third storage medium is configured to carry fourth storage volumes whose fourth access attributes are of the second storage medium type: (Yata, Abstract; FIG. 2, reference numerals 205A and 206A; and paragraph 0091-0097 and 0353-0355, where Pool A 205A of Yata is a storage pool that comprises Tier A 206A, which may comprise a set of storage devices of a same type (e.g., SSDs). The Examiner notes that SSDs by definition have attributes that are specific to an SSD storage device. While Yata does not appear to explicitly teach a third storage pool that comprises storage media that include fourth storage volumes that have fourth access attributes that are the second storage medium type, Yata does teach that the system of Yata may include other embodiments that those explicitly described in the disclosure of Yata. The Examiner notes that inclusion of a third storage pool that comprises only SSDs or SAS storage devices that have storage attribute that are the second storage medium type would be one such obvious modification. The modification would have been obvious because a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase system performance and flexibility by including a third storage pool to store data. Yata therefore substantially teaches a third storage pool comprising a third storage medium, wherein the third storage medium is of the second storage medium type, and wherein the third storage medium is configured to carry fourth storage volumes whose fourth access attributes are of the second storage medium type); and
a scheduling node configured to: (Yata, paragraph 0079, where the system of Yata includes storage management software 164 that provides functions of collecting and monitoring configuration information and performance information and also migrates data within the storage system of Yata. Yata therefore substantially teaches a scheduling node configured to).
Yata does not appear to explicitly teach the other limitations of this claim beyond those taught above; however, in an analogous art, Naamad teaches data storage system modeling using application service level objectives and specified workload limits for storage tiers.
As per claim 1, Naamad particularly teaches:
migrate, when a first hotspot occurs in the first storage pool, a first part of the first storage volumes to the second storage medium; and migrate, when a second hotspot occurs in the second storage pool, a part of the second storage volumes to the first storage medium in the first storage pool: (Naamad, Abstract; FIG. 3, reference numeral 135; and column 9, lines 36, to column 11, line 44, where optimizer 135 of Naamad may move (i.e., migrate) given data between tiers (e.g., from a first tier to a second tier or from a second tier to a first tier) based on tier workload and how frequently the given data is accessed (i.e., when the given data is part of a hotspot). Naamad therefore particularly teaches migrate, when a first hotspot occurs in the first storage pool, a first part of the first storage volumes to the second storage medium; and migrate, when a second hotspot occurs in the second storage pool, a part of the second storage volumes to the first storage medium in the first storage pool).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Naamad and Yata before them before the instant application was effectively filed, to modify the system of Yata to include the principles of Naamad of migration between storage based on workload and data access frequency.
The modification would have been obvious because a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase system performance by implementing storage management techniques that classify storage tiers based on expected average response time to provide more effective, efficient, and better optimization of storage resource usage (Naamad, column 21, lines 6-26).
Neither Yata nor Naamad appears to explicitly teach the other limitations of this claim beyond those taught above; however, in an analogous art, Tyrrell teaches system and method for implementing a flexible storage manager with threshold control.
As per claim 1, Tyrrell particularly teaches:
wherein the first hotspot means that a virtual capacity, physical space occupation, or a total bandwidth of the first storage pool exceeds a threshold, wherein the physical space occupation is a first sum of occupied physical space in all storage volumes in the first storage pool, and wherein the total bandwidth is a second sum of bandwidths of all the storage volumes: (Tyrrell, Abstract; FIG. 15; FIG. 16; FIG. 17; and paragraphs 0084-0091, where the Flexible Storage Manager (FSM) of Tyrrell monitors physical space usage (i.e., physical space occupation) of a thinly provisioned pool of storage devices (i.e., the first storage pool). In response to the monitored physical space usage reaching or exceeding a threshold level, additional physical space is provisioned to the thinly provisioned pool of storage devices so that a user may continue to store data to the thinly provisioned pool of storage devices. The Examiner notes that the monitored physical space usage by definition corresponds to a total value (i.e., sum) of physical space usage within storage devices of the thinly provisioned pool. Tyrrell therefore particularly teaches wherein the first hotspot means that a virtual capacity, physical space occupation, or a total bandwidth of the first storage pool exceeds a threshold, wherein the physical space occupation is a first sum of occupied physical space in all storage volumes in the first storage pool, and wherein the total bandwidth is a second sum of bandwidths of all the storage volumes).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Tyrrell, Naamad, and Yata before them before the instant application was effectively filed, to modify the combination of Naamad with Yata to include the principles of Tyrrell of flexibly allocating physical storage based on physical storage capacity usage exceeding a threshold.
The modification would have been obvious because a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase system storage utilization rate by implementing a flexible storage manager that reduces an amount of wasted storage space (Tyrrell, paragraph 0080).
As per claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated, and Naamad further particularly teaches:
wherein the scheduling node is further configured to migrate a part of the third storage volumes to the third storage medium: (Naamad, Abstract; FIG. 3, reference numeral 135; and column 9, lines 36, to column 11, line 44, where optimizer 135 of Naamad may move (i.e., migrate) given data between tiers (e.g., from a first tier to a second tier or from a second tier to a first tier) based on tier workload and how frequently the given data is accessed (i.e., when the given data is part of a hotspot). Naamad therefore particularly teaches wherein the scheduling node is further configured to migrate a part of the third storage volumes to the third storage medium).
As per claim 3, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated, and Yata further substantially teaches further comprising:
a fourth storage pool, wherein the fourth storage pool comprises a fourth storage medium, wherein the fourth storage medium is of the second storage medium type, wherein the fourth storage medium is configured to carry fifth storage volumes whose fifth access attributes are of the second storage medium type, wherein further storage medium is further configured to carry sixth storage volumes whose access attributes are of a third storage medium type, wherein a third storage performance of the third storage medium type is lower than the second storage performance, and wherein, when a third hotspot occurs in the third storage pool, the scheduling node is further configured to: migrate a part of the fourth storage volumes to the second storage medium; and migrate a part of the fourth storage volumes to the fourth storage medium: (Yata, Abstract; FIG. 2, reference numerals 205A and 206A; and paragraph 0091-0097 and 0353-0355, where Pool A 205A of Yata is a storage pool that comprises Tier A 206A, which may comprise a set of storage devices of a same type (e.g., SSDs). The Examiner notes that SSDs by definition have attributes that are specific to an SSD storage device. While Yata does not appear to explicitly teach a third storage pool that comprises storage media that include fourth storage volumes that have fourth access attributes that are the second storage medium type, Yata does teach that the system of Yata may include other embodiments that those explicitly described in the disclosure of Yata. The Examiner notes that inclusion of a third storage pool that comprises only SSDs or SAS storage devices that have storage attribute that are the second storage medium type would be one such obvious modification. The modification would have been obvious because a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase system performance and flexibility by including a third storage pool to store data. Yata therefore substantially teaches a fourth storage pool, wherein the fourth storage pool comprises a fourth storage medium, wherein the fourth storage medium is of the second storage medium type, wherein the fourth storage medium is configured to carry fifth storage volumes whose fifth access attributes are of the second storage medium type, wherein further storage medium is further configured to carry sixth storage volumes whose access attributes are of a third storage medium type, wherein a third storage performance of the third storage medium type is lower than the second storage performance, and wherein, when a third hotspot occurs in the third storage pool, the scheduling node is further configured to: migrate a part of the fourth storage volumes to the second storage medium; and migrate a part of the fourth storage volumes to the fourth storage medium).
As per claim 4, the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated, and Yata further substantially teaches further comprising:
a fifth storage pool, wherein the fifth storage pool comprises a fifth storage medium, wherein the fifth storage medium is of the third storage medium type, wherein the fifth storage medium is configured to carry seventh storage volumes whose sixth access attributes are of the third storage medium type, and wherein, when a fourth hotspot occurs in the fourth storage pool, the scheduling node is further configured to: migrate a part of the fifth storage volumes to the third storage medium; and migrate a part of the sixth storage volumes to the fifth storage medium: (Yata, Abstract; FIG. 2, reference numerals 205A and 206A; and paragraph 0091-0097 and 0353-0355, where Pool A 205A of Yata is a storage pool that comprises Tier A 206A, which may comprise a set of storage devices of a same type (e.g., SSDs). The Examiner notes that SSDs by definition have attributes that are specific to an SSD storage device. While Yata does not appear to explicitly teach a third storage pool that comprises storage media that include fourth storage volumes that have fourth access attributes that are the second storage medium type, Yata does teach that the system of Yata may include other embodiments that those explicitly described in the disclosure of Yata. The Examiner notes that inclusion of a third storage pool that comprises only SSDs or SAS storage devices that have storage attribute that are the second storage medium type would be one such obvious modification. The modification would have been obvious because a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase system performance and flexibility by including a third storage pool to store data. Yata therefore substantially teaches a fifth storage pool, wherein the fifth storage pool comprises a fifth storage medium, wherein the fifth storage medium is of the third storage medium type, wherein the fifth storage medium is configured to carry seventh storage volumes whose sixth access attributes are of the third storage medium type, and wherein, when a fourth hotspot occurs in the fourth storage pool, the scheduling node is further configured to: migrate a part of the fifth storage volumes to the third storage medium; and migrate a part of the sixth storage volumes to the fifth storage medium).
As per claim 5, the rejection of claim 4 is incorporated, and Yata further substantially teaches:
wherein the scheduling node is further configured to migrate, when a fifth hotspot occurs in the fifth storage pool, a part of the seventh storage volumes to the fourth storage medium: (Yata, Abstract; FIG. 2, reference numerals 205A and 206A; and paragraph 0091-0097 and 0353-0355, where Pool A 205A of Yata is a storage pool that comprises Tier A 206A, which may comprise a set of storage devices of a same type (e.g., SSDs). The Examiner notes that SSDs by definition have attributes that are specific to an SSD storage device. While Yata does not appear to explicitly teach a third storage pool that comprises storage media that include fourth storage volumes that have fourth access attributes that are the second storage medium type, Yata does teach that the system of Yata may include other embodiments that those explicitly described in the disclosure of Yata. The Examiner notes that inclusion of a third storage pool that comprises only SSDs or SAS storage devices that have storage attribute that are the second storage medium type would be one such obvious modification. The modification would have been obvious because a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase system performance and flexibility by including a third storage pool to store data. Yata therefore substantially teaches wherein the scheduling node is further configured to migrate, when a fifth hotspot occurs in the fifth storage pool, a part of the seventh storage volumes to the fourth storage medium).
As per claim 6, the rejection of claim 5 is incorporated, and Yata further substantially teaches:
wherein the first storage medium type is a solid-state drive (SSD) type, the second storage medium type is a Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) type, and the third storage medium type is a Serial AT Attachment (SATA) type: (Yata, paragraphs 0060-0061, where the storage pools and devices of Yata are SSDs, SAS disks, and SATA disks. Yata therefore substantially teaches wherein the first storage medium type is a solid-state drive (SSD) type, the second storage medium type is a Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) type, and the third storage medium type is a Serial AT Attachment (SATA) type).
As per claim 7, the rejection of claim 5 is incorporated, and Yata further substantially teaches:
wherein the first storage medium type is a multi-level cell (MLC) subtype in a solid-state drive (SSD) type, the second storage medium type is a trinary-level cell (TLC) subtype in the SSD type, and the third storage medium type is a quad-level cell (QLC) subtype in the SSD type: (Yata, paragraphs 0055 and 0060-0061, where the storage pools and devices of Yata are flash-based SSDs, SAS disks, and SATA disks. The Examiner notes that flash-based SSDs may use combinations of Single Level Cell (SLC), MLC, TLC, and QLC flash memory cells. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the instant application was filed to use MLC, TLC, and QLC flash memory cells as part of the SSDs. The modification would have been obvious because a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase system storage capacity by using denser flash memory storage. Yata therefore substantially teaches wherein the first storage medium type is a multi-level cell (MLC) subtype in a solid-state drive (SSD) type, the second storage medium type is a trinary-level cell (TLC) subtype in the SSD type, and the third storage medium type is a quad-level cell (QLC) subtype in the SSD type).
As per claim 9, the rejection of claim 5 is incorporated, and Yata further substantially teaches:
wherein the first storage medium type is a single-level cells (SLC) subtype in a solid-state drive (SSD) type, the second medium type is a multi-level cell (MLC) subtype or a trinary-level cell (TLC) subtype in the SSD type, and the third storage medium type is a quad-level cell (QLC) subtype in the SSD type: (Yata, paragraphs 0055 and 0060-0061, where the storage pools and devices of Yata are flash-based SSDs, SAS disks, and SATA disks. The Examiner notes that flash-based SSDs may use combinations of Single Level Cell (SLC), MLC, TLC, and QLC flash memory cells. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the instant application was filed to use MLC, TLC, and QLC flash memory cells as part of the SSDs. The modification would have been obvious because a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase system storage capacity by using denser flash memory storage. Yata therefore substantially teaches wherein the first storage medium type is a single-level cells (SLC) subtype in a solid-state drive (SSD) type, the second medium type is a multi-level cell (MLC) subtype or a trinary-level cell (TLC) subtype in the SSD type, and the third storage medium type is a quad-level cell (QLC) subtype in the SSD type).
As per claim 10, Yata substantially teaches a method comprising:
making a first determination that a first hotspot has occurred in a first storage pool comprising a first storage medium of a first storage medium type, wherein the first storage volumes have first access attributes that are the first storage medium type, and wherein the second storage medium is of a second storage medium type: (Yata, Abstract; FIG. 2, reference numerals 205A and 206A; and paragraph 0091-0097, where Pool A 205A of Yata is a storage pool that comprises Tier A 206A, which may comprise a set of storage devices of a same type (e.g., SSDs). The Examiner notes that SSDs by definition have attributes that are specific to an SSD storage device. The system of Yata may move data between storage pools based on whether given data of a first storage pool has reached a specific threshold (i.e., has been determined to be a hotspot) such that the given data may be migrated between the storage pools. Yata therefore substantially teaches making a first determination that a first hotspot has occurred in a first storage pool comprising a first storage medium of a first storage medium type, wherein the first storage volumes have first access attributes that are the first storage medium type, and wherein the second storage medium is of a second storage medium type);
making a second determination that a second hotspot has occurred in the second storage pool, wherein the second storage volumes have second access attributes that are the first storage medium type: (Yata, Abstract; FIG. 2, reference numerals 205B, 206C, 207D, and 207E; and paragraphs 0091-0097, where Pool B 205B of Yata is a second storage pool comprised of Tier C 206C, which may be comprised of a set of storage devices of a same type (e.g., Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) storage) that are store volumes on pool volume D 207D and pool volume F 207E (i.e., a set of second storage volumes). The Examiner notes that Tier C 206C may comprise the same or different storage devices, which means that Tier C 206C may comprise storage devices that have different storage devices attributes (i.e., storage volumes whose second access attributes are the first storage medium type and third storage volumes whose access attributes are of a second storage medium type). The Examiner notes that SAS storage by definition has attributes that are specific to an SAS storage device, and SSDs have different storage attributes that are specific to SAS storage devices. Yata therefore substantially teaches making a second determination that a second hotspot has occurred in the second storage pool, wherein the second storage volumes have second access attributes that are the first storage medium type).
Yata does not appear to explicitly teach the other limitations of this claim beyond those taught above; however, in an analogous art, Naamad teaches data storage system modeling using application service level objectives and specified workload limits for storage tiers.
As per claim 10, Naamad particularly teaches:
migrating, in response to the first determination, a part of first storage volumes in the first storage medium to a second storage medium in a second storage pool; and migrating, in response to the second determination, a part of second storage volumes in the second storage medium to the first storage medium: (Naamad, Abstract; FIG. 3, reference numeral 135; and column 9, lines 36, to column 11, line 44, where optimizer 135 of Naamad may move (i.e., migrate) given data between tiers (e.g., from a first tier to a second tier or from a second tier to a first tier) based on tier workload and how frequently the given data is accessed (i.e., when the given data is part of a hotspot). Naamad therefore particularly teaches migrating, in response to the first determination, a part of first storage volumes in the first storage medium to a second storage medium in a second storage pool; and migrating, in response to the second determination, a part of second storage volumes in the second storage medium to the first storage medium).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Naamad and Yata before them before the instant application was effectively filed, to modify the system of Yata to include the principles of Naamad of migration between storage based on workload and data access frequency.
The modification would have been obvious because a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase system performance by implementing storage management techniques that classify storage tiers based on expected average response time to provide more effective, efficient, and better optimization of storage resource usage (Naamad, column 21, lines 6-26).
Neither Yata nor Naamad appears to explicitly teach the other limitations of this claim beyond those taught above; however, in an analogous art, Tyrrell teaches system and method for implementing a flexible storage manager with threshold control.
As per claim 10, Tyrrell particularly teaches:
wherein the first hotspot means that a virtual capacity, physical space occupation, or a total bandwidth of the first storage pool exceeds a threshold, wherein the physical space occupation is a first sum of occupied physical space in all storage volumes in the first storage pool, and wherein the total bandwidth is a second sum of bandwidths of all the storage volumes: (Tyrrell, Abstract; FIG. 15; FIG. 16; FIG. 17; and paragraphs 0084-0091, where the Flexible Storage Manager (FSM) of Tyrrell monitors physical space usage (i.e., physical space occupation) of a thinly provisioned pool of storage devices (i.e., the first storage pool). In response to the monitored physical space usage reaching or exceeding a threshold level, additional physical space is provisioned to the thinly provisioned pool of storage devices so that a user may continue to store data to the thinly provisioned pool of storage devices. The Examiner notes that the monitored physical space usage by definition corresponds to a total value (i.e., sum) of physical space usage within storage devices of the thinly provisioned pool. Tyrrell therefore particularly teaches wherein the first hotspot means that a virtual capacity, physical space occupation, or a total bandwidth of the first storage pool exceeds a threshold, wherein the physical space occupation is a first sum of occupied physical space in all storage volumes in the first storage pool, and wherein the total bandwidth is a second sum of bandwidths of all the storage volumes).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Tyrrell, Naamad, and Yata before them before the instant application was effectively filed, to modify the combination of Naamad with Yata to include the principles of Tyrrell of flexibly allocating physical storage based on physical storage capacity usage exceeding a threshold.
The modification would have been obvious because a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase system storage utilization rate by implementing a flexible storage manager that reduces an amount of wasted storage space (Tyrrell, paragraph 0080).
As per claim 11, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated, and Naamad further particularly teaches further comprising:
migrating a part of third storage volumes in the second storage medium to a third storage medium in a third storage pool, wherein the third storage volumes have third access attributes that are of a second medium type: (Naamad, Abstract; FIG. 3, reference numeral 135; and column 9, lines 36, to column 11, line 44, where optimizer 135 of Naamad may move (i.e., migrate) given data between tiers (e.g., from a first tier to a second tier or from a second tier to a first tier) based on tier workload and how frequently the given data is accessed (i.e., when the given data is part of a hotspot). Naamad therefore particularly teaches migrating a part of third storage volumes in the second storage medium to a third storage medium in a third storage pool, wherein the third storage volumes have third access attributes that are of a second medium type).
As per claim 12, the rejection of claim 10 is incorporated, and Yata further substantially teaches:
wherein when a third hotspot occurs in a third storage pool, the method further comprises: migrating a part of fourth storage volumes in a third storage medium in the third storage pool to the second storage medium, wherein the fourth storage volumes have fourth access attributes that are of the second storage medium type; and migrating a part of the fourth storage volumes to a fourth storage medium of the second storage medium type and in a fourth storage pool: (Yata, Abstract; FIG. 2, reference numerals 205A and 206A; and paragraph 0091-0097 and 0353-0355, where Pool A 205A of Yata is a storage pool that comprises Tier A 206A, which may comprise a set of storage devices of a same type (e.g., SSDs). The Examiner notes that SSDs by definition have attributes that are specific to an SSD storage device. While Yata does not appear to explicitly teach a third storage pool that comprises storage media that include fourth storage volumes that have fourth access attributes that are the second storage medium type, Yata does teach that the system of Yata may include other embodiments that those explicitly described in the disclosure of Yata. The Examiner notes that inclusion of a third storage pool that comprises only SSDs or SAS storage devices that have storage attribute that are the second storage medium type would be one such obvious modification. The modification would have been obvious because a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase system performance and flexibility by including a third storage pool to store data. Yata therefore substantially teaches wherein when a third hotspot occurs in a third storage pool, the method further comprises: migrating a part of fourth storage volumes in a third storage medium in the third storage pool to the second storage medium, wherein the fourth storage volumes have fourth access attributes that are of the second storage medium type; and migrating a part of the fourth storage volumes to a fourth storage medium of the second storage medium type and in a fourth storage pool).
As per claim 13, the rejection of claim 12 is incorporated, and Yata further substantially teaches:
wherein when a fourth hotspot occurs in the fourth storage pool, the method further comprises: migrating a part of fifth storage volumes in the fourth storage medium to the third storage medium, wherein the fifth storage volumes have fifth access attributes that are the second storage medium type; and migrating a part of sixth storage volumes in the fourth storage medium to a fifth storage medium, wherein the fifth storage medium is of a third storage medium type, and wherein the fifth storage medium is in a fifth storage pool: (Yata, Abstract; FIG. 2, reference numerals 205A and 206A; and paragraph 0091-0097 and 0353-0355, where Pool A 205A of Yata is a storage pool that comprises Tier A 206A, which may comprise a set of storage devices of a same type (e.g., SSDs). The Examiner notes that SSDs by definition have attributes that are specific to an SSD storage device. While Yata does not appear to explicitly teach a third storage pool that comprises storage media that include fourth storage volumes that have fourth access attributes that are the second storage medium type, Yata does teach that the system of Yata may include other embodiments that those explicitly described in the disclosure of Yata. The Examiner notes that inclusion of a third storage pool that comprises only SSDs or SAS storage devices that have storage attribute that are the second storage medium type would be one such obvious modification. The modification would have been obvious because a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase system performance and flexibility by including a third storage pool to store data. Yata therefore substantially teaches wherein when a fourth hotspot occurs in the fourth storage pool, the method further comprises: migrating a part of fifth storage volumes in the fourth storage medium to the third storage medium, wherein the fifth storage volumes have fifth access attributes that are the second storage medium type; and migrating a part of sixth storage volumes in the fourth storage medium to a fifth storage medium, wherein the fifth storage medium is of a third storage medium type, and wherein the fifth storage medium is in a fifth storage pool).
As per claim 14, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated, and Yata further substantially teaches further comprising:
migrating, when a fifth hotspot occurs in the fifth storage pool, a part of seventh storage volumes in the fifth storage medium to the fourth storage medium: (Yata, Abstract; FIG. 2, reference numerals 205A and 206A; and paragraph 0091-0097 and 0353-0355, where Pool A 205A of Yata is a storage pool that comprises Tier A 206A, which may comprise a set of storage devices of a same type (e.g., SSDs). The Examiner notes that SSDs by definition have attributes that are specific to an SSD storage device. While Yata does not appear to explicitly teach a third storage pool that comprises storage media that include fourth storage volumes that have fourth access attributes that are the second storage medium type, Yata does teach that the system of Yata may include other embodiments that those explicitly described in the disclosure of Yata. The Examiner notes that inclusion of a third storage pool that comprises only SSDs or SAS storage devices that have storage attribute that are the second storage medium type would be one such obvious modification. The modification would have been obvious because a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase system performance and flexibility by including a third storage pool to store data. Yata therefore substantially teaches migrating, when a fifth hotspot occurs in the fifth storage pool, a part of seventh storage volumes in the fifth storage medium to the fourth storage medium).
As per claim 15, the rejection of claim 14 is incorporated, and the Examiner notes that the language of claim 15 is substantially similar to the language of claim 6. Claim 15 is therefore rejected using the same references and reasoning, mutatis mutandis, as used in the above rejection of claim 6.
As per claim 16, the rejection of claim 14 is incorporated, and the Examiner notes that the language of claim 16 is substantially similar to the language of claim 7. Claim 16 is therefore rejected using the same references and reasoning, mutatis mutandis, as used in the above rejection of claim 7.
As per claim 17, the rejection of claim 14 is incorporated, and the Examiner notes that the language of claim 17 is substantially similar to the language of claim 8. Claim 17 is therefore rejected using the same references and reasoning, mutatis mutandis, as used in the above rejection of claim 8.
As per claim 18, the rejection of claim 14 is incorporated, and the Examiner notes that the language of claim 18 is substantially similar to the language of claim 9. Claim 18 is therefore rejected using the same references and reasoning, mutatis mutandis, as used in the above rejection of claim 9.
As per claim 22, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated, and Tyrrell further particularly teaches wherein the scheduling node is further configured to:
determine, from within the storage system, one or more strongly-fluctuating storage volumes having a physical space occupation variation or a bandwidth variation exceeding a threshold variation in a specified time interval; and evenly distribute the one or more strongly-fluctuating storage volumes to all storage pools in the storage system based on a quantity of the strongly-fluctuating storage volumes: (Tyrrell, Abstract; FIG. 15; FIG. 16; FIG. 17; and paragraphs 0084-0091, where the Flexible Storage Manager (FSM) of Tyrrell monitors physical space usage (i.e., physical space occupation) of a thinly provisioned pool of storage devices (i.e., the first storage pool). In response to the monitored physical space usage reaching or exceeding a threshold level, additional physical space is provisioned to the thinly provisioned pool of storage devices so that a user may continue to store data to the thinly provisioned pool of storage devices. The Examiner notes that the monitored physical space usage by definition corresponds to a total value (i.e., sum) of physical space usage within storage devices of the thinly provisioned pool. In order to balance load, the FSM of Tyrrell may also migrate data among storage volumes. Tyrrell therefore particularly teaches determine, from within the storage system, one or more strongly-fluctuating storage volumes having a physical space occupation variation or a bandwidth variation exceeding a threshold variation in a specified time interval; and evenly distribute the one or more strongly-fluctuating storage volumes to all storage pools in the storage system based on a quantity of the strongly-fluctuating storage volumes).
As per claim 23, Yata substantially teaches a computer program product comprising program instructions that, when executed by a computing device cluster, cause the computing device cluster to:
make a first determination that a first hotspot has occurred in a first storage pool comprising a first storage medium of a first storage medium type; wherein the first storage volumes have first access attributes that are of the first storage medium type, and wherein the second storage medium is of a second storage medium type: (Yata, Abstract; FIG. 2, reference numerals 205A and 206A; and paragraph 0091-0097, where Pool A 205A of Yata is a storage pool that comprises Tier A 206A, which may comprise a set of storage devices of a same type (e.g., SSDs). The Examiner notes that SSDs by definition have attributes that are specific to an SSD storage device. The system of Yata may move data between storage pools based on whether given data of a first storage pool has reached a specific threshold (i.e., has been determined to be a hotspot) such that the given data may be migrated between the storage pools. Yata therefore substantially teaches make a first determination that a first hotspot has occurred in a first storage pool comprising a first storage medium of a first storage medium type; wherein the first storage volumes have first access attributes that are of the first storage medium type, and wherein the second storage medium is of a second storage medium type);
make a second determination that a second hotspot has occurred in the second storage pool; wherein the second storage volumes have second access attributes that are of the first storage medium type: (Yata, Abstract; FIG. 2, reference numerals 205B, 206C, 207D, and 207E; and paragraphs 0091-0097, where Pool B 205B of Yata is a second storage pool comprised of Tier C 206C, which may be comprised of a set of storage devices of a same type (e.g., Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) storage) that are store volumes on pool volume D 207D and pool volume F 207E (i.e., a set of second storage volumes). The Examiner notes that Tier C 206C may comprise the same or different storage devices, which means that Tier C 206C may comprise storage devices that have different storage devices attributes (i.e., storage volumes whose second access attributes are the first storage medium type and third storage volumes whose access attributes are of a second storage medium type). The Examiner notes that SAS storage by definition has attributes that are specific to an SAS storage device, and SSDs have different storage attributes that are specific to SAS storage devices. Yata therefore substantially teaches make a second determination that a second hotspot has occurred in the second storage pool; wherein the second storage volumes have second access attributes that are of the first storage medium type).
Yata does not appear to explicitly teach the other limitations of this claim beyond those taught above; however, in an analogous art, Naamad teaches data storage system modeling using application service level objectives and specified workload limits for storage tiers.
As per claim 23, Naamad particularly teaches:
migrate, in response to the first determination, a part of first storage volumes in the first storage medium to a second storage medium in a second storage pool, and migrate, in response to the second determination, a part of second storage volumes in the second storage medium to the first storage medium: (Naamad, Abstract; FIG. 3, reference numeral 135; and column 9, lines 36, to column 11, line 44, where optimizer 135 of Naamad may move (i.e., migrate) given data between tiers (e.g., from a first tier to a second tier or from a second tier to a first tier) based on tier workload and how frequently the given data is accessed (i.e., when the given data is part of a hotspot). Naamad therefore particularly teaches migrate, in response to the first determination, a part of first storage volumes in the first storage medium to a second storage medium in a second storage pool, and migrate, in response to the second determination, a part of second storage volumes in the second storage medium to the first storage medium).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Naamad and Yata before them before the instant application was effectively filed, to modify the system of Yata to include the principles of Naamad of migration between storage based on workload and data access frequency.
The modification would have been obvious because a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase system performance by implementing storage management techniques that classify storage tiers based on expected average response time to provide more effective, efficient, and better optimization of storage resource usage (Naamad, column 21, lines 6-26).
Neither Yata nor Naamad appears to explicitly teach the other limitations of this claim beyond those taught above; however, in an analogous art, Tyrrell teaches system and method for implementing a flexible storage manager with threshold control.
As per claim 23, Tyrrell particularly teaches:
wherein the first hotspot means that a virtual capacity, physical space occupation, or a total bandwidth of the first storage pool exceeds a threshold, wherein the physical space occupation is a first sum of occupied physical space in all storage volumes in the first storage pool, and wherein the total bandwidth is a second sum of bandwidths of all the storage volumes: (Tyrrell, Abstract; FIG. 15; FIG. 16; FIG. 17; and paragraphs 0084-0091, where the Flexible Storage Manager (FSM) of Tyrrell monitors physical space usage (i.e., physical space occupation) of a thinly provisioned pool of storage devices (i.e., the first storage pool). In response to the monitored physical space usage reaching or exceeding a threshold level, additional physical space is provisioned to the thinly provisioned pool of storage devices so that a user may continue to store data to the thinly provisioned pool of storage devices. The Examiner notes that the monitored physical space usage by definition corresponds to a total value (i.e., sum) of physical space usage within storage devices of the thinly provisioned pool. Tyrrell therefore particularly teaches wherein the first hotspot means that a virtual capacity, physical space occupation, or a total bandwidth of the first storage pool exceeds a threshold, wherein the physical space occupation is a first sum of occupied physical space in all storage volumes in the first storage pool, and wherein the total bandwidth is a second sum of bandwidths of all the storage volumes).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Tyrrell, Naamad, and Yata before them before the instant application was effectively filed, to modify the combination of Naamad with Yata to include the principles of Tyrrell of flexibly allocating physical storage based on physical storage capacity usage exceeding a threshold.
The modification would have been obvious because a person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to increase system storage utilization rate by implementing a flexible storage manager that reduces an amount of wasted storage space (Tyrrell, paragraph 0080).
Response to Arguments
In the Remarks dated 7/1/2026, Applicant substantially argues:
Neither Yata nor Naamad, alone or in combination, teaches or suggests the claimed feature of “wherein the first hotspot means that a virtual capacity, physical space occupation, or a total bandwidth of the first storage pool exceeds a threshold, wherein the physical space occupation is a first sum of occupied physical space in all storage volumes in the first storage pool, and wherein the total bandwidth is a second sum of bandwidths of the storage volumes” of the amended claims.
Applicant’s arguments dated 7/1/2026 have been fully considered, but they are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection that were necessitated by Applicant’s amendments to the claims. The Examiner notes that the new Tyrrell reference, in combination with the combination of Naamad with Yata, clearly teaches the limitations added via amendment. The Examiner further notes that the new grounds of rejection were necessitated by Applicant’s amendments to the claims.
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Daniel C. Chappell whose telephone number is (571)272-5003. The examiner can normally be reached 1000-1800, Eastern.
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, Jared I. Rutz can be reached at (571)272-5535. 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.
Daniel C. Chappell
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2135
/Daniel C. Chappell/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2135
Prosecution Insights