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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on September 24th, 2025 and January 7th, 2026 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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, 11 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hong et al. (US Publication No. 2022/0179907 – “Hong”).
Regarding claim 1, Hong teaches A data storage system comprising: a memory storing instructions; and a processor communicatively coupled to the memory and configured to execute the instructions to: (Hong paragraph [0006], An aspect of the disclosure is to provide an electronic device that includes a file system, a memory, and at least one processor. The memory may store at least one instruction for, when executed, enabling the at least one processor to receive a request for access to at least one of a file or a directory stored in a user data region of the file system) establish a data structure for a directory of a file system, the data structure referenced by all files and directories (Hong paragraph [0007], When the first information is information associated with the file, the first information comprises information indicating the size of the file, and, when the first information is information associated with the directory, the first information comprises information indicating a sum of sizes of all subdirectories included in the directory and sizes of all files included in the directory. All subdirectory information is included in the directory of the file system, which can include a storage structure, i.e., see Fig. 2; Ref #220 and paragraph [0066], The file system 240 may be formed in the storage 220. The file system 240 may include a user data region (a data blocks region) 244 for storing data such as files and a metadata region 242 for storing metadata related to the data and/or file system 240) within a directory tree of the directory; (The directory may utilize a particular structure such as a directory tree, see Hong paragraph [0068], A plurality of files may be stored in the storage 220. For example, the plurality of files may be stored in the user data region 244 of the file system 240 of the storage 220. The plurality of files may be stored in the user data region 244, based on a directory. The directory may include other directories and/or one or more files. A sub directory (or a lower directory) or child directory of a specific directory may mean one or more directories included in the specific directory. A super directory (or an upper directory) or parent directory of a specific directory may mean a directory including the specific directory. When the plurality of directories exist in the storage 220, a relationship between the plurality of directories may be a relationship that is based on a hierarchy such as a tree structure) and coordinate, based on the data structure and on operations applied to the directory, implementation of the operations on the files and directories within the directory tree of the directory (Hong Fig. 3; Hong paragraph [0075], Referring to FIG. 3, in step 310, a processor (e.g., the processor 120 or the VFS manager 232 operated by the processor 120) receives a request for access to a file stored in a storage. The processor may receive the request for access to the file stored in a user data region of the storage. The processor may receive a first user input for accessing the file. Even a request for access to a directory stored in the storage may be processed in the same manner as the request for access to the file. The first user input may include a user input for accessing a directory and/or a file, based on an application such as a file manager. Accessing the directory and/or file may include opening the directory and/or file and/or displaying a list of subdirectories included in the directory and/or files. Operations and modifications may be applied to files and directories within the data structure).
Claims 11 and 20 are the corresponding method and non-transitory computer readable medium claims to system claim 1. They are rejected with the same references and rationale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2-3, 5, 12-13 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Ankireddypalle et al. (US Publication No. 2020/0089409 – “Ankireddypalle”).
Regarding claim 2, Hong in view of Ankireddypalle teaches The data storage system of claim 1, wherein the coordinating implementation of the operations on the files and directories within the directory tree of the directory comprises using the data structure to delay implementation of one or more of the operations on one or more of the files and directories (Ankireddypalle paragraph [0233], While the above types of information management policies 148 are described as separate policies, one or more of these can be generally combined into a single information management policy 148. For instance, a storage policy may also include or otherwise be associated with one or more scheduling, audit, or provisioning policies or operational parameters thereof. Moreover, while storage policies are typically associated with moving and storing data, other policies may be associated with other types of information management operations. The following is a non-exhaustive list of items that information management policies 148 may specify: [0234] schedules or other timing information, e.g., specifying when and/or how often to perform information management operations; [0235] the type of secondary copy 116 and/or copy format (e.g., snapshot, backup, archive, HSM, etc.). The information management policy can be used to schedule (i.e., delay) implementation of particular operations, such as secondary copies or backup operations).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Hong with those of Ankireddypalle. Ankireddypalle teaches using snapshots to manage file directory systems, which can provide a low processing, efficient means of providing a backup version of data contained in the file system, as well as more flexible implementation of operations performed (i.e., see Ankireddypalle paragraph [0187], A snapshot copy in many cases can be made quickly and without significantly impacting primary computing resources because large amounts of data need not be copied or moved. In some embodiments, a snapshot may exist as a virtual file system, parallel to the actual file system. Users in some cases gain read-only access to the record of files and directories of the snapshot. By electing to restore primary data 112 from a snapshot taken at a given point in time, users may also return the current file system to the state of the file system that existed when the snapshot was taken).
Claim 12 is the corresponding method claim to system claim 2. It is rejected with the same references and rationale.
Regarding claim 3, Hong in view of Ankireddypalle teaches The data storage system of claim 1, wherein: the operations comprise a snapshot of the directory of the file system; and the coordinating implementation of the operations on the files and directories within the directory tree of the directory comprises taking a snapshot of a file in response to a request to modify the file (Ankireddypalle paragraph [0170], Data movement operations can include by way of example, backup operations, archive operations, information lifecycle management operations such as hierarchical storage management operations, replication operations (e.g., continuous data replication), snapshot operations, deduplication or single-instancing operations, auxiliary copy operations, disaster-recovery copy operations, and the like. As will be discussed, some of these operations do not necessarily create distinct copies. Nonetheless, some or all of these operations are generally referred to as “secondary copy operations” for simplicity, because they involve secondary copies. Data movement also comprises restoring secondary copies. Snapshots can be utilized to generate secondary copies of data in secondary copy operations. For further details regarding using snapshots as a means to coordinate operations on the file system directory, see Ankireddypalle paragraph [0187], An initial snapshot may use only a small amount of disk space needed to record a mapping or other data structure representing or otherwise tracking the blocks that correspond to the current state of the file system. Additional disk space is usually required only when files and directories change later on. Furthermore, when files change, typically only the pointers which map to blocks are copied, not the blocks themselves. For example for “copy-on-write” snapshots, when a block changes in primary storage, the block is copied to secondary storage or cached in primary storage before the block is overwritten in primary storage, and the pointer to that block is changed to reflect the new location of that block. The snapshot mapping of file system data may also be updated to reflect the changed block(s) at that particular point in time).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Hong with those of Ankireddypalle. Ankireddypalle teaches using snapshots to manage file directory systems, which can provide a low processing, efficient means of providing a backup version of data contained in the file system, as well as more flexible implementation of operations performed (i.e., see Ankireddypalle paragraph [0187], A snapshot copy in many cases can be made quickly and without significantly impacting primary computing resources because large amounts of data need not be copied or moved. In some embodiments, a snapshot may exist as a virtual file system, parallel to the actual file system. Users in some cases gain read-only access to the record of files and directories of the snapshot. By electing to restore primary data 112 from a snapshot taken at a given point in time, users may also return the current file system to the state of the file system that existed when the snapshot was taken).
Claim 13 is the corresponding method claim to system claim 3. It is rejected with the same references and rationale.
Regarding claim 5, Hong in view of Ankireddypalle teaches The data storage system of claim 1, further comprising: maintaining versions of the data structure comprising a first version of the data structure and a second version of the data structure (Ankireddypalle paragraphs [0004-0005], In an example of a high availability configuration, high availability to data may be provided without using shared storage. In particular, high availability to data is provided using a synchronous replicated copy of a primary storage object. The high availability to data may be provided through a software defined architecture, using synchronous replication, and is not limited to merely two storage controllers. Various replication and synchronization techniques may be used to replicate data (e.g., client data), configuration data (e.g., a size of a volume, a name of a volume, logical unit number (LUN) configuration data, etc.), and/or write caching data (e.g., cached write operations not yet flushed to a storage device, but cached within memory such as a non-volatile random access memory (NVRAM)) between storage controllers and/or storage devices. Synchronous replication may be used where an incoming write operation to the first storage controller is locally implemented upon a first storage object (e.g., a file, a LUN, a LUN spanning multiple volumes, or any other type of object) by the first storage controller and remotely implemented upon a second storage object (e.g., maintained as a fully synchronized copy of the first storage object) by the second storage controller before an acknowledgement is provided back to a client that sent the incoming write operation. Replication and synchronization processes may maintain at least two versions of a particular data structure/configuration).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Hong with those of Ankireddypalle. Ankireddypalle teaches using snapshots to manage file directory systems, which can provide a low processing, efficient means of providing a backup version of data contained in the file system, as well as more flexible implementation of operations performed (i.e., see Ankireddypalle paragraph [0187], A snapshot copy in many cases can be made quickly and without significantly impacting primary computing resources because large amounts of data need not be copied or moved. In some embodiments, a snapshot may exist as a virtual file system, parallel to the actual file system. Users in some cases gain read-only access to the record of files and directories of the snapshot. By electing to restore primary data 112 from a snapshot taken at a given point in time, users may also return the current file system to the state of the file system that existed when the snapshot was taken).
Claim 15 is the corresponding method claim to system claim 5. It is rejected with the same references and rationale.
Claim(s) 4, 6-7, 14 and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong in view of Ankireddypalle as applied to claims 3, 5, 13 and 15 above, and further in view of Shetty et al. (US Publication No. 2017/0316030 – “Shetty”).
Regarding claim 4, Hong in view of Ankireddypalle in further view of Shetty teaches The data storage system of claim 3, wherein: the snapshot is applied to the directory at a first time; and the implementation of the snapshot on the file is delayed until the request to modify the file is received at a second time subsequent to the first time (Shetty paragraph [0023], One or more techniques and/or computing devices for replicating virtual machine disk clones are provided herein. For example, a virtual machine, stored within first storage hosted by a first storage controller having a synchronous replication relationship with a second storage controller hosting second storage, may be determined as having synchronous replication protection such that the virtual machine, a virtual machine disk of the virtual machine, and/or virtual machine disk clones of the virtual machine disk are to be replicated from the first storage to the second storage. While the synchronous replication relationship is in-sync, virtual machine disk clone operations (e.g., a create, delete, or rename operation for the virtual machine disk), targeting the first storage, may be split into a replication virtual machine disk clone operation. In this way, the virtual machine disk clone operation may be locally implemented upon the first storage and the replication virtual machine disk clone operation may be remotely implemented upon the second storage. Symmetry between virtual machine disk clones within the first storage and replicated virtual machine disk clones within the second storage may be maintained while the synchronous replication relationship is in-sync or transitioning from out-of-sync to in-sync (e.g., inventory of clones/backups may be maintained between the first storage and the second storage). Snapshots may be applied to file directories, where the implementation of the snapshot can be delayed for a subsequent modification (i.e., a disk clone operation is performed, and then a re-sync operation is subsequently performed), for further details regarding the delayed/queued modifications, see Shetty paragraph [0057], During local implementation of the virtual machine disk clone operation, inflight operations, targeting the consistency group, may be drained (e.g., completed). In this way, the state of the virtual machine disk may be consistent. Responsive to the inflight operations being drained, the virtual machine disk clone operation may be locally implemented (e.g., the new virtual machine disk clone may be captured). While implementing the virtual machine disk clone operation, incoming inflight operations, targeting the consistency group, may be queued as queued inflight operations. Responsive to completing the local implementation of the virtual machine disk clone operation, the queued inflight operations may be dequeued and implemented. At 312, the replication virtual machine disk clone operation may be sent to the second storage controller for implementation upon the second storage (e.g., to create a replicated new virtual machine disk clone within the second storage). In this way, the virtual machine disk clone operation may be locally implemented upon the first storage and replicated to the second storage).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Hong and Ankireddypalle with those of Shetty. Shetty teaches using snapshots to provide backup versions of file data, which can be used to perform various modifications, as well as delaying implementation of the modifications, which can provide reliable backup data, as well as additional flexibility when performing sync or consistency operations (i.e., see Shetty paragraph [0057], At 306, a determination may be made that the virtual machine disk clone operation targets the virtual machine having the synchronous replication protection. Accordingly, the virtual machine disk clone operation may be split to create a replication virtual machine disk clone operation, at 308. At 310, the virtual machine disk clone operation may be locally implemented upon the first storage (e.g., to create a new virtual machine disk clone of the virtual machine disk of the virtual machine, to rename or delete a virtual machine disk clone of the virtual machine disk of the virtual machine, etc.). For example, the virtual machine may be part of a consistency group having the synchronous replication protection).
Claim 14 is the corresponding method claim to system claim 4. It is rejected with the same references and rationale.
Regarding claim 6, Hong in view of Ankireddypalle in further view of Shetty teaches The data storage system of claim 5, wherein: the first version of the data structure represents all files and directories within the directory tree of the directory at a first time; and the second version of the data structure represents all files and directories within the directory tree of the directory at a second time subsequent to the first time (Shetty paragraph [0062], One embodiment of replicating virtual machine disk clones is illustrated by an exemplary method 500 of FIG. 5. A first storage controller may host first storage comprising a volume within which one or more virtual machines and virtual machine disks (e.g., .VMDK files) are stored. The storage controller may have a synchronous replication relationship with a second storage controller hosting second storage. For example, the synchronous replication relationship may be specified for a virtual machine, a virtual machine disk, a file, a LUN, a directory, a consistency group of files and/or LUNs, and/or any other type of storage object, such that data is replicated from the first storage to the second storage. In this way, if the first storage controller has a failure, then the second storage controller can provide clients with failover access to replicated data within the second storage (e.g., the second storage controller may perform a switchover operation to take ownership of the second storage for serving replicated data to clients). Multiple versions of the data structure containing the files/directories may be contained as operations/modifications occur resulting in differing versions, for examples of modifications to the directory, also see Shetty paragraph [0059], A client may specify that the virtual machine 408 (e.g., but not the other virtual machines within the first storage 401) is to have synchronous replication protection. Accordingly, the virtual machine 408 and the virtual machine disk 410 may be replicated to the second storage 405 as a replicated virtual machine 412 and a replicated virtual machine disk 414. In this way, synchronous replication may be provided for the virtual machine 408 (e.g., client write operations that modify the virtual machine disk 410 may be replicated to the replicated virtual machine disk 414)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Hong and Ankireddypalle with those of Shetty. Shetty teaches using snapshots to provide backup versions of file data, which can be used to perform various modifications, as well as delaying implementation of the modifications, which can provide reliable backup data, as well as additional flexibility when performing sync or consistency operations (i.e., see Shetty paragraph [0057], At 306, a determination may be made that the virtual machine disk clone operation targets the virtual machine having the synchronous replication protection. Accordingly, the virtual machine disk clone operation may be split to create a replication virtual machine disk clone operation, at 308. At 310, the virtual machine disk clone operation may be locally implemented upon the first storage (e.g., to create a new virtual machine disk clone of the virtual machine disk of the virtual machine, to rename or delete a virtual machine disk clone of the virtual machine disk of the virtual machine, etc.). For example, the virtual machine may be part of a consistency group having the synchronous replication protection).
Claim 16 is the corresponding method claim to system claim 6. It is rejected with the same references and rationale.
Regarding claim 7, Hong in view of Ankireddypalle in further view of Shetty teaches The data storage system of claim 6, wherein the files and directories within the directory tree of the directory at the second time is different from the files and directories within the directory tree of the directory at the first time (Shetty paragraph [0062], One embodiment of replicating virtual machine disk clones is illustrated by an exemplary method 500 of FIG. 5. A first storage controller may host first storage comprising a volume within which one or more virtual machines and virtual machine disks (e.g., .VMDK files) are stored. The storage controller may have a synchronous replication relationship with a second storage controller hosting second storage. For example, the synchronous replication relationship may be specified for a virtual machine, a virtual machine disk, a file, a LUN, a directory, a consistency group of files and/or LUNs, and/or any other type of storage object, such that data is replicated from the first storage to the second storage. In this way, if the first storage controller has a failure, then the second storage controller can provide clients with failover access to replicated data within the second storage (e.g., the second storage controller may perform a switchover operation to take ownership of the second storage for serving replicated data to clients). Multiple versions of the data structure containing the files/directories may be contained as operations/modifications occur resulting in differing versions, for examples of modifications to the directory, also see Shetty paragraph [0059], A client may specify that the virtual machine 408 (e.g., but not the other virtual machines within the first storage 401) is to have synchronous replication protection. Accordingly, the virtual machine 408 and the virtual machine disk 410 may be replicated to the second storage 405 as a replicated virtual machine 412 and a replicated virtual machine disk 414. In this way, synchronous replication may be provided for the virtual machine 408 (e.g., client write operations that modify the virtual machine disk 410 may be replicated to the replicated virtual machine disk 414)).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Hong and Ankireddypalle with those of Shetty. Shetty teaches using snapshots to provide backup versions of file data, which can be used to perform various modifications, as well as delaying implementation of the modifications, which can provide reliable backup data, as well as additional flexibility when performing sync or consistency operations (i.e., see Shetty paragraph [0057], At 306, a determination may be made that the virtual machine disk clone operation targets the virtual machine having the synchronous replication protection. Accordingly, the virtual machine disk clone operation may be split to create a replication virtual machine disk clone operation, at 308. At 310, the virtual machine disk clone operation may be locally implemented upon the first storage (e.g., to create a new virtual machine disk clone of the virtual machine disk of the virtual machine, to rename or delete a virtual machine disk clone of the virtual machine disk of the virtual machine, etc.). For example, the virtual machine may be part of a consistency group having the synchronous replication protection).
Claim 17 is the corresponding method claim to system claim 7. It is rejected with the same references and rationale.
Claim(s) 8-10 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hong as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Shetty.
Regarding claim 8, Hong in view of Shetty teaches The data storage system of claim 1, wherein the operations comprise at least one of a snapshot operation, a cloning operation, a replication operation, a continuous data protection operation, a quota operation, a space management operation, or a space accounting operation (Shetty paragraph [0023], One or more techniques and/or computing devices for replicating virtual machine disk clones are provided herein. For example, a virtual machine, stored within first storage hosted by a first storage controller having a synchronous replication relationship with a second storage controller hosting second storage, may be determined as having synchronous replication protection such that the virtual machine, a virtual machine disk of the virtual machine, and/or virtual machine disk clones of the virtual machine disk are to be replicated from the first storage to the second storage. While the synchronous replication relationship is in-sync, virtual machine disk clone operations (e.g., a create, delete, or rename operation for the virtual machine disk), targeting the first storage, may be split into a replication virtual machine disk clone operation. The operation performed may be a snapshot, clone, replicate, or other various operation, also see Shetty paragraph [0005] for more information on snapshotting operations).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Hong with those of Shetty. Shetty teaches using snapshots to provide backup versions of file data, which can be used to perform various modifications, as well as delaying implementation of the modifications, which can provide reliable backup data, as well as additional flexibility when performing sync or consistency operations (i.e., see Shetty paragraph [0057], At 306, a determination may be made that the virtual machine disk clone operation targets the virtual machine having the synchronous replication protection. Accordingly, the virtual machine disk clone operation may be split to create a replication virtual machine disk clone operation, at 308. At 310, the virtual machine disk clone operation may be locally implemented upon the first storage (e.g., to create a new virtual machine disk clone of the virtual machine disk of the virtual machine, to rename or delete a virtual machine disk clone of the virtual machine disk of the virtual machine, etc.). For example, the virtual machine may be part of a consistency group having the synchronous replication protection).
Claim 18 is the corresponding method claim to system claim 8. It is rejected with the same references and rationale.
Regarding claim 9, Hong in view of Shetty teaches The data storage system of claim 1, wherein the directory is a managed directory configured to support application of operations to contents of the managed directory as a group (Shetty paragraph [0041], The operating system 208 can also manage communications for the data storage system, and communications between other data storage systems that may be in a clustered network, such as attached to a cluster fabric 215 (e.g., 106 in FIG. 1). Thus, the node 202, such as a network storage controller, can respond to host device requests to manage data on the data storage device 234 (e.g., or additional clustered devices) in accordance with these host device requests. The operating system 208 can often establish one or more file systems on the data storage system 200, where a file system can include software code and data structures that implement a persistent hierarchical namespace of files and directories, for example. As an example, when a new data storage device (not shown) is added to a clustered network system, the operating system 208 is informed where, in an existing directory tree, new files associated with the new data storage device are to be stored. This is often referred to as “mounting” a file system. The operating system can perform various operations on the directory of the file system, managing the file system contents).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Hong with those of Shetty. Shetty teaches using snapshots to provide backup versions of file data, which can be used to perform various modifications, as well as delaying implementation of the modifications, which can provide reliable backup data, as well as additional flexibility when performing sync or consistency operations (i.e., see Shetty paragraph [0057], At 306, a determination may be made that the virtual machine disk clone operation targets the virtual machine having the synchronous replication protection. Accordingly, the virtual machine disk clone operation may be split to create a replication virtual machine disk clone operation, at 308. At 310, the virtual machine disk clone operation may be locally implemented upon the first storage (e.g., to create a new virtual machine disk clone of the virtual machine disk of the virtual machine, to rename or delete a virtual machine disk clone of the virtual machine disk of the virtual machine, etc.). For example, the virtual machine may be part of a consistency group having the synchronous replication protection).
Claim 19 is the corresponding method claim to system claim 9. It is rejected with the same references and rationale.
Regarding claim 10, Hong in view of Shetty teaches The data storage system of claim 9, wherein the managed directory is a subdirectory within a root directory tree of the file system (Shetty paragraph [0041], The operating system 208 can also manage communications for the data storage system, and communications between other data storage systems that may be in a clustered network, such as attached to a cluster fabric 215 (e.g., 106 in FIG. 1). Thus, the node 202, such as a network storage controller, can respond to host device requests to manage data on the data storage device 234 (e.g., or additional clustered devices) in accordance with these host device requests. The operating system 208 can often establish one or more file systems on the data storage system 200, where a file system can include software code and data structures that implement a persistent hierarchical namespace of files and directories, for example. As an example, when a new data storage device (not shown) is added to a clustered network system, the operating system 208 is informed where, in an existing directory tree, new files associated with the new data storage device are to be stored. This is often referred to as “mounting” a file system. The directory tree may utilize a hierarchical structure which can have new files added for operations, resulting in a subdirectory at a lower hierarchy level within an existing (i.e., root) directory).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the teachings of Hong with those of Shetty. Shetty teaches using a directory tree for managing a file system, which can allow for more efficient managing of memory, see Shetty paragraph [0041-0042], In the example data storage system 200, memory 206 can include storage locations that are addressable by the processors 204 and network adapters 210, 212, 214 for storing related software application code and data structures. The processors 204 and network adapters 210, 212, 214 may, for example, include processing elements and/or logic circuitry configured to execute the software code and manipulate the data structures. The operating system 208, portions of which are typically resident in the memory 206 and executed by the processing elements, functionally organizes the storage system by, among other things, invoking storage operations in support of a file service implemented by the storage system. It will be apparent to those skilled in the art that other processing and memory mechanisms, including various computer readable media, may be used for storing and/or executing application instructions pertaining to the techniques described herein. For example, the operating system can also utilize one or more control files (not shown) to aid in the provisioning of virtual machines).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kanteti et al. (US Publication No. 2016/0048351 – “Kanteti”) teaches the concept of a virtual file system utilizing directories and subdirectories to perform modifications to file system objects for various operations (i.e., see Kanteti Fig. 1; Kanteti paragraphs [0012-0013], Subsequently received access requests for applying a file system action a file system object located with a subdirectory are then serviced by the primary and restore nodes using only the virtual file system level object information and not the subdirectory directly. This ensures that the virtual file system objects remain transparent to the application. In this arrangement, a property may be associated with two or more virtual file system objects to indicate that an access request applies to two or more subdirectories as a consistency group.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONAH C KRIEGER whose telephone number is (571)272-3627. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 5 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, Rocio Del Mar Perez-Velez can be reached at (571)-270-5935. 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.
/J.C.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2133
/ROCIO DEL MAR PEREZ-VELEZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2133
Prosecution Insights