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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending for examination in instant application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/31/2025 is/are 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
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 Wang et al. (Pub. No.: US 2014/0344810 A1), hereinafter “Wang”.
As to claim 1. Wang disclose, a dedicated host creation method applied to a cloud management platform (Wang [0179] virtual resource management and [0182], cloud application.) and the method comprising:
obtaining a first metric comprising a first delay between dedicated hosts in a first dedicated host cluster (Wang, [0180], step 501, obtains a QoS constraint parameter of the virtual machine cluster recorded in a creation process of the virtual machine cluster or in an operation process of the virtual machine cluster.);
obtaining a second delay comprising an actual delay between the dedicated hosts; generating a first condition based on the first delay and the second delay, wherein the first condition indicates a preset value relationship between the first delay and the second delay (Wang, [0182-0185], step-502, the lower layer scheduling module obtains operating information of a cloud application, that is , obtains operating information of a created VM cluster. For example, for a cloud application 1, the operating information of the VM cluster1 is obtained. Step 503, the lower layer scheduling module obtains, according to the obtained operating information of the created VM cluster, the current operating status statistical indicator of the VM cluster.) ; and
creating a second dedicated host cluster based on the first condition (Wang, [0190-208], step504, The lower layer scheduling module, according to the QoS constraint parameter of the virtual machine cluster and the current operating status statistical indicator of the virtual machine cluster, adjusts the physical resource scheduling policy of the physical device platform or performs the physical resource scheduling on the physical device platform. In this step, according to the QoS constraint parameter of the virtual machine cluster and the current operating status statistical indicator of the virtual machine cluster, the physical resource scheduling or the modification of the physical resource scheduling policy is performed, so as to ensure the QoS of the VM Cluster. Specifically, the physical resource scheduling or the modification of the physical resource scheduling policy may be performed in the following several manners ... (2) At least one physical machine on the physical device platform is powered up ... (4) The virtual machine of the virtual machine cluster is centrally deployed on a same physical machine. When the QoS constraint parameter of the virtual machine cluster that is obtained in step 501 includes the average communication delay constraint parameter of the virtual machine cluster, accordingly, the obtaining the current operating status statistical indicator of the virtual machine cluster in step 503 includes: obtaining a statistical value of the current average communication delay of the virtual machine cluster. In this case, the lower layer scheduling module compares the statistical value of the current average communication delay of the virtual machine cluster with the average communication delay constraint parameter of the virtual machine cluster. If the statistical value of the current average communication delay of the virtual machine cluster is greater than the average communication delay constraint parameter of the virtual machine cluster, or a difference between the two is smaller than a set tolerance threshold, the virtual machine of the virtual machine. cluster is centrally deployed on the same physical machine, so as to decrease the communication delay of the virtual machine cluster, thereby ensuring the QoS of the cloud application.").
As to claim 19 and 20 are rejected for same rationale as applied to claim 1 above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 non-obviousness.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang as applied above in view of Li et al. (Pub. No.: US 2016/0006634 A1), hereinafter “Li”.
As to claim 2. Wang discloses, wherein the first delay comprises a first average delay and a first maximum delay between the dedicated hosts, the second delay comprises a second average delay and a second maximum delay between the dedicated hosts, and generating the first condition based on the first delay and the second delay (Wang, [0019], [0056], [0186], [0189], [0207-0208], [0219], Average communication delay and “largest value” statistic; delay between “any two VMs”; QoS based scheduling /placement) comprises:
generating a second condition based on a preset value relationship between the first average delay and the second average delay (Wang, [0189], [0207-0208], [0219], Average delay Vs. delay constraint parameter; threshold/tolerance comparison);
combining the second condition and the third condition to generate the first condition (Wang, [0019], [0208],[0219], Wang’s delay response may be triggered when either of two predefined average delay criteria is satisfied: the current average is greater than the constraint or the difference is smaller than a tolerance threshold. Wang further teaches in [0059-0061], [0190-0191], policy based scheduling using QoS parameters and current operating statistics.).
Wang however is silent to disclose explicitly, generating a third condition based on a preset value relationship between the first maximum delay and the second maximum delay.
Li discloses a similar concept in the same field of endeavor including, generating a third condition based on a preset value relationship between the first maximum delay and the second maximum delay [0005-0006], [0055-0062], teaches repeated round trip delay measurements for a network device pair, producing a population of values from which a maximum may be selected.); and
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the instant application it would have been obvious to one of the skilled in the art to incorporate the teachings of Li (endpoint pair, packet based delay measurement) into those of Wang (VM cluster QoS and placement framework by providing a technique for measuring those delay statistics between particular communicating endpoints without injecting additional test traffic, thereby reducing measurement related network load.
As to claim 12 is rejected for same rationale as applied to claim 2 above.
Claim(s) 3-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang as applied above in view of Li et al. (Pub. No.: US 2016/0006634 A1), hereinafter “Li” and further in view of Kulshreshta et al. (Pub. No.: US 2018/0270129 A1), hereinafter “Kul”.
As to claim 3. The combined system of Wang and Li discloses the invention as applied above. Wang and Li however are silent to disclose explicitly,
obtaining a total quantity of the dedicated hosts and a delay between every two of the dedicated hosts;
determining the second maximum delay based on the delay between every two of the dedicated hosts; and
determining the second average delay based on the total quantity of the dedicated hosts and the delay between every two of the dedicated hosts.
Kul however disclose a similar concept in the same field of endeavor including, obtaining a total quantity of the dedicated hosts and a delay between every two of the dedicated hosts (Kul, [0014], discloses plurality of nodes and expressly identifies firs, second and third nodes for forming pairwise latency distribution. The three node example necessarily entails a known node quantity for defining the three pairwise relationships. The monitoring device also generates a graph of the node topology showing one or more communication links between the nodes, and annotates each communication link of the one or more communication links with at least one of a mean response time or a median response time based on at least one of the latency distributions.);
determining the second maximum delay based on the delay between every two of the dedicated hosts (Kul, [0037], the latency distribution shown in graph 402 may also indicate one or more outlier latency values, which can be determined according to policies of the communication network and/or according to pre-determined thresholds. For example, certain outlier latency values may result from dropped packets, internal device buffering, or other network conditions not relevant to an initial network topology mapping.); and
determining the second average delay based on the total quantity of the dedicated hosts and the delay between every two of the dedicated hosts (Kul, [0037], these outlier latency values may indicate communications issues amongst nodes—e.g., when a measured response time is (statistically) greater than a median response time, a mean response time, and the like.).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the instant application it would have been obvious to one of the skilled in the art to incorporate the teachings of “Kul” into those of “Wang and Li” to provide Li’s Pairwise monitoring into Wang’s QoS framework would allow the resource manager to obtain delay data for each host pair supporting the VM cluster and to base placement/scheduling on complete cluster communication performance rather than a single selected pair, thereby predictably improving QoS assurance and reducing the risk that high delay host pair degrades the cluster.
As to claim 4. The combined system of “Wang, Li and Kul” disclose the invention as applied above including, wherein determining the second maximum delay based on the delay between every two of the dedicated hosts (Wang, [0186], [0189]) comprises:
determining a maximum delay value from the delay between every two of the dedicated hosts (Li, [0061-0062], recording times for multiple packets, determining multiple round trip delays and averaging them. Also see Kul, [0025].), and
determining the maximum delay value as the second maximum delay (Kul, [0051], the monitoring device annotates, at step 930, each communication link with a representative response time or latency value. For example, the representative response time may include a mean response time, a median response time, or other measures of a response time from the corresponding latency distribution.).
As to claim 5. The combined system of “Wang, Li and Kul” disclose the invention as applied above including, wherein determining the second average delay based on the total quantity of the dedicated hosts and the delay between every two of the dedicated hosts comprises: determining a quotient of a sum of the delay between every two of the dedicated hosts and the total quantity of the dedicated hosts as the second average delay (Kul, [0027], Based on the time stamp data for each message, the monitoring device can determine latency distributions between pairs of nodes, and further determine representative latency values—e.g., mean latency, median latency, and the like. In some embodiments, outlier latency values or “bad” packet response times in a latency distribution may be eliminated or removed so as to avoid skewing the representative latency values (e.g., for initial network topology mapping). Therefore, further calculation variation can be derived from the given context combining the teachings of Wang (average communication delay) and Li (aggregating multiple delay samples).).
As to claim 6. The combined system of “Wang, Li and Kul” disclose the invention as applied above including, wherein creating the second dedicated host cluster based on the first condition comprises: determining, from the first dedicated host cluster, a dedicated host cluster that meets the first condition; and determining the dedicated host cluster that meets the first condition as the second dedicated host cluster (Kul, [0027], Based on the time stamp data for each message, the monitoring device can determine latency distributions between pairs of nodes, and further determine representative latency values - e.g., mean latency, median latency, and the like. In some embodiments, outlier latency values or “bad” packet response times in a latency distribution may be eliminated or removed so as to avoid skewing the representative latency values (e.g., for initial network topology mapping). Therefore, further calculation variation can be derived from the given context combining the teachings of Wang (average communication delay) and Li (aggregating multiple delay samples).).
As to claim 7. The combined system of “Wang, Li and Kul” disclose the invention as applied above including, wherein determining, from the first dedicated host cluster, the dedicated host cluster that meets the first condition comprises: for every two of the dedicated hosts in the first dedicated host cluster, if the first delay between the two dedicated hosts is greater than or equal to the second delay, determining the two dedicated hosts as the dedicated host cluster that meets the first condition (Kul, [0027], Li, [0061-0062] and Wang, [0019, 0207-0209, 0219], see the rejection of claim 5-6 above. Additionally, Kul’s all pairs delay information and Li’s per pair average delay computation it would have been predictable design choice to derive further calculations per requirement.).
As to claim 13 are rejected for same rationale as applied to claim 3 above.
16. As to claim 14 are rejected for same rationale as applied to claim 4 above.
17. As to claim 15 are rejected for same rationale as applied to claim 5 above.
18. As to claim 16 are rejected for same rationale as applied to claim 6 above.
19. As to claim 17 are rejected for same rationale as applied to claim 7 above.
Examiner note: Claims 8-10 and 18-19 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see the attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TAUQIR HUSSAIN whose telephone number is (571)270-1247. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 - 8:00 with IFP.
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, Vivek Srivastava can be reached at 571 272-7304. 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.
/Tauqir Hussain/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2449
Prosecution Insights