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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on November 5th, 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
Claims 1, 6-12, and 14-16 of this application is patentably indistinct from claims 1-4 and 6-11 of Application No. 18/758,558. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.78(f), when two or more applications filed by the same applicant or assignee contain patentably indistinct claims, elimination of such claims from all but one application may be required in the absence of good and sufficient reason for their retention during pendency in more than one application. Applicant is required to either cancel the patentably indistinct claims from all but one application or maintain a clear line of demarcation between the applications. See MPEP § 822.
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.
The subject matter claimed in the instant application is fully disclosed in the U.S Application No. 18/758,558 and is covered by the application since the co-pending application and instant application are claiming common subject matters, as follows:
Instant Application: U.S Application No. 19/208,832 (hereinafter as “ARORA 832”)
Claims 1 and 9
U.S Application No. 18/758,558 (hereinafter as “ARORA 558”)
Claim 1
1. A data processing unit (DPU) comprising: a non-transitory storage device; and a data deduplication engine coupled to the non-transitory storage device comprising at least a processor, wherein the data deduplication engine is to:
receive, from an initiating device, a request for a data write operation, wherein the data write operation comprises one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries associated with the data write operation;
determine a destination write location for the data write operation, wherein the destination write location is associated with one or more deduplication parameters;
access one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location;
9. The DPU according to Claim 1, wherein the data deduplication engine is configured to access the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location in the absence of a transmission to the destination write location.
preclude writing of duplicate data entries to the destination write location based on a comparison between the one or more data identifiers of the data write operation and the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location.
1. A data processing unit (DPU) comprising: a non-transitory storage device; and a data deduplication engine coupled to the non-transitory storage device comprising at least a processor, wherein the data deduplication engine is configured to:
receive, from an initiating device, a request for a data write operation, wherein the request for the data write operation comprises one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries for writing to a destination write location
access one or more stored data identifiers in the non-transitory storage device indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location in an absence of a transmission between the destination write location and the initiating device;
preclude writing of duplicate data entries to the destination write location based on a comparison between the one or more data identifiers of the request for the data write operation and the one or more stored data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location.
Claims 1 and 9 are provisionally rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of co-pending Application No. 18/758,558 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1 and 9 of the instant application is obvious variation of claim 1 of ARORA 558 because claim 1 of the instant application is alternate variations than claim 1 of ARORA 558, and the limitation in ARORA 558 does not teach away from the scope of the claimed invention in claim 1 of the instant application. For example, U.S Patent Application No. 18/758,558 recites almost identical claim with the instant application except the bolded portion from the instant application that recites, “receive, from an initiating device, a request for a data write operation, wherein the data write operation: is associated with a destination write location, and comprises one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries for writing to the destination write location…the data deduplication engine is configured to access the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location in the absence of a transmission to the destination write location” and “determine a destination write location for the data write operation, wherein the destination write location is associated with one or more deduplication parameters”.
The claimed difference would be obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, because the instant claims are merely broader and/or alternate variations of the claim recited in the parent application. Because the instant claims merely add/modify the additional elements from the set of elements and functions claimed in the parent application, such modification would be readily apparent to a person of the ordinary skill.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to omit/add/modify the additional element of claim 1 of ARORA 558 to arrive at claims 1 and 9 of the instant application because the person would have realized that the remaining element would perform the same function as before. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the instant claims to adjust the write operation to include a alternative variations of “receive, from an initiating device, a request for a data write operation, wherein the data write operation: is associated with a destination write location, and comprises one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries for writing to the destination write location…the data deduplication engine is configured to access the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location in the absence of a transmission to the destination write location” and “determine a destination write location for the data write operation, wherein the destination write location is associated with one or more deduplication parameters” in performing the same set of function and steps as previously presented.
This is a provisional non-statutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
U.S Application No. 19/208,832 (hereinafter as “ARORA 832”)
Claim 6
Instant Application: 18/758,558 (hereinafter as “ARORA 558”)
Claim 2
6. The DPU according to Claim 1, wherein the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location are stored locally by the DPU.
2. The DPU according to Claim 1, wherein the one or more stored data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location are stored locally by the DPU.
Claim 6 is dependent on claim 1 recite similar limitations to claim 2 of ARORA 558, therefore, claim 6 is rejected for similar reasons as recited above.
Instant Application: U.S Application No. 19/208,832 (hereinafter as “ARORA 832”)
Claim 7
U.S Application No. 18/758,558 (hereinafter as “ARORA 558”)
Claim 3
7. The DPU according to Claim 1, wherein, in accessing the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location, the data deduplication engine is to access a data repository storing the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location.
3. The DPU according to Claim 1, wherein, in accessing the one or more stored data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location, the data deduplication engine is configured to access a data repository storing the one or more stored data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location.
Claim 7 is dependent on claim 1 recite similar limitations to claim 3 of ARORA 558, therefore, claim 7 is rejected for similar reasons as recited above.
Instant Application: U.S Application No. 19/208,832 (hereinafter as “ARORA 832”)
Claim 8
U.S Application No. 18/758,558 (hereinafter as “ARORA 558”)
Claim 4
8. The DPU according to Claim 7, wherein the data repository is distinct from the destination write location.
4. The DPU according to Claim 3, wherein the data repository is distinct from the destination write location.
Claim 8 is dependent on claim 7 which is further dependent on claim 1 and recite similar limitations to claim 4 of ARORA 558, therefore, claim 8 is rejected for similar reasons as recited above.
Instant Application: U.S Application No. 19/208,832 (hereinafter as “ARORA 832”)
Claim 10
U.S Application No. 18/758,558 (hereinafter as “ARORA 558”)
Claim 6
10. The DPU according to Claim 1, wherein the data deduplication engine is further to: compare the one or more data identifiers of the data write operation and the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location; and determine one or more data identifiers of the data write operation that are absent from the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location.
6. The DPU according to Claim 1, wherein the data deduplication engine is further configured to: compare the one or more data identifiers of the request for the data write operation and the one or more stored data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location; and determine one or more data identifiers of the request for the data write operation that are absent from the one or more stored data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location.
Claim 10 is dependent on claim 1 recite similar limitations to claim 6 of ARORA 558, therefore, claim 10 is rejected for similar reasons as recited above.
Instant Application: U.S Application No. 19/208,832 (hereinafter as “ARORA 832”)
Claim 11
U.S Application No. 18/758,558 (hereinafter as “ARORA 558”)
Claim 7
11. The DPU according to Claim 10, wherein the data deduplication engine is further to: transmit the one or more absent data identifiers to the initiating device; receive data entries associated with the one or more absent data identifiers; and cause writing of the received data entries of the one or more absent data identifiers to the destination write location.
The DPU according to Claim 6, wherein the data deduplication engine is further configured to: transmit the one or more absent data identifiers to the initiating device; receive data entries associated with the one or more absent data identifiers; and cause writing of the received data entries of the one or more absent data identifiers to the destination write location.
Claim 11 is dependent on claim 10 which is further dependent on claim 1 recite similar limitations to claim 7 of ARORA 558, therefore, claim 11 is rejected for similar reasons as recited above.
Instant Application: U.S Application No. 19/208,832 (hereinafter as “ARORA 832”)
Claim 12
U.S Application No. 18/758,558 (hereinafter as “ARORA 558”)
Claim 8
12. The DPU according to Claim 11, wherein a number of the one or more data identifiers of the data write operation is greater than a number of the absent data identifiers transmitted to the initiating device.
8. The DPU according to Claim 7, wherein a number of the one or more data identifiers of the request for the data write operation is greater than a number of the absent data identifiers transmitted to the initiating device.
Claim 12 is dependent on claim 11 which is dependent on claim 10 which is further dependent on claim 1 and recite similar limitations to claim 8 of ARORA 558, therefore, claim 12 is rejected for similar reasons as recited above.
Instant Application: 19/208,832 (hereinafter as “ARORA 832”)
Claim 14
U.S Application No. 18/758,558 (hereinafter as “ARORA 558”)
Claim 9
14. The DPU according to Claim 1, wherein the one or more data identifiers comprise Secure Hash Algorithms (SHAs).
9. The DPU according to Claim 1, wherein the one or more data identifiers comprise Secure Hash Algorithms (SHAs).
Claim 14 is dependent on claim 1 recite similar limitations to claim 9 of ARORA 558, therefore, claim 14 is rejected for similar reasons as recited above.
Instant Application: U.S Application No. 19/208,832 (hereinafter as “ARORA 832”)
Claim 15
U.S Application No. 18/758,558 (hereinafter as “ARORA 558”)
Claim 10
15. The DPU according to Claim 1, wherein the data deduplication engine is to preclude writing of duplicate data entries to the destination write location in the absence of accessing data stored by the destination write location.
10. The DPU according to Claim 1, wherein the data deduplication engine is configured to preclude writing of duplicate data entries to the destination write location in the absence of accessing data stored by the destination write location.
Claim 15 is dependent on claim 1 recite similar limitations to claim 10 of ARORA 558, therefore, claim 15 is rejected for similar reasons as recited above.
Instant Application: U.S Application No. 19/208,832 (hereinafter as “ARORA 832”)
Claim 16
U.S Application No. 18/758,558 (hereinafter as “ARORA 558”)
Claim 11
16. A computer-implemented method comprising:
receiving, by a data processing unit (DPU) from an initiating device, a request for a data write operation, wherein the data write operation comprises one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries associated with the data write operation;
determining, by the DPU, a destination write location for the data write operation, wherein the destination write location is associated with one or more deduplication parameters;
accessing, by the DPU, one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location; and
precluding, by the DPU, writing of duplicate data entries to the destination write location based on a comparison between the one or more data identifiers of the data write operation and the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location.
11. A computer-implemented method comprising:
receiving, by a data processing unit (DPU) from an initiating device, a request for a data write operation, wherein the request for the data write operation comprises one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries for writing to a destination write location;
accessing, by the DPU, one or more stored data identifiers in a non-transitory storage device of the DPU indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location in an absence of a transmission between the destination write location and the initiating device;
precluding, by the DPU, writing of duplicate data entries to the destination write location based on a comparison between the one or more data identifiers of the request for the data write operation and the one or more stored data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location.
Claim 16 provisionally rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 11 of co-pending Application No. 18/758,558 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 16 of the instant application is obvious variation of claim 11 of ARORA 558 because claim 16 of the instant application is alternative variation than claim 11 of ARORA 558, and the limitation in ARORA 558 does not teach away from the scope of the claimed invention in claim 16 of the instant application. For example, U.S Patent Application No. 18/758,558 recites almost identical claims with the instant application except the bolded portion from the instant application that recites, “receiving, by a data processing unit (DPU) from an initiating device, a request for a data write operation, wherein the request for the data write operation comprises one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries for writing to a destination write location” and “accessing, by the DPU, one or more stored data identifiers in a non-transitory storage device of the DPU indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location in an absence of a transmission between the destination write location and the initiating device”.
The claimed difference would be obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art, because the instant claims are merely broader and/or alternate variations of the claim recited in the parent application. Because the instant claims merely add/modify the additional elements from the set of elements and functions claimed in the parent application, such modification would be readily apparent to a person of the ordinary skill.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to omit/add/modify the additional element of claim 11 of ARORA 558 to arrive at claim 16 of the instant application because the person would have realized that the remaining element would perform the same function as before. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the instant claims to adjust the write operation to include a alternative variation of “receiving, by a data processing unit (DPU) from an initiating device, a request for a data write operation, wherein the request for the data write operation comprises one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries for writing to a destination write location” and “accessing, by the DPU, one or more stored data identifiers in a non-transitory storage device of the DPU indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location in an absence of a transmission between the destination write location and the initiating device” in performing the same set of function and steps as previously presented.
This is a provisional non-statutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, 7, 10, 15, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S Patent Application Publication 2023/0333736 issued to BORIS GLIMCHER (hereinafter as "Glimcher").
Regarding claim 1, Glimcher teaches a data processing unit (DPU) comprising (Glimcher: [0027]; Turning to FIG. 1 , a block diagram illustrating a system in accordance with an embodiment is shown. The system shown in FIG. 1 may facilitate performance of workloads (e.g., computer-implemented workloads performed by executing computing instructions with at least one processor of one or more data processing systems). The system may include to data processing system 100
[0029]; To provide the computer implemented services, data processing system 100 may include various hardware resources such as compute resources 102, local storage 104, network interface controller (NIC) 110, and bus 106. Compute resources 102 may include hardware devices such as processors, memory modules, etc. NIC 110 may facilitate communication with other remote devices):
a non-transitory storage device (Glimcher: [0025]; A non-transitory media may include instructions that when executed by a processor cause the computer-implemented method to be performed); and
a data deduplication engine coupled to the non-transitory storage device comprising at least a processor, wherein the data deduplication engine is to (Glimcher: [0013]; the NIC and the storage devices may implement a distributed deduplication process. [0025]-[0026]; A non-transitory media may include instructions that when executed by a processor cause the computer-implemented method to be performed. A data processing system may include the non-transitory media and a processor (e.g., of a NIC), and may perform the computer-implemented method. [0033]; To manage data storage in a data processing system, NIC 110 may perform deduplication for data to be stored in an emulated storage that it presents to other device):
receive, from an initiating device, a request for a data write operation, wherein the data write operation comprises one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries associated with the data write operation (Glimcher: [0015]; The method may include obtaining, by a Network Interface Controller (NIC) of a data processing system, data for storage; segmenting, by the NIC, the data into chunks; obtaining, by the NIC, fingerprints for the chunks; [0030]; Consequently, compute resources 102 may direct access requests (e.g., storage, read, delete) for the emulated storage to NIC 110 via bus 106. [0034]; For example, to deduplicate data, the system of FIG. 1 may (i) segment the data into chunks, (ii) obtain fingerprints for the chunks. [0051]; In the context of data storage, the access request may include the data to be stored in the emulated storage);
determine a destination write location for the data write operation (Glimcher: [0013]; The fingerprints may be provided to the storage which may check the fingerprints against fingerprints of already stored chunks. The storage may request the chunks corresponding to the fingerprints that did not match any fingerprints of the already stored chunks. The NIC may provide only those requested chunks to the storage before discarding all of the chunks. [0030]-[0032]; Consequently, compute resources 102 may direct access requests (e.g., storage, read, delete) for the emulated storage to NIC 110 via bus 106. To implement the emulated storage, NIC 110 may use the storage resources of network storage 130 (and/or other remote or local storage devices operably connected to it)…storing data in the emulated storage device may consume network bandwidth if the to-be-stored data is transmitted by NIC 110 to network storage 130 via communication system 120), wherein the destination write location is associated with one or more deduplication parameters (Glimcher: [0019]; determining communication characteristics (e.g., latency, available bandwidth, maximum transmission unit size, etc.) of a connection between the NIC and the storage via the network; and identifying a batch size based on the communication characteristics. Providing the batches may include obtaining a batch of the batches based on the identified batch size. [0021]; Obtaining the fingerprints may include obtaining hashes for the chunks, the hashes being used as the fingerprints, and a hash function used to obtain the hashes being substantially collision free. [0031]; In such a scenario, network storage 130 may store fingerprints and/or metadata (e.g., reference counts). To identify whether a chunk may need to be stored, network storage 130 may receive a corresponding fingerprint, compare it to fingerprints of stored chunks. Consequently, the communication bandwidth used for data storage may be reduced when compared to relying on network storage 130 to perform all of the deduplication process, including fingerprint generation);
access one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location (Glimcher: [0013]; To improve the quantity of data that may be stored in the storage devices, the NIC and the storage devices may implement a distributed deduplication process. The NIC may segment data into chunks and obtain fingerprints of the chunks. The fingerprints may be provided to the storage which may check the fingerprints against fingerprints of already stored chunks. [0035]-[0036]; To identify whether a chunk may need to be stored, network storage 130 may receive a corresponding fingerprint, compare it to fingerprints of stored chunks, and request the chunk if the fingerprint does not match the fingerprints of stored chunks. Network storage 130 may also maintain a copy of the metadata (e.g., reference counts) to identify when stored chunks are no longer needed (e.g., for reconstruction)); and
preclude writing of duplicate data entries to the destination write location based on a comparison between the one or more data identifiers of the data write operation and the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location (Glimcher: [0013]; The NIC may segment data into chunks and obtain fingerprints of the chunks. The fingerprints may be provided to the storage which may check the fingerprints against fingerprints of already stored chunks. The storage may request the chunks corresponding to the fingerprints that did not match any fingerprints of the already stored chunks. The NIC may provide only those requested chunks to the storage before discarding all of the chunks. [0015]; providing, by the NIC, batches of the fingerprints to a storage; providing, by the NIC and to the storage for storage, a first portion of the chunks corresponding to a first portion of the fingerprints that are new; and discarding, by the NIC, the chunks without providing to the storage a second portion of the chunks corresponding to a second portion of the fingerprints that are not new. [0030]; Consequently, compute resources 102 may direct access requests (e.g., storage, read, delete) for the emulated storage to NIC 110 via bus 106).
Regarding claim 7, Glimcher teaches in accessing the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location, the data deduplication engine is to access a data repository storing the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location (Glimcher: [0013]; The fingerprints may be provided to the storage which may check the fingerprints against fingerprints of already stored chunks. The storage may request the chunks corresponding to the fingerprints that did not match any fingerprints of the already stored chunks. The NIC may provide only those requested chunks to the storage before discarding all of the chunks. [0035]; In such a scenario, network storage 130 may store fingerprints and/or metadata (e.g., reference counts). To identify whether a chunk may need to be stored, network storage 130 may receive a corresponding fingerprint, compare it to fingerprints of stored chunks, and request the chunk if the fingerprint does not match the fingerprints of stored chunks. [0080]; The requests may be obtained by comparing the fingerprints from the batch to a fingerprint cache in which fingerprints of stored chunks are stored).
Regarding claim 10, Glimcher teaches the data deduplication engine is further to: compare the one or more data identifiers of the data write operation and the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location (Glimcher: [0013]; The NIC may segment data into chunks and obtain fingerprints of the chunks. The fingerprints may be provided to the storage which may check the fingerprints against fingerprints of already stored chunks. The storage may request the chunks corresponding to the fingerprints that did not match any fingerprints of the already stored chunks. The NIC may provide only those requested chunks to the storage before discarding all of the chunks. [0015]; providing, by the NIC, batches of the fingerprints to a storage; providing, by the NIC and to the storage for storage, a first portion of the chunks corresponding to a first portion of the fingerprints that are new; and discarding, by the NIC, the chunks without providing to the storage a second portion of the chunks corresponding to a second portion of the fingerprints that are not new. [0030]; Consequently, compute resources 102 may direct access requests (e.g., storage, read, delete) for the emulated storage to NIC 110 via bus 106); and
determine one or more data identifiers of the data write operation that are absent from the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location (Glimcher: [0013]; The NIC may segment data into chunks and obtain fingerprints of the chunks. The fingerprints may be provided to the storage which may check the fingerprints against fingerprints of already stored chunks. The storage may request the chunks corresponding to the fingerprints that did not match any fingerprints of the already stored chunks. The NIC may provide only those requested chunks to the storage before discarding all of the chunks. [0015]; providing, by the NIC, batches of the fingerprints to a storage; providing, by the NIC and to the storage for storage, a first portion of the chunks corresponding to a first portion of the fingerprints that are new; and discarding, by the NIC, the chunks without providing to the storage a second portion of the chunks corresponding to a second portion of the fingerprints that are not new. [0030]; Consequently, compute resources 102 may direct access requests (e.g., storage, read, delete) for the emulated storage to NIC 110 via bus 106).
Regarding claim 15, Glimcher teaches the data deduplication engine is to preclude writing of duplicate data entries to the destination write location in the absence of accessing data stored by the destination write location (Glimcher: [0013]; The NIC may segment data into chunks and obtain fingerprints of the chunks. The fingerprints may be provided to the storage which may check the fingerprints against fingerprints of already stored chunks. The storage may request the chunks corresponding to the fingerprints that did not match any fingerprints of the already stored chunks. The NIC may provide only those requested chunks to the storage before discarding all of the chunks. [0015]; providing, by the NIC, batches of the fingerprints to a storage; providing, by the NIC and to the storage for storage, a first portion of the chunks corresponding to a first portion of the fingerprints that are new; and discarding, by the NIC, the chunks without providing to the storage a second portion of the chunks corresponding to a second portion of the fingerprints that are not new. [0030]; Consequently, compute resources 102 may direct access requests (e.g., storage, read, delete) for the emulated storage to NIC 110 via bus 106).
Regarding claim 16, Glimcher teaches a computer-implemented method comprising: receiving, by a data processing unit (DPU) from an initiating device (Glimcher: [0027]; Turning to FIG. 1 , a block diagram illustrating a system in accordance with an embodiment is shown. The system shown in FIG. 1 may facilitate performance of workloads (e.g., computer-implemented workloads performed by executing computing instructions with at least one processor of one or more data processing systems). The system may include to data processing system 100
[0029]-[0030]; To provide the computer implemented services, data processing system 100 may include various hardware resources such as compute resources 102, local storage 104, network interface controller (NIC) 110, and bus 106. Compute resources 102 may include hardware devices such as processors, memory modules, etc. NIC 110 may facilitate communication with other remote devices. Consequently, compute resources 102 may direct access requests (e.g., storage, read, delete) for the emulated storage to NIC 110 via bus 106. [0048]; Any of data processing system 100, NIC 110, and network storage 130 may be implemented with a computing device such as a host or server, a personal computer),
a request for a data write operation, wherein the data write operation comprises one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries associated with the data write operation (Glimcher: [0015]; The method may include obtaining, by a Network Interface Controller (NIC) of a data processing system, data for storage; segmenting, by the NIC, the data into chunks; obtaining, by the NIC, fingerprints for the chunks; [0030]; Consequently, compute resources 102 may direct access requests (e.g., storage, read, delete) for the emulated storage to NIC 110 via bus 106. [0034]; For example, to deduplicate data, the system of FIG. 1 may (i) segment the data into chunks, (ii) obtain fingerprints for the chunks. [0051]; In the context of data storage, the access request may include the data to be stored in the emulated storage);
determining, a destination write location for the data write operation (Glimcher: [0013]; The fingerprints may be provided to the storage which may check the fingerprints against fingerprints of already stored chunks. The storage may request the chunks corresponding to the fingerprints that did not match any fingerprints of the already stored chunks. The NIC may provide only those requested chunks to the storage before discarding all of the chunks. [0030]-[0032]; Consequently, compute resources 102 may direct access requests (e.g., storage, read, delete) for the emulated storage to NIC 110 via bus 106. To implement the emulated storage, NIC 110 may use the storage resources of network storage 130 (and/or other remote or local storage devices operably connected to it)…storing data in the emulated storage device may consume network bandwidth if the to-be-stored data is transmitted by NIC 110 to network storage 130 via communication system 120), wherein
the destination write location is associated with one or more deduplication parameters (Glimcher: [0019]; determining communication characteristics (e.g., latency, available bandwidth, maximum transmission unit size, etc.) of a connection between the NIC and the storage via the network; and identifying a batch size based on the communication characteristics. Providing the batches may include obtaining a batch of the batches based on the identified batch size. [0021]; Obtaining the fingerprints may include obtaining hashes for the chunks, the hashes being used as the fingerprints, and a hash function used to obtain the hashes being substantially collision free. [0031]; In such a scenario, network storage 130 may store fingerprints and/or metadata (e.g., reference counts). To identify whether a chunk may need to be stored, network storage 130 may receive a corresponding fingerprint, compare it to fingerprints of stored chunks. Consequently, the communication bandwidth used for data storage may be reduced when compared to relying on network storage 130 to perform all of the deduplication process, including fingerprint generation);
accessing, one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location (Glimcher: [0013]; To improve the quantity of data that may be stored in the storage devices, the NIC and the storage devices may implement a distributed deduplication process. The NIC may segment data into chunks and obtain fingerprints of the chunks. The fingerprints may be provided to the storage which may check the fingerprints against fingerprints of already stored chunks. [0035]-[0036]; To identify whether a chunk may need to be stored, network storage 130 may receive a corresponding fingerprint, compare it to fingerprints of stored chunks, and request the chunk if the fingerprint does not match the fingerprints of stored chunks. Network storage 130 may also maintain a copy of the metadata (e.g., reference counts) to identify when stored chunks are no longer needed (e.g., for reconstruction)); and
precluding, writing of duplicate data entries to the destination write location based on a comparison between the one or more data identifiers of the data write operation and the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location (Glimcher: [0013]; The NIC may segment data into chunks and obtain fingerprints of the chunks. The fingerprints may be provided to the storage which may check the fingerprints against fingerprints of already stored chunks. The storage may request the chunks corresponding to the fingerprints that did not match any fingerprints of the already stored chunks. The NIC may provide only those requested chunks to the storage before discarding all of the chunks. [0015]; providing, by the NIC, batches of the fingerprints to a storage; providing, by the NIC and to the storage for storage, a first portion of the chunks corresponding to a first portion of the fingerprints that are new; and discarding, by the NIC, the chunks without providing to the storage a second portion of the chunks corresponding to a second portion of the fingerprints that are not new. [0030]; Consequently, compute resources 102 may direct access requests (e.g., storage, read, delete) for the emulated storage to NIC 110 via bus 106).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 2-5, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Patent Application Publication 2023/0333736 issued to BORIS GLIMCHER (hereinafter as "Glimcher") in view of U.S Patent 11,520,744 issued to Rajimwale et al. (hereinafter as "Rajimwale").
Regarding claim 2, Glimcher teaches claimed invention substantially as claimed, however, Glimcher does not explicitly teach the one or more deduplication parameters are indicative of a memory system type of the destination write location.
Rajimwale teaches the one or more deduplication parameters are indicative of a memory system type of the destination write location (Rajimwale: Col 2, lines 36-39; Accordingly, the system may ensure (e.g. to an extent determined by a predefined distribution policy) that data originating from a particular data source is stored together on the same deduplication domain. Col 11, lines 5-12; Accordingly, in some embodiments, the data source identifier may be provided to the clustered storage system 180 at the time of a backup file write request. Accordingly, the file write may be performed by the clustered storage system 180 directly to a particular deduplication domain (e.g. storage node) via the backup component 150. Col 12, lines 11-15; When a backup file is created (e.g. via a write operation), the clustered storage system may use the data source identifier to select a destination deduplication domain 470 for the backup file using a mapping that associates backup files to particular deduplication domains).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the teachings of Glimcher with the teachings of Rajimwale because one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination of utilizing a data source identifier to store in a manner to improve the performance of the system (See Rajimwale: Col 14, lines 17-19). In addition, the references (Glimcher and Rajimwale) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor as Glimcher and Rajimwale are directed to performing deduplications and avoid performing storing multiple copies of the same data to save storage.
Regarding claim 3, the modification of GLIMCHER and Rajimwale teaches claimed invention substantially as claimed, and Rajimwale further teaches the data deduplication engine is to determine, based on the one or more deduplication parameters, that the destination write location comprises a file system memory type (Rajimwale: Col 10, lines 58-65; As described, the clustered storage system 180 may receive the data source identifier in various ways. In some embodiments, the data source identifier may be received as an input to an operation that writes ( or creates) a backup file to the clustered storage system 180. For example, the input may include the data source identifier as an argument to an operation (e.g. function, method, class, etc.) that initiates the creation of a backup file to the clustered storage system 180. Col 11, lines 10-15; Accordingly, the file write may be performed by the clustered storage system 180 directly to a particular deduplication domain (e.g. storage 10 node) via the backup component 150. In some embodiments, the data source identifier may be received directly to a file system or namespace managed by the clustered storage system 180).
Regarding claim 4, GLIMCHER teaches claimed invention substantially as claimed, however, GLIMCHER does not explicitly teach the request for the data write operation comprises the one or more deduplication parameters associated with the destination write location.
Rajimwale teaches the request for the data write operation comprises the one or more deduplication parameters associated with the destination write location (Rajimwale: Col 10, lines 58-65; As described, the clustered storage system 180 may receive the data source identifier in various ways. In some embodiments, the data source identifier may be received as an input to an operation that writes ( or creates) a backup file to the clustered storage system 180. For example, the input may include the data source identifier as an argument to an operation (e.g. function, method, class, etc.) that initiates the creation of a backup file to the clustered storage system 180. Col 12, lines 11-15; When a backup file is created (e.g. via a write operation), the clustered storage system may use the data source identifier to select a destination deduplication domain 470 for the backup file using a mapping that associates backup files to particular deduplication domains. Col 13, lines 11-15; For example, the request may include a request to write the first backup file to the clustered storage system. In one embodiment, the request may include a first data source identifier associated with the received data).
Regarding claim 5, GLIMCHER teaches the data deduplication engine is to further preclude writing of duplicate data entries to the destination write location based at least in part on the one or more deduplication parameters associated with the destination write location (Glimcher: [0013]; The NIC may segment data into chunks and obtain fingerprints of the chunks. The fingerprints may be provided to the storage which may check the fingerprints against fingerprints of already stored chunks. The storage may request the chunks corresponding to the fingerprints that did not match any fingerprints of the already stored chunks. The NIC may provide only those requested chunks to the storage before discarding all of the chunks. [0015]; providing, by the NIC, batches of the fingerprints to a storage; providing, by the NIC and to the storage for storage, a first portion of the chunks corresponding to a first portion of the fingerprints that are new; and discarding, by the NIC, the chunks without providing to the storage a second portion of the chunks corresponding to a second portion of the fingerprints that are not new. [0030]; Consequently, compute resources 102 may direct access requests (e.g., storage, read, delete) for the emulated storage to NIC 110 via bus 106).
However, GLIMCHER does not explicitly teach based at least in part on the one or more deduplication parameters associated with the destination write location.
Rajimwale teaches based at least in part on the one or more deduplication parameters associated with the destination write location (Rajimwale: Col 12, lines 11-15; When a backup file is created (e.g. via a write operation), the clustered storage system may use the data source identifier to select a destination deduplication domain 470 for the backup file using a mapping that associates backup files to particular deduplication domains. Col 13, lines 11-15; For example, the request may include a request to write the first backup file to the clustered storage system. In one embodiment, the request may include a first data source identifier associated with the received data).
Regarding claim 17, GLIMCHER teaches claimed invention substantially as claimed, however, GLIMCHER does not explicitly teach the one or more deduplication parameters are indicative of a memory system type of the destination write location.
Rajimwale teaches the one or more deduplication parameters are indicative of a memory system type of the destination write location (Rajimwale: Col 2, lines 36-39; Accordingly, the system may ensure (e.g. to an extent determined by a predefined distribution policy) that data originating from a particular data source is stored together on the same deduplication domain. Col 11, lines 5-12; Accordingly, in some embodiments, the data source identifier may be provided to the clustered storage system 180 at the time of a backup file write request. Accordingly, the file write may be performed by the clustered storage system 180 directly to a particular deduplication domain (e.g. storage node) via the backup component 150. Col 12, lines 11-15; When a backup file is created (e.g. via a write operation), the clustered storage system may use the data source identifier to select a destination deduplication domain 470 for the backup file using a mapping that associates backup files to particular deduplication domains).
Regarding claim 18, GLIMCHER and Rajimwale teaches claimed invention substantially as claimed, and Rajimwale further teaches determining, based on the one or more deduplication parameters, that the destination write location comprises a file system memory type (Rajimwale: Col 10, lines 58-65; As described, the clustered storage system 180 may receive the data source identifier in various ways. In some embodiments, the data source identifier may be received as an input to an operation that writes ( or creates) a backup file to the clustered storage system 180. For example, the input may include the data source identifier as an argument to an operation (e.g. function, method, class, etc.) that initiates the creation of a backup file to the clustered storage system 180. Col 11, lines 10-15; Accordingly, the file write may be performed by the clustered storage system 180 directly to a particular deduplication domain (e.g. storage 10 node) via the backup component 150. In some embodiments, the data source identifier may be received directly to a file system or namespace managed by the clustered storage system 180).
Regarding claim 19, GLIMCHER teaches claimed invention substantially as claimed, however, GLIMCHER does not explicitly teach the request for the data write operation comprises the one or more deduplication parameters associated with the destination write location.
Rajimwale teaches the request for the data write operation comprises the one or more deduplication parameters associated with the destination write location (Rajimwale: Col 10, lines 58-65; As described, the clustered storage system 180 may receive the data source identifier in various ways. In some embodiments, the data source identifier may be received as an input to an operation that writes ( or creates) a backup file to the clustered storage system 180. For example, the input may include the data source identifier as an argument to an operation (e.g. function, method, class, etc.) that initiates the creation of a backup file to the clustered storage system 180. Col 12, lines 11-15; When a backup file is created (e.g. via a write operation), the clustered storage system may use the data source identifier to select a destination deduplication domain 470 for the backup file using a mapping that associates backup files to particular deduplication domains. Col 13, lines 11-15; For example, the request may include a request to write the first backup file to the clustered storage system. In one embodiment, the request may include a first data source identifier associated with the received data).
Regarding claim 20, GLIMCHER teaches claimed invention substantially as claimed, and Glimcher further teaches precluding the writing of duplicate data entries to the destination write location (Glimcher: [0013]; The NIC may segment data into chunks and obtain fingerprints of the chunks. The fingerprints may be provided to the storage which may check the fingerprints against fingerprints of already stored chunks. The storage may request the chunks corresponding to the fingerprints that did not match any fingerprints of the already stored chunks. The NIC may provide only those requested chunks to the storage before discarding all of the chunks. [0015]; providing, by the NIC, batches of the fingerprints to a storage; providing, by the NIC and to the storage for storage, a first portion of the chunks corresponding to a first portion of the fingerprints that are new; and discarding, by the NIC, the chunks without providing to the storage a second portion of the chunks corresponding to a second portion of the fingerprints that are not new. [0030]; Consequently, compute resources 102 may direct access requests (e.g., storage, read, delete) for the emulated storage to NIC 110 via bus 106)
Glimcher does not explicitly teach is further based at least in part on the one or more deduplication parameters associated with the destination write location.
However, Rajimwale teaches is further based at least in part on the one or more deduplication parameters associated with the destination write location (Rajimwale: Col 12, lines 11-15; When a backup file is created (e.g. via a write operation), the clustered storage system may use the data source identifier to select a destination deduplication domain 470 for the backup file using a mapping that associates backup files to particular deduplication domains. Col 13, lines 11-15; For example, the request may include a request to write the first backup file to the clustered storage system. In one embodiment, the request may include a first data source identifier associated with the received data).
Claims 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Patent Application Publication 2023/0333736 issued to BORIS GLIMCHER (hereinafter as "Glimcher") in view of U.S Patent Application Publication 2007/0174668 issued to Udayakumar Srinivasan (hereinafter as "Srinivasan").
Regarding claim 6, Glimcher teaches claimed invention substantially as claimed, however, Glimcher does not explicitly teach the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location are stored locally by the DPU.
Srinivasan teaches the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location are stored locally by the DPU (Srinivasan: [0052]-[0053]; The instructions enable the apparatus to extract a first data segment from a redundant-data cache at a receiving DPU, if a first header comprising a label identifying the first data segment is received. According to embodiments of the present invention, initially, only the signatures identifying the transmitted data segments are stored. Embodiments of the present invention store only signatures identifying the data segments of the large data A in signature cache 208).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the teachings of Glimcher with the teachings of Srinivasan because one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination of preventing redundant data being stored to improve the effective bandwidth of the network (See Srinivasan: [0054]). In addition, the references (Glimcher and Srinivasan) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor as Glimcher and Srinivasan are directed to performing deduplications and avoid performing storing multiple copies of the same data to save storage.
Claims 8 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Patent Application Publication 2023/0333736 issued to BORIS GLIMCHER (hereinafter as "Glimcher") in view of U.S Patent 9,792,306 issued to Jeremy Wartnick (hereinafter as "Wartnick").
Regarding claim 8, Glimcher teaches claimed invention substantially as claimed, however, Glimcher does not explicitly teach the data repository is distinct from the destination write location.
Wartnick teaches the data repository is distinct from the destination write location (Wartnick: Col 7, lines 28-29; Destination computing device 150 is configured to store data for clients 120 in a storage device 170. Col 8, lines 32-34; Fingerprint lookup table thus provides a central repository of fingerprints of differing fingerprint types that can be used by various clients to perform deduplication {Examiner correlates the repository different from the destination computing device as the write location is different form the repository storing fingerprints}).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Glimcher with the teachings of Wartnick because one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination of improving the storage space utilization by reducing the amount of storage needed (See Wartnick: Col 3, lines 22-27). In addition, the references (Glimcher and Wartnick) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor as Glimcher and Wartnick are directed to performing deduplications and avoid performing storing multiple copies of the same data to save storage.
Regarding claim 14, Glimcher teaches claimed invention substantially as claimed, however, Glimcher does not explicitly teach the one or more data identifiers comprise Secure Hash Algorithms (SHAs).
Wartnick teaches the one or more data identifiers comprise Secure Hash Algorithms (SHAs) (Wartnick: Col 6, lines 44-47; In one embodiment, fingerprint index 166 is configured to support one type of fingerprint, such as fingerprints generated using a SHA (Secure Hash Algorithm) or MD (Message Digest) algorithm).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art , before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Glimcher with the teachings of Wartnick (teaches one or more data identifiers comprise Secure Hash Algorithms (SHAs). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination of improving the security by creating algorithms in such prevent unnecessary attacks (See Wartnick: Col 7, lines 16-26). In addition, the references (Glimcher and Wartnick) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor as Glimcher and Wartnick are directed to performing deduplications and avoid performing storing multiple copies of the same data to save storage.
Claims 9, 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Patent Application Publication 2023/0333736 issued to BORIS GLIMCHER (hereinafter as "Glimcher") in view of U.S Patent 11,593,332 issued to Shilane et al. (hereinafter as "Shilane").
Regarding claim 9, Glimcher teaches claimed invention substantially as claimed, however, Glimcher does not explicitly teach the data deduplication engine is configured to access the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location in the absence of a transmission to the destination write location.
Shilane teaches the data deduplication engine is configured to access the one or more data identifiers indicative of data entries stored by the destination write location in the absence of a transmission to the destination write location (Shilane: Col 8, lines 1-10; the disclosure copy files by configuring sources to generate fingerprints for the file segments to be copied to a destination, and to communicate these fingerprints to the destination. Whether a back-end service receives a communication of fingerprints for data segments or generates the fingerprints for the received data segments, the back-end service compares these newly received fingerprints against previously generated fingerprints. Col 14, lines 50-54; loads these unique fingerprints to an in-memory cache, and compares each of the newly received fingerprints against the unique fingerprints in the cache to identify which newly received fingerprints are missing from the unique fingerprints in the cache. Col 15, lines 6-10; The deduplication and compression service 312 or 314 communicates the L1 segments' missing fingerprints back to the access object service 308 or 310, which communicates a request to the source for the L0 data segments which correspond to the missing fingerprints).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Glimcher with the teachings of Shilane because one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination of improving the routing of data in improving the deduplication while increasing the skew (See Shilane: Col 9, lines 54-56). In addition, the references (Glimcher and Shilane) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor as Glimcher and Shilane are directed to performing deduplications and avoid performing storing multiple copies of the same data to save storage.
Regarding claim 11, Glimcher teaches claimed invention substantially as claimed, however, Glimcher does not explicitly teach the data deduplication engine is further to: transmit the one or more absent data identifiers to the initiating device; receive data entries associated with the one or more absent data identifiers; and cause writing of the received data entries of the one or more absent data identifiers to the destination write location.
Shilane teaches the data deduplication engine is further to: transmit the one or more absent data identifiers to the initiating device (Shilane: Col 10, lines 58-67; identifies the newly received L1 fingerprints which are missing from its previously stored fingerprints at the destination, and returns the missing fingerprints to the source Data Domain Boost client 334. The source Data Domain Boost client 334 receives the missing fingerprints from the destination Data Domain Boost client 332, retrieves the file's L0 data segments that correspond to the missing fingerprints, and communicates the missing L0 data segments to the destination Data Domain Boost client 332 which stores the missing L0 data segments needed to copy the file from the source Data Domain Boost client 334 to the destination Data Domain Boost client 332);
receive data entries associated with the one or more absent data identifiers (Shilane: Col 10, lines 58-67; identifies the newly received L1 fingerprints which are missing from its previously stored fingerprints at the destination, and returns the missing fingerprints to the source Data Domain Boost client 334. The source Data Domain Boost client 334 receives the missing fingerprints from the destination Data Domain Boost client 332, retrieves the file's L0 data segments that correspond to the missing fingerprints, and communicates the missing L0 data segments to the destination Data Domain Boost client 332 which stores the missing L0 data segments needed to copy the file from the source Data Domain Boost client 334 to the destination Data Domain Boost client 332); and
cause writing of the received data entries of the one or more absent data identifiers to the destination write location (Shilane: Col 10, lines 58-67; identifies the newly received L1 fingerprints which are missing from its previously stored fingerprints at the destination, and returns the missing fingerprints to the source Data Domain Boost client 334. The source Data Domain Boost client 334 receives the missing fingerprints from the destination Data Domain Boost client 332, retrieves the file's L0 data segments that correspond to the missing fingerprints, and communicates the missing L0 data segments to the destination Data Domain Boost client 332 which stores the missing L0 data segments needed to copy the file from the source Data Domain Boost client 334 to the destination Data Domain Boost client 332. Col 14, lines 40-41; The fingerprint index 318 maps from <fp, simgroup>→<location where the segment is stored>. The location where the segment is stored consists of several numbers such as object ID).
Regarding claim 12, the modification of Glimcher and Shilane teaches claimed invention substantially as claimed, and Shilane further teaches a number of the one or more data identifiers of the data write operation is greater than a number of the absent data identifiers transmitted to the initiating device (Shilane: Col 8, lines 6-8; generates the fingerprints for the received data segments, the back-end service compares these newly received fingerprints against previously generated fingerprints for previously stored data segments that were previously identified as unique. Col 19, lines 61-65; Consequently, subsequently received fingerprints which correspond to those portions of the correctly copied segments will be detected as duplicates of the correctly copied segments' fingerprints, such that resending these data file's segments is not necessary{Examiner correlates the write operations greater than the absent as the system is sending more fingerprints thus duplicates are detected over the unique ones}).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S Patent Application Publication 2023/0333736 issued to BORIS GLIMCHER (hereinafter as "Glimcher") in view of U.S Patent 11,593,332 issued to Shilane et al. (hereinafter as "Shilane") in further view of U.S Patent Application Publication 2016/0366226 issued to Friedman et al. (hereinafter as “Friedman”).
Regarding claim 13, the modification of Glimcher and Shilane teaches claimed invention substantially as claimed, however, the modification of Glimcher and Shilane does not explicitly teach the data deduplication engine is to receive the data entries associated with the one or more absent data identifiers via Remote Direct Memory Access (RDMA).
Friedman teaches the data deduplication engine is to receive the data entries associated with the one or more absent data identifiers via Remote Direct Memory Access (RDMA) (Friedman: [0005]; In some embodiments, deduplicating the data blocks includes, in a given server that prepares to store a given data block, checking whether a hash value of the given data block already exists in the shared data structure, and if the hash value exists, refraining from storing the given data block on the storage devices. [0008]; to store data blocks on the storage devices, to access, using remote direct memory access, a shared data structure that maps hash values calculated over the data blocks to respective storage locations of the data blocks on the storage devices, and to deduplicate the data blocks stored on the storage device, by looking-up the shared data structure by the servers. [0022]; The shared KV store is typically stored in the storage controller memory, and is accessible to the servers using remote direct memory access, e.g., using a Remote Direct Memory Access (RDMA) protocol).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art , before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Glimcher with the teachings of Shilane with the further teachings of Friedman because one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make such a combination of utilizing Remote Direct Memory Access without triggering and executing code on a storage controller CPU (See Friedman: [0022]). In addition, the references (Glimcher, Shilane, and Friedman) teach features that are directed to analogous art and they are directed to the same field of endeavor as Glimcher, Shilane, and Friedman are directed to performing deduplications and avoid performing storing multiple copies of the same data to save storage.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S Patent Application Publication 2020/0019516 issued to Sobolewski (hereinafter as “Sobolewski”) teaches operating to analyze the data associated to a write block command relating to the different storage locations and identifying potential writing the block to the same data of the data store system and preventing the writing of such blocks of data.
U.S Patent 11,349,915 issued to Xu et al. (hereinafter as “Xu”) teaches a determination that the destination site does not include an object that is same as the first object and which determine a deduplication is performed between the source and destination worker nodes.
U.S Patent Application Publication 2020/0026781 issued to KHOT et al. (hereinafter as “KHOT”) teaches deduplication and calculating the first and second checksum values between the units and utilizing Boolean flag to indicate a state that the deduplicated data is deleted.
U.S Patent Application Publication 2015/0012504 issued to AKIRAV et al. (hereinafter as “AKIRAV”) teaches data file in data deduplication system associated with a file identifier to have identifying the data file in the deduplication system over time.
U.S Patent Application Publication 2024/0256491 issued to Bhanjois et al. (hereinafter as “Bhanjois”) teaches performing offloading client-based inline deduplication operation using a data processing unit by filtering data as being received by the back up client.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW N HO whose telephone number is (571)270-0590. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday and Thursday 10:00-6:00.
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, Sherief Badawi can be reached at (571) 272-9782. 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.
7/9/2026
/ANDREW N HO/Examiner
Art Unit 2169
/SON T HOANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2169
Prosecution Insights