DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
01. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
02. Applicant’s claim for domestic priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) is acknowledged.
Drawings
03. The drawings were received on 06/09/2025. These drawings are accepted.
Claim Objections
04. Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informality: the claim recites a first and a third set of operational instructions without reciting a second set of operational instructions. It is believed that the third set was intended to be recited as a second set.
Claim Interpretation – 35 USC § 112
05. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a data ingest sub-system”, “a data ingest network interface”, “a data store and analytics sub-system” in claim 1, and “an administrative sub-system” in claim 5.
Applicant’s specification defines the data ingest sub-system and a data ingest and analytics sub-system in paragraph [0098] and Fig. 1B to include computing clusters that contain computing devices. The computing devices are defined in paragraph [0128] as including hardware, such as a chipset. The data ingest network is defined in paragraph [0100] as including hardware, such as a computing core, and the administrative sub-system is defined in paragraph [0111] as including computing devices.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 112
06. 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.
07. Claims 2 and 7 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 pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 2 recites “an analytics network interface” and claim 7 recites “an application network interface”. These are recited in the specification, such as paragraph [0110] and Fig. 1B, but they are not provided a definition that includes a corresponding structure for performing the claimed function. Therefore they are not interpreted under 35 USC 112(f) in the same manner that some of the other claimed limitations are.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
08. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
09. 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.
10. Claims 1 – 3, 5, 7, and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sarkar et al. (US PGPub 2018/0276256), hereinafter “Sarkar”.
Consider claim 1, Sarkar discloses a database system comprises:
a data ingest sub-system includes a plurality of data_in computing clusters, wherein the plurality of data_in computing clusters is configured into sets of data_in computing clusters, wherein the sets of data_in computing clusters temporarily stores data of a plurality of data sets (paragraphs [0007], [0014], [0078], a system is used that includes clusters of datasets, such that the datasets are stored based on a data model of the system);
a data ingest network interface operable to (paragraphs [0033], [0106], a user interface is used, which includes networking capabilities):
support a plurality of data ingest options (paragraphs [0059], [0061], [0184], a data ingestion module is used that allows for different data ingestion capabilities);
provide data of a first data set of the plurality of data sets in accordance with a first data ingest option of the plurality of data ingest options to a first set of the sets of data_in computing clusters, wherein the first set of data_in computing clusters temporarily stores the data of the first data set (paragraphs [0059], [0141], [0153], a cluster of datasets is obtained and provided to a particular computing infrastructure, such that one or more options are used for system that determine how to process the data and can determine that the data is to be stored temporarily);
provide data of a second data set of the plurality of data sets in accordance with a second data ingest option of the plurality of data ingest options to a second set of the sets of data in computing clusters, wherein the second set of data_in computing clusters temporarily stores the data of the second data set (paragraphs [0059], [0141], [0153], a cluster of datasets is obtained and provided to a particular computing infrastructure, such that one or more options are used for system that determine how to process the data and can determine that the data is to be stored temporarily);
a data store and analytics (S&A) sub-system includes a plurality of data_S&A computing clusters, wherein the plurality of data_S&A computing clusters is configured into sets of data_S&A computing clusters for long-term and resilient storage of the data of the plurality of data sets (paragraphs [0055], [0068], [0141], [0153], the system includes storing of the datasets in different types of storage, such as an active storage, an archive storage, a process storage, etc., such that the data can be stored in a long-term storage, such as the archive storage);
wherein a first set of the sets of data_S&A computing clusters is operable to long-term and resiliently store the data of the first data set (paragraphs [0068], [0071], [0084], the data can be stored in a long-term storage, such as the archive storage);
execute a first set of operational instructions on the data of the first data set to produce a set of first partial results (paragraphs [0035], [0100], [0105], operations are performed on the datasets, such as a query, in order to generate a set of results);
wherein a second set of the sets of data_S&A computing clusters is operable to: long-term and resiliently store the data of the second data set (paragraphs [0068], [0071], [0084], the data, which can be from the second datasets, can be stored in a long-term storage, such as the archive storage);
execute a second set of operational instructions on the data of the second data set to produce a set of second partial results (paragraphs [0035], [0100], [0105], operations are performed on the datasets, including the second datasets, such as a query, in order to generate a set of results);
Consider claim 2, and as applied to claim 1 above, Sarkar discloses a system comprising:
an analytics network interface operable to support interaction between the plurality of data_S&A computing devices and a plurality of data analytics tools (paragraphs [0032] – [0034], interactions take place between different networked components);
Consider claim 3, and as applied to claim 1 above, Sarkar discloses a system comprising:
wherein the first set of the sets of data_S&A computing clusters supports online analytics processing by:
executing a first set of operational instructions on the data of the first data set in accordance with a first online analytics process to produce the set of first partial results (paragraphs [0034], [0041], [0184], instructions are executed on the datasets in order to execute analytic requests);
executing a third set of operational instructions on the data of the first data set in accordance with a third online analytics process to produce the set of third partial results, wherein the first and third online analytics processes are processes of a list of processes that includes a database query, a data report, a data compilation, a geospatial evaluation, machine learning training, a machine learning tool, and a data evaluation (paragraphs [0041], [0049], [0050], [0184], analytic requests are processed, which can include queries and other requests for information).
Consider claim 5, and as applied to claim 1 above, Sarkar discloses a system comprising:
an administrative sub-system that includes a plurality of computing devices, wherein a computing device of the plurality of computing devices orchestrates, for a tenant, workload management based on uses affiliated with the tenant, based on transactions, and/or based on queries (paragraphs [0082] – [0086], [0171], computing operations, such as transactions, are managed by the system or by an administrator).
Consider claim 7, and as applied to claim 1 above, Sarkar discloses a system comprising:
an application network interface operable to:
support a plurality of external applications (paragraph [0034], different types of applications are supported by the system);
output, from long-term and resiliently storage of the first set of data_S&A computing cluster, the data of the first data set, or a subset of the data of the first data set, to a first external application of the plurality of external applications (paragraphs [0080], [0106], [0164], data from the datasets are output from a storage for an executed analytic process);
output, from long-term and resiliently storage of the second set of data_S&A computing clusters, the data of the second data set, or a subset of the data of the second data set, to a second external application of the plurality of external applications (paragraphs [0080], [0106], [0164], data from the datasets are output from a storage for an executed analytic process);
Consider claim 9, and as applied to claim 1 above, Sarkar discloses a system comprising:
the configuring of the plurality of data_in computing clusters into the sets of data_in computing clusters includes one of:
the first set of data_in computing clusters was configured on an as-needed basis; the first set of data_in computing clusters was configured in a fixed manner for a tenant of the database system; or the first set of data_in computing clusters was configured in a fixed manner based on the first data ingest option (paragraphs [0109], [0128], data is obtained and processed based on it being needed for a particular operation to be performed).
Allowable Subject Matter
11. Claims 4, 6, 8, 10, 11, and 12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form, including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Reasons for the Indication of Allowable Subject Matter
12. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The primary reason for allowance of claim 4 in the instant application is because the prior arts of record do not teach or suggest executing operational instructions on two datasets to produce partial results, such that the different datasets are stored in different types of storage. The primary reason for allowance of claim 6 in the instant application is because the prior arts of record do not teach or suggest a query and response computing cluster for optimizing a query to produce operational instructions. The primary reason for allowance of claim 8 in the instant application is because the prior arts of record do not teach or suggest a batch translation protocol or steaming translation protocol. The primary reason for allowance of claim 10 in the instant application is because the prior arts of record do not teach or suggest metadata changes for a time period that are used to update configuration data. The primary reason for allowance of claim 11 in the instant application is because the prior arts of record do not teach or suggest an array field distribution for an array field of the data sets. The primary reason for allowance of claim 12 in the instant application is because the prior arts of record do not teach or suggest re-executing instructions on data of a set that obtained partial results that were cached. The prior art of record including the disclosures above neither anticipates nor renders obvious the above recited combinations.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Relevant Prior Art Directed to State of Art
13. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a) Stojanovic et al. (US PGPub 2016/0092476) discloses a method of ingesting data that is then stored in a distributed storage system, which can be done temporarily. The system allows for enrichment of data based on different specifications and operations that are performed.
Conclusion
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Christopher Raab whose telephone number is (571) 270-1090. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 9:00am to 5:00pm.
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, Ajay Bhatia can be reached on (571) 272-3906. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free) or 703-305-3028.
/CHRISTOPHER J RAAB/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2156
May 30, 2026
Prosecution Insights