Non-Final Office 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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 9 recites “wherein the storage controller is configured to: receiving, by a storage controller of a storage system, information indicating…; and in response to the information, adjusting a number”. Claim 9 should read: “wherein the storage controller is configured to: receive information indicating…; and in response to the information, adjust a number…” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 recites “receiving, by a storage system controller of a storage system, information indicating a change in resource usage associated with background operations on one or more storage devices of the storage system”. This limitation was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The specification is silent regarding “information indicating a change in resource usage associated with background operations”. There is no mention of “resource usage”. The only mention of “background” is para. [0082]: Each authority can effectively serve as an independent controller. Each authority can provide its own data and metadata structures, background workers, and maintains its own lifecycle. However, there is no mention of an associated resource usage with the background workers.
Claim 2 recites “wherein the background operations include one or more of: garbage collection, flash management operations, and cache flush operations”. In addition to the specification not mentioning “background operations”, the specification is also silent regarding “garbage collection and flash management”. The only mention of a “flush operation” is para. [0081]: During this holdup interval, the contents of the NVRAM (704) may be flushed to flash memory (706). However, there is no mention of an associated resource usage with the “flush operation”.
The specification is silent regarding “information indicating a change in resource usage associated with background operations on one or more storage devices of the storage system” and “wherein the background operations include one or more of: garbage collection, flash management operations, and cache flush operations”. These limitations were not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 6 recites “decreasing the number of storage devices permitted to concurrently service I/O operations in response to a reduction in the resource usage for the background operations”. The specification is silent regarding “resource usage for the background operations” and determining “a reduction in the resource usage for the background operations”. These limitations were not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 3-5, 7, and 8 are rejected as being dependent on claim 1 and do not cure the deficiencies of claim 1.
Claim 9 recites “wherein the storage system controller is configured to receive, by a storage system controller of a storage system, information indicating a change in resource usage associated with background operations on one or more storage devices of the storage system”. This limitation was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The specification is silent regarding “information indicating a change in resource usage associated with background operations”. There is no mention of “resource usage”. The only mention of “background” is para. [0082]: Each authority can effectively serve as an independent controller. Each authority can provide its own data and metadata structures, background workers, and maintains its own lifecycle. However, there is no mention of an associated resource usage with the background workers.
Claim 10 recites “wherein the background operations include one or more of: garbage collection, flash management operations, and cache flush operations”. In addition to the specification not mentioning “background operations”, the specification is also silent regarding “garbage collection and flash management”. The only mention of a “flush operation” is para. [0081]: During this holdup interval, the contents of the NVRAM (704) may be flushed to flash memory (706). However, there is no mention of an associated resource usage with the “flush operation”.
The specification is silent regarding “information indicating a change in resource usage associated with background operations on one or more storage devices of the storage system” and “wherein the background operations include one or more of: garbage collection, flash management operations, and cache flush operations”. These limitations were not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 14 recites “the storage system controller is further configured to decrease the number of storage devices permitted to concurrently service I/O operations in response to a reduction in the resource usage for the background operations”. The specification is silent regarding “resource usage for the background operations” and determining “a reduction in the resource usage for the background operations”. These limitations were not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 11-13 are rejected as being dependent on claim 9 and do not cure the deficiencies of claim 9.
Claim 15 recites “cause the processing device to: receive information indicating a change in resource usage associated with background operations on one or more storage devices of the storage system”. This limitation was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The specification is silent regarding “information indicating a change in resource usage associated with background operations”. There is no mention of “resource usage”. The only mention of “background” is para. [0082]: Each authority can effectively serve as an independent controller. Each authority can provide its own data and metadata structures, background workers, and maintains its own lifecycle. However, there is no mention of an associated resource usage with the background workers.
Claim 16 recites “wherein the background operations include one or more of: garbage collection, flash management operations, and cache flush operations”. In addition to the specification not mentioning “background operations”, the specification is also silent regarding “garbage collection and flash management”. The only mention of a “flush operation” is para. [0081]: During this holdup interval, the contents of the NVRAM (704) may be flushed to flash memory (706). However, there is no mention of an associated resource usage with the “flush operation”.
The specification is silent regarding “information indicating a change in resource usage associated with background operations on one or more storage devices of the storage system” and “wherein the background operations include one or more of: garbage collection, flash management operations, and cache flush operations”. These limitations were not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 20 recites “the instructions, when executed, further cause the processing device to decrease the number of storage devices permitted to concurrently service I/O operations in response to a reduction in the resource usage for the background operations”. The specification is silent regarding “resource usage for the background operations” and determining “a reduction in the resource usage for the background operations”. These limitations were not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 17-19 are rejected as being dependent on claim 9 and do not cure the deficiencies of claim 15.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 9-11, 14-17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Yerfule et al., US 10,394,606 B2.
Referring to claim 1:
In col. 5, lines 28-31 and 42-50, Yerfule et al. disclose receiving, by a storage system controller (hierarchical fair CPU and hierarchical fair disk scheduler are part of the storage controller) of a storage system, information indicating a change in resource usage associated with background operations on one or more storage devices of the storage system (a task scheduler that allocates CPU resources to the different tasks, foreground or background, based on various factors including the amount of CPU cycles, or any other metric related to CPU consumption utilized during execution of different tasks).
In col. 4, lines 66-67 continued in col. 5, line 1, Yerfule et al. disclose a data storage system, that includes a controller with a storage operating system, which is a multitasking system able to execute several tasks concurrently. In col. 8, lines 38-44, Yerfule et al. disclose in response to the information, adjusting a number of the one or more storage devices permitted to concurrently service input/output (I/O) operations (allocating resources including disks to tasks).
Referring to claims 2, 10, and 16, in col. 8, lines 26-35, Yerfule et al. disclose wherein the background operations include one or more of: garbage collection and cache flush operations.
Referring to claims 3, 11, and 17, in col. 8, lines 38-44, Yerfule et al. disclose wherein adjusting the number of the one or more storage devices comprises increasing the number of storage devices permitted to concurrently service I/O operations (ensuring that the CPU or disk access resources assigned to various tasks are allocated fairly—the resources would increase and decrease according to need and other tasks being executed).
Referring to claims 6, 14, and 20, in col. 8, lines 38-44, Yerfule et al. disclose decreasing the number of storage devices permitted to concurrently service I/O operations in response to a reduction in the resource usage for the background operations (ensuring that the CPU or disk access resources assigned to various tasks are allocated fairly—the resources would increase and decrease according to need and other tasks being executed).
Referring to claim 9:
In col. 4, lines 66-67 continued in col. 5, line 1, Yerfule et al. disclose an apparatus comprising a storage system and a storage system controller.
In col. 5, lines 28-31 and 42-50, Yerfule et al. disclose wherein the storage system controller (hierarchical fair CPU and hierarchical fair disk scheduler are part of the storage controller) is configured to receive information indicating a change in resource usage associated with background operations on one or more storage devices of the storage system (a task scheduler that allocates CPU resources to the different tasks, foreground or background, based on various factors including the amount of CPU cycles, or any other metric related to CPU consumption utilized during execution of different tasks).
In col. 4, lines 66-67 continued in col. 5, line 1, Yerfule et al. disclose a data storage system, that includes a controller with a storage operating system, which is a multitasking system able to execute several tasks concurrently. In col. 8, lines 38-44, Yerfule et al. disclose the storage system controller is configured to: in response to the information, adjusting a number of the one or more storage devices permitted to concurrently service input/output (I/O) operations (allocating resources including disks to tasks).
Referring to claim 15:
In col. 22, lines 7-25, Yerfule et al. disclose a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that, are executed by a processing device, cause the processing device to:
In col. 5, lines 28-31 and 42-50, Yerfule et al. disclose instructions that, when executed by a processing device, cause the processing device to: receive information indicating a change in resource usage associated with background operations on one or more storage devices of the storage system (a task scheduler that allocates CPU resources to the different tasks, foreground or background, based on various factors including the amount of CPU cycles, or any other metric related to CPU consumption utilized during execution of different tasks).
In col. 4, lines 66-67 continued in col. 5, line 1, Yerfule et al. disclose a data storage system, that includes a controller with a storage operating system, which is a multitasking system able to execute several tasks concurrently. In col. 8, lines 38-44, Yerfule et al. disclose instructions that, when executed by a processing device, cause the processing device to: in response to the information, adjust a number of the one or more storage devices permitted to concurrently service input/output (I/O) operations (allocating resources including disks to tasks).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2017/0177221 A1 discloses assigning CPU tasks to background operations.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL C MASKULINSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-3649. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 am-5:00 pm.
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, Bryce Bonzo can be reached at (571) 272-3655. 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.
/MICHAEL MASKULINSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2113
Prosecution Insights