DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to the application filed on 05/22/2025.
Preliminary amendments filed 06/02/2025 are entered. The preliminary amendments include cancelling claims 1-20 and adding claims 21-40. Claims 21-40 are preserved for examination; of which claims 21, 31, and 40 are in independent forms.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/04/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form 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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,332,890 since the claims, if allowed, would improperly extend the “right to exclude” already granted in the patent. The subject matter claimed in claims 21-40 in the instant application is fully anticipated by claims 1-20 of the U.S. Patent No. 12,332,890 and is covered by the patent. Claims 1-20 of the U. S. Patent No. US 12,332,890 are presented in the instant application with some omitted limitations and in much broader scopes.
As illustrated below, the bolded limitations of claim 1 of the U. S. Patent No. US 12,332,890 anticipates all the limitations of claim 21 of the instant application. Similarly, claims 11 and 20 (which are similar to claim 1) of the U. S. Patent No. US 12,332,890 anticipates all the limitations of claim 31 and 40 (which are similar to claim 21) of the instant application.
U.S. Patent No. 12,332,890
Instant Application
1. A computer-implemented method comprising:
traversing an operator topology of a query plan to identify pipelines within the query plan, wherein the query plan includes a first shared subplan reference, wherein the first shared subplan reference refers to a first shared subplan, and wherein the first shared subplan is associated with a shared node in the operator topology; assigning a pipeline index to each pipeline in the query plan, wherein the pipeline index uniquely identifies each pipeline in the query plan according to a location and an order of execution of the pipeline within the query plan, and wherein a first pipeline of the first shared subplan reference is assigned a first pipeline index;
tracking pipeline dependencies of the query plan, wherein pipeline dependencies are tracked using pipeline indices; responsive to determining that the first pipeline has a dependency to a second pipeline with a second pipeline index and responsive to determining that the second pipeline index is greater than a third pipeline index associated with a third pipeline of the first shared subplan, specifying the first shared subplan reference as a pipeline breaker; responsive to determining that the first pipeline does not depend on any pipeline having a pipeline index greater than the third pipeline index, specifying the first shared subplan reference as a non-pipeline breaker; updating the query plan with the first shared subplan reference being specified as either a pipeline breaker or a non-pipeline breaker; and
generating, based on the updated query plan, an execution plan for execution of a corresponding query at run time.
21. A computer-implemented method comprising:
traversing an operator topology of a query plan to identify pipelines within the query plan, wherein the query plan includes a first shared subplan reference, wherein the first shared subplan reference refers to a first shared subplan including a first pipeline, and wherein the first shared subplan is associated with a shared node in the operator topology;
tracking pipeline dependencies of the query plan based on a state of the operator topology, wherein pipeline dependencies are tracked using pipeline indices;
updating the query plan with the first shared subplan reference being specified as either a pipeline breaker or a non-pipeline breaker based on whether the first pipeline depends on a second pipeline of the first shared subplan; and generating, based on the updated query plan, an execution plan for execution of a corresponding query at run time.
2-20
22-40
The claims of the patent "anticipate" the claims of the application. Accordingly, the application claims are not patentably distinct from the patent claims. Here, the more specific patent claims encompass the broader application claim. Following the rationale in In re Goodman cited in the preceding paragraph, where applicant has once been granted a patent containing a claim for the specific or narrower invention, applicant may not then obtain a second patent with a claim for the generic or broader invention without first submitting an appropriate terminal disclaimer.
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 21-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Qiu et al., US 2018/0089270 (Qiu, hereafter).
Regarding claim 21,
Qui discloses a computer-implemented method comprising:
traversing an operator topology of a query plan to identify pipelines within the query plan, wherein the query plan includes a first shared subplan reference, wherein the first shared subplan reference refers to a first shared subplan including a first pipeline, and wherein the first shared subplan is associated with a shared node in the operator topology (See paragraph [0025], “The pipeline dependent tree generator 120 traverses the query plan tree 110 and identifies multiple pipelines indicated at 125, 130 and 135, indicates as P1, P2, and P3.”. The procedure for traversing a query plan tree to generate a pipeline dependent tree (PDT), as described in paragraphs [0034]-[0039], with reference to figure 6. As further discussed in paragraphs [0043]-[0045], with reference to figure 7, said query plan is conventionally provided by a query optimizer (from a given user query) and subsequently said PDT is being generated. As pointed out in paragraph [0034], stacks are used during said traversal of the query plan tree to keep an ordered record of tree nodes and pipelines, wherein "[a]n iterative post-order traversal ensures that the query plan tree may be visited once". Shared subplan references/nodes are processed in the following way: During the (post-order) downward traversal, "[i]f at 620, it was determined that traversal was not proceeding down, a determination is made at 628 whether the current node is a pipeline breaker. If not, the current node is appended to the current pipeline [. . .]. If at 628, the current node was a pipeline breaker, a determination is made whether the current node is a join node at 640. A pipeline breaker is identified by a necessity to materialize an intermediate result. If the current node is not a join node, the current node is appended to the current pipeline, which is designated as complete at 642', cf. paragraphs [0036]-[0039]. Data sharing/shuffling between dependent pipelines is, furthermore, discussed in paragraphs [0046]-[0047], with reference to figure 8);
tracking pipeline dependencies of the query plan based on a state of the operator topology, wherein pipeline dependencies are tracked using pipeline indices (See paragraphs [0025]-[0027], identifying and tracking pipeline dependencies using PDT. Also see figure 5 or the left-hand PTO in figure 8, where all pipelines have their own unique index/number, wherein "execution should occur from the bottom up, with pipelines on the same level being performable by different processors in parallel", cf. paragraph [0036], i.e. the lowest, left-most pipeline is designated as "P1 ", the first pipeline index/ number);
updating the query plan with the first shared subplan reference being specified as either a pipeline breaker or a non-pipeline breaker based on whether the first pipeline depends on a second pipeline of the first shared subplan (See paragraphs [0039]-[0041] and Fig. 6, after determining a pipeline breaker or non-pipeline breaker, the current node is appended to current pipeline. As such, the appending a current pipeline would result in updating the query plan); and
generating, based on the updated query plan, an execution plan for execution of a corresponding query at run time (See figure 7 and paragraphs [0043]-[0045], describing how the PDT is used to find an optimal execution order (as represented by an optimal directed acyclic graph (DAG) derived from said PDT) which is "utilize[d] to execute the query via the execution engine 730").
Regarding claim 22,
Qui discloses wherein the query plan is structured as a directed acyclic graph (See paragraphs 15, 45, and Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 23,
Qui discloses wherein the first shared subplan reference being specified as the pipeline breaker causes execution to stop until one or more conditions are satisfied (See paragraphs 40-43, and 52, and Fig. 6, breaking or stopping processing until some calculations (intermediate results) many need to be performed before processing can continue).
Regarding claim 24,
Qui discloses wherein a first condition of the one or more conditions comprises generation of an intermediate result being detected (See paragraphs 40-43, and 52, and Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 25,
Qui discloses wherein the first shared subplan reference being specified as the non-pipeline breaker allows execution to continue without waiting for an intermediate result to be generated (See paragraphs 40-43, and 52, and Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 26,
Qui discloses specifying all shared subplan references as pipeline breakers during a first traversal of the operator topology (See paragraphs 6, 60, 62, 64, 70-72, and Fig. 6, traversing the query plan to identify a sequence of nodes for each pipeline and starting the new pipeline as a function encountering pipeline breaker).
Regarding claim 27,
Qui discloses during the first traversal, creating a new pipeline in the operator topology after a second shared subplan reference (See paragraphs 25, 35, 46, 60, 62, 64, Fig. 4-6, and Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 28,
Qui discloses checking, during a second traversal of the operator topology, whether the new pipeline depends on any pipeline which comes after an origination pipeline of a second shared subplan corresponding to the second shared subplan reference (See paragraphs 25, 35, 46, 60, 62, 64, Fig. 4-6, and Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 29,
Qui discloses converting the second shared subplan reference to a non-pipeline breaker responsive to determining, during the second traversal of the operator topology, that the new pipeline does not depend on any pipeline having a pipeline index greater than a given pipeline index of the origination pipeline (See paragraphs 25, 35, 46, 60, 62, 64, Fig. 4-6, and Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 30,
Qui discloses wherein the second pipeline has a pipeline index greater than a pipeline index of a third pipeline of the first shared subplan (See paragraphs 25, 35, 46, 60, 62, 64, Fig. 4-6, and Fig. 8).
Regarding claims 31-39,
the scopes of the claims are substantially the same as claims 21-29, respectively, and are rejected on the same basis as set forth for the rejections of claims 21-29, respectively.
Regarding claim 40,
the scope of the claim is substantially the same as claim 21, and is rejected on the same basis as set forth for the rejection of claim 21.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
BreB et al., US 2024/0338366 disclosing a database system that generates a query plan and identifies a contingent database operation within the query plan, the contingent database operation being dependent on a completion of at least one additional operation. The database system schedules the contingent operation using an opportunistic scheduler. The database system executes the query plan comprising processing the contingent database operation after the completion of the at least one additional operation.
Wolf et al., US 2023/0141462 disclosing a system that includes reception of a query execution plan associated with a plurality of query execution pipelines, estimated execution costs and estimated intermediate result cardinalities, determination of one or more precedence relationships of the plurality of query execution pipelines, determination of an execution order of the plurality of query execution pipelines based on the estimated execution costs, the estimated intermediate result cardinalities, and the one or more precedence relationships, and providing of the execution order of the plurality of query execution pipelines and the query execution plan to a query execution engine.
“Memory Efficient Scheduling of Query pipeline Execution” authored by Landgraf et al. and published in 2022. The publication discloses computing an optimal schedule of the individual pipelines with respect to minimizing the memory consumption needed for a particular query execution plan.
Points of Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HARES JAMI whose telephone number is (571)270-1291. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00a-5:00p.
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, Amy Ng can be reached at 571-270-1698. 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.
/Hares Jami/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2164
04/10/2026
Prosecution Insights