DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending in the present application.
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 19 May 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
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. Regarding claim 1, the detailed disclosure does not appear to use the term origin. The limitations of claims 8 and 15 parallel claim 1; therefore, they are rejected under the same rationale. Claims 2-7, 9-14, and 16-20 are rejected based on dependency..
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the following limitation is vague: “extract the information that identifies the origin of the request from the query results; and output, based on the extracted information, a summary corresponding to the origin of the results.” [note: claim 1, lines 27-30]. The detailed disclosure does not appear to use the term origin. Also, the term lacks proper antecedent basis; therefore it is vague.
The limitations of claims 8 and 15 parallel claim 1, therefore they are rejected under the same rationale. Claims 2-7, 9-14, and 16-20 are rejected based on dependency.
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 conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,386,840 B2 Kandukuri et al. in view of Aleti et al. US Patent 11,693,710 B1. Although Patent No. 12,386,840 B2 Kandukuri et al. teach the invention substantially, they do not explicitly claim a summary; however Aleti et al. teach a summary as part of generating a report [see: column 10 lines 25-31 report including visualizations; and column 15 lines 24-54, creation of a summary the summarization engine periodically generates updated reports]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill at the time of the effective filing date to have combined the cited reference because a summary would provide an optimized viewing of reports generated.
19/275,057
1. A computing device comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the computing device to: receive a request to execute a query on at least one of a plurality of data warehouses; modify the query by adding, one or more portions of the query, information that identifies an origin of the request; identify a plurality of virtual warehouses, wherein each of the plurality of virtual warehouses comprises a respective set of computing resources configured to execute one or more queries with respect to at least a portion of the plurality of data warehouses; select a first virtual warehouse of the plurality of virtual warehouses based on one or more of: an operating status of the plurality of virtual warehouses, processing capabilities of the plurality of virtual warehouses, or a predicted processing complexity of the query; cause the first virtual warehouse to execute the query; receive, based on execution of the query by the first virtual warehouse, query results that comprise the one or more portions of the query; extract the information that identifies the origin of the request from the query results; and output, based on the extracted information, a summary corresponding to the origin of the request.
2. The computing device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the computing device to: identify an execution plan for the query by determining one or more sub-queries to be executed with respect to one or more of the plurality of data warehouses; and determine, based on the query and the execution plan, the predicted processing complexity of the query.
3. The computing device of claim 1, wherein the query results indicate a quantity of data processed by the first virtual warehouse.
4. The computing device of claim 1, wherein the query results indicate a time period during which the first virtual warehouse executed the query.
5. The computing device of claim 1, wherein the summary comprises a report of one or more queries, associated with the information, over a period of time.
6. The computing device of claim 1, wherein the summary comprises an indication of aggregated query information for a plurality of different origins.
7. The computing device of claim 1, wherein the summary is based on a size of the first virtual warehouse.
8. A method comprising: receiving a request to execute a query on at least one of a plurality of data warehouses; modifying the query by adding, one or more portions of the query, information that identifies an origin of the request; identifying a plurality of virtual warehouses, wherein each of the plurality of virtual warehouses comprises a respective set of computing resources configured to execute one or more queries with respect to at least a portion of the plurality of data warehouses; selecting a first virtual warehouse of the plurality of virtual warehouses based on one or more of: an operating status of the plurality of virtual warehouses, processing capabilities of the plurality of virtual warehouses, or a predicted processing complexity of the query; causing the first virtual warehouse to execute the query; receiving, based on execution of the query by the first virtual warehouse, query results that comprise the one or more portions of the query; extracting the information that identifies the origin of the request from the query results; and outputting, based on the extracted information, a summary corresponding to the origin of the request.
9. The method of claim 8, further comprising: identifying an execution plan for the query by determining one or more sub-queries to be executed with respect to one or more of the plurality of data warehouses; and determining, based on the query and the execution plan, the predicted processing complexity of the query.
10. The method of claim 8, wherein the query results indicate a quantity of data processed by the first virtual warehouse.
11. The method of claim 8, wherein the query results indicate a time period during which the first virtual warehouse executed the query.
12. The method of claim 8, wherein the summary comprises a report of one or more queries, associated with the information, over a period of time.
13. The method of claim 8, wherein the summary comprises an indication of aggregated query information for a plurality of different origins.
14. The method of claim 8, wherein the summary is based on a size of the first virtual warehouse.
15. One or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a computing device, cause the computing device to: receive a request to execute a query on at least one of a plurality of data warehouses; modify the query by adding, one or more portions of the query, information that identifies an origin of the request; identify a plurality of virtual warehouses, wherein each of the plurality of virtual warehouses comprises a respective set of computing resources configured to execute one or more queries with respect to at least a portion of the plurality of data warehouses; select a first virtual warehouse of the plurality of virtual warehouses based on one or more of: an operating status of the plurality of virtual warehouses, processing capabilities of the plurality of virtual warehouses, or a predicted processing complexity of the query; cause the first virtual warehouse to execute the query; receive, based on execution of the query by the first virtual warehouse, query results that comprise the one or more portions of the query; extract the information that identifies the origin of the request from the query results; and output, based on the extracted information, a summary corresponding to the origin of the request.
16. The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the computing device to: identify an execution plan for the query by determining one or more sub-queries to be executed with respect to one or more of the plurality of data warehouses; and determine, based on the query and the execution plan, the predicted processing complexity of the query.
17. The or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein the query results indicate a quantity of data processed by the first virtual warehouse.
18. The or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein the query results indicate a time period during which the first virtual warehouse executed the query.
19. The or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein the summary comprises a report of one or more queries, associated with the information, over a period of time.
20. The or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein the summary comprises an indication of aggregated query information for a plurality of different origins.
US Patent 12,386,840 B2
1. A computing device comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the computing device to: receive, from a user device, a request to execute a query on at least one of a plurality of data warehouses; modify the query by adding, to a metadata field of the query, information that identifies a user of the user device; identify a plurality of virtual warehouses, wherein each of the plurality of virtual warehouses comprises a respective set of computing resources configured to: execute one or more queries with respect to at least a portion of the plurality of data warehouses; collect results from the one or more queries; and provide, to the user device, access to the collected results; select a first virtual warehouse of the plurality of virtual warehouses based on one or more of: an operating status of the plurality of virtual warehouses, processing capabilities of the plurality of virtual warehouses, or a predicted processing complexity of the query; cause the first virtual warehouse to execute the query; receive, based on execution of the query by the first virtual warehouse: query results that comprise the metadata field; and costs data; extract the information that identifies the user of the user device from the metadata field in the query results; and output, based on the costs data and the extracted information in the metadata field of the query results, query cost information corresponding to the information.
2. The computing device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the computing device to: identify an execution plan for the query by determining one or more sub-queries to be executed with respect to one or more of the plurality of data warehouses; and determine, based on the query and the execution plan, the predicted processing complexity of the query.
3. The computing device of claim 1, wherein the costs data corresponds to a quantity of data processed by the first virtual warehouse.
4. The computing device of claim 1, wherein the costs data corresponds to a time period during which the first virtual warehouse executed the query.
5. The computing device of claim 1, wherein the output query cost information comprises a report of query costs, associated with the information, over a period of time.
6. The computing device of claim 1, wherein the output query cost information comprises an indication of aggregated query cost information for a plurality of different organizations.
7. The computing device of claim 1, wherein the query cost information is based on a size of the first virtual warehouse.
8. A method comprising: receiving, from a user device, a request to execute a query on at least one of a plurality of data warehouses; modifying the query by adding, to a metadata field of the query, information that identifies a user of the user device; identifying a plurality of virtual warehouses, wherein each of the plurality of virtual warehouses comprises a respective set of computing resources configured to: execute one or more queries with respect to at least a portion of the plurality of data warehouses; collect results from the one or more queries; and provide, to the user device, access to the collected results; selecting a first virtual warehouse of the plurality of virtual warehouses based on one or more of: an operating status of the plurality of virtual warehouses, processing capabilities of the plurality of virtual warehouses, or a predicted processing complexity of the query; causing the first virtual warehouse to execute the query; receiving, based on execution of the query by the first virtual warehouse: query results that comprise the metadata field; and costs data; extracting the information that identifies the user of the user device from the metadata field in the query results; and outputting, based on the costs data and the extracted information in the metadata field of the query results, query cost information corresponding to the information.
9. The method of claim 8, further comprising: identifying an execution plan for the query by determining one or more sub-queries to be executed with respect to one or more of the plurality of data warehouses; and determine, based on the query and the execution plan, the predicted processing complexity of the query.
10. The method of claim 8, wherein the costs data corresponds to a quantity of data processed by the first virtual warehouse.
11. The method of claim 8, wherein the costs data corresponds to a time period during which the first virtual warehouse executed the query.
12. The method of claim 8, wherein output query cost information comprises a report of query costs, associated with the information, over a period of time.
13. The method of claim 8, wherein the output query cost information comprises an indication of aggregated query cost information for a plurality of different organizations.
14. The method of claim 8, wherein the query cost information is based on a size of the first virtual warehouse.
15. One or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause a computing device to: receive, from a user device, a request to execute a query on at least one of a plurality of data warehouses; modify the query by adding, to a metadata field of the query, information that identifies a user of the user device; identify a plurality of virtual warehouses, wherein each of the plurality of virtual warehouses comprises a respective set of computing resources configured to: execute one or more queries with respect to at least a portion of the plurality of data warehouses; collect results from the one or more queries; and provide, to the user device, access to the collected results; select a first virtual warehouse of the plurality of virtual warehouses based on one or more of: an operating status of the plurality of virtual warehouses, processing capabilities of the plurality of virtual warehouses, or a predicted processing complexity of the query; cause the first virtual warehouse to execute the query; receive, based on execution of the query by the first virtual warehouse: query results that comprise the metadata field; and costs data; extract the information that identifies the user of the user device from the metadata field in the query results; and output, based on the costs data and the extracted information in the metadata field of the query results, query cost information corresponding to the information.
16. The computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, further cause the computing device to: identify an execution plan for the query by determining one or more sub-queries to be executed with respect to one or more of the plurality of data warehouses; and determine, based on the query and the execution plan, the predicted processing complexity of the query.
17. The computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein the costs data corresponds to a quantity of data processed by the first virtual warehouse.
18. The computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein the costs data corresponds to a time period during which the first virtual warehouse executed the query.
19. The computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein the output query cost information comprises a report of query costs, associated with the information, over a period of time.
20. The computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein the output query cost information comprises an indication of aggregated query cost information for a plurality of different organizations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Note attached form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GRETA ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)272-4118. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 9:30AM-6:00PM.
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, Hassan Mahmoudi can be reached at 571-272-4078. 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.
/GRETA L ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2163
Prosecution Insights