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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are present in this application. Claims 1-20 are pending in this office action.
This office action is NON-FINAL.
Drawings
The Drawings filed on 08/05/25 are acceptable for examination purposes.
Specification
The Specification filed on 08/05/25 acceptable for examination purposes.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) filed on 08/05/25 have
been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file
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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used.
Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 of the instant application is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory
obviousness type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of US Patent No. 12, 380, 132 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they
are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-20 of US Patent No. 12, 380, 132 B2 recite the elements of Claims 1-20 of the Instant application 19/291,451.
Both claim features of the instant application 19/291,451 and US Patent No. 12, 380, 132 B2 can be compared as follows:
Instant Application 19/291,451
US Patent No. 12, 380, 132 B2
1. A system for detaching partitioned data control logic related to a railroad system, comprising:
a memory including a database with a plurality of partitions, tables, or jobs;
a configuration file including or more parameters, instructions, operations, or conditions related to database management; and
a processor operably coupled to the memory and capable of executing machine- readable instructions to perform program steps, the program steps comprising:
initializing the configuration file and determining whether required file systems are accessible;
initializing variables used in executing detach data instructions;
generating a detach data library identifying data to detach;
collecting metrics about the data to detach;
determining a type of key that is supported based on at least one of a date, a group value, and a member value;
determining whether a table is partitioned;
determining whether a number of partitions is supported;
generate detach data instructions to detach a partition and restore the table objects to a normal state; and
deleting the data based on the detach data instructions.
1 A system for detaching partitioned data control logic related to a railroad system, comprising:
a memory including a database with a plurality of partitions, tables, or jobs;
a configuration file including or more parameters, instructions, operations, or conditions related to database management; and
a processor operably coupled to the memory and capable of executing machine-readable instructions to perform program steps, the program steps comprising:
initializing the configuration file and determining whether required file systems are accessible;
initializing variables used in executing detach data instructions;
generating a detach data library identifying data to detach;
collecting metrics about the data to detach;
identifying data structures based on at least one of three key pattern groups defined for each partition to determine a type of key that is supported, wherein the three key pattern groups include a date indicating a date range to include data, a group value indicating a particular group
for detaching the data, and a member value indicating whether data belongs to a particular group, wherein identifying the data structures based on the at least one of three key pattern groups includes
executing a key pattern when each of the three key pattern groups is determined to be valid and foreclosing execution of the key pattern when at least one key pattern group of the three key pattern
groups is determined to be invalid;
determining whether a table is partitioned;
determining whether a number of partitions is supported;
generate detach data instructions to detach a partition and restore the table objects to a normal state; and
deleting the data based on the detach data instructions.
2. The system of Claim 1, the program steps further comprising providing a user interface for modifying an administrative portion, including algorithms and thresholds.
2. The system of Claim 1, the program steps further comprising providing a user interface for modifying an administrative portion, including algorithms and thresholds.
3. The system of Claim 1, wherein the instructions identify specific data structures using the identifications.
3. The system of Claim 1, wherein the instructions identify specific data structures using the identifications.
4. The system of Claim 3, wherein the data structures are organized into data clusters providing information regarding the identifications of the data structures.
4. The system of Claim 3, wherein the data structures are organized into data clusters providing information regarding the identifications of the data structures.
5. The system of Claim 1, wherein the data is partitioned when the table is organized according to a predetermined structure.
5. The system of Claim 1, wherein the data is partitioned when the table is organized according to a predetermined structure.
6. The system of Claim 5, wherein the predetermined structure includes organizing the columns of the table based on an event code, an event type, a message, or a row identifier.
6. The system of Claim 5, wherein the predetermined structure includes organizing the columns of the table based on an event code, an event type, a message, or a row identifier.
7. The system of Claim 1, wherein the number of partitions is supported when a number of allocated partitions is greater than a number of partitions retained.
7. The system of Claim 1, wherein the number of partitions is supported when a number of allocated partitions is greater than a number of partitions retained.
8. The system of Claim 1, the program steps further comprising collecting metric data about cluster members of the database.
8. The system of Claim 1, the program steps further comprising collecting metric data about cluster members of the database.
9. The system of Claim 8, wherein the cluster members of the database are particular groups of data structures with assigned identification providing information regarding the data
structures.
9. The system of Claim 8, wherein the cluster members of the database are particular groups of data structures with assigned identification providing information regarding the data structures.
10. The system of Claim 1, the program steps further comprising indexing table objects by defining global indexes, table constraints, and table triggers.
10. The system of Claim 1, the program steps further comprising indexing table objects by defining global indexes, table constraints, and table triggers.
Claim Rejections 35 U.S.C. §103
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. Claims 1-9 and 11-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable
over ADAYILAMURIYIL et al. (US 2015/0106407 A1) in view of Hobson et al. (US
2018/0191706 A1).
Regarding claim 1, ADAYILAMURIYIL teaches a system for detaching partitioned data control logic related to a railroad system, comprising, (See ADAYILAMURIYIL paragraph [0127], The DISCARD keyword specifies that successfully detached partitions be dropped, so that unneeded data is removed in a timely manner):
a memory, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0019], one or more memories), including a database with a plurality of partitions, tables, or jobs, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0058], detect detached partitions and archive their contents into different tables, archive their contents into different databases);
a configuration file including or more parameters, instructions, operations, or conditions, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0171], computer system executable instructions, such as program modules, being executed by a computer system), related to database management, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0037], the server computer 100 is a database server. The RDBMS 110 includes a Physical Schema Management System); and
a processor operably coupled to the memory and capable of executing machine- readable instructions to perform program steps, the program steps comprising, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0017], The computer system comprises one or more processors, one or more computer-readable memories and one or more computer-readable, tangible storage devices; and program instructions):
initializing variables used in executing detach data instructions, (See
Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0006], dropping a partition, may require an exclusive lock and access to the table from which a partition is being detached);
generating a detach data library identifying data to detach, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0149] See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0017], a feature of storing additional information in the system catalogs, and a feature of using information and the online create/attach/detach/modify facilities to do the required operation via the built-in job schedule);
collecting metrics about the data to detach, (See Adayilamuriyil
paragraph [0150], performing the event to the data selected from a group
consisting of add, drop, detach, discard, and otherwise modify (e.g., compress, repack, shrink, and other administrative actions) a partition. With embodiments, the data is for records in a database);
determining a type of key that is supported based on at least one of a date, a group value, and a member value, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0086], the partition key range that include the new data values);
determining whether a table is partitioned, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0111], creates for rolling window tables may be called rolling partitions);
determining whether a number of partitions is supported, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0111], creates for rolling window tables may be called rolling partitions);
generate detach data instructions to detach a partition and restore the table objects to a normal state, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0115],
when range partitions are being detached or discarded, they are replaced with new empty partitions for storing the same ranges of values so that the schema of the table is preserved); and
deleting the data based on the detach data instructions, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0127], The DISCARD keyword specifies that successfully detached partitions be dropped, so that unneeded data is removed in a timely manner).
Adayilamuriyil does not explicitly disclose initializing the configuration file and determining whether required file systems are accessible.
However, Hobson teaches initializing the configuration file, (See Hobson
paragraph [0068], configuration type determiner 610 receives a
configuration file and parses and processes the configuration file); and determining whether required file systems are accessible, (See Hobson paragraph [0050], 140 determines, based at least on the configuration parameter, whether to allow execution of a read or write request using the shared resource 130. At 318, an answering token (or an access token) is issued for the application 21).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, to modify initializing the configuration file and determining whether required file systems are accessible of
Hobson in order to controlling access to a shared resource based on a configuration parameter that relates to a relationship between read and write requests to access the shared resource.
Claim 11 recites the same limitations as claim 1 above. Therefore, claim
11 is rejected based on the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 2, Adayilamuriyil taught the system according to claim 1, as
described above. Adayilamuriyil further teaches the program steps further comprising providing a user interface for modifying an administrative portion, including algorithms and thresholds, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0150], detecting the criteria specified by the interface, automatically performing the event to the data selected from a group consisting of add, drop, detach, discard, and otherwise modify (e.g.,. compress, repack, shrink, and other administrative actions) a partition… the parameters to the interface are selected from a group consisting of range, limit, rolling, interval, size, purge, etc.).
Claim 12 recites the same limitations as claim 2 above. Therefore, claim
12 s rejected based on the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 3, Adayilamuriyil taught the system according to claim 1, as
described above. Adayilamuriyil further teaches wherein the instructions identify specific data structures using the identifications, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0127], The DISCARD keyword specifies that successfully detached partitions be dropped, so that unneeded data is removed in a timely manner).
Claim 13 recites the same limitations as claim 3 above. Therefore, claim
Is rejected based on the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 4, Adayilamuriyil taught the system according to claim 3, as
described above. Adayilamuriyil further teaches wherein the data structures are organized into data clusters providing information regarding the identifications of the data structures, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0150], performing the event to the data selected from a group consisting of add, drop, detach, discard, and otherwise modify (e.g., compress, repack, shrink, and other administrative actions) a partition. With embodiments, the data is for records in a database).
Claim 14 recites the same limitations as claim 4 above. Therefore, claim
is rejected based on the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 5, Adayilamuriyil taught the system according to claim 3, as
described above. Adayilamuriyil further teaches wherein the data is partitioned when the table is organized according to a predetermined structure, (See Adayilamuriyil
paragraph [0143], determines that a purge policy is to be enforced, selects a
partition to be one of detached and discarded, and detaches or discards the selected partition).
Claim 15 recites the same limitations as claim 5 above. Therefore, claim
is rejected based on the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 6, Adayilamuriyil taught the system according to claim 5, as
described above. Adayilamuriyil further teaches wherein the predetermined structure includes organizing the columns of the table based on an event code, an event type, a message, or a row identifier, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0049], Each partition
may hold a specific set of values for the column used for partitioning (e.g., for a
table partitioned on an integer column, the first partition may hold values from
10001 to 20000, the second partition may hold values from 20001 to 30000, etc.).
Claim 16 recites the same limitations as claim 6 above. Therefore, claim 16 is rejected based on the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 7, Adayilamuriyil taught the system according to claim 1, as
described above. Adayilamuriyil further teaches wherein the number of partitions is supported when a number of allocated partitions is greater than a number of partitions retained, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0048], The LIMIT TO clause specifies the
maximum size of the table. When either the number of interval partitions exceeds
the number set in the ROLLING PARTITIONS clause or the overall (data and
indices) allocated table size exceeds the size set in the LIMIT TO clause,
partitions are detached to stand-alone tables).
Claim 17 recites the same limitations as claim 7 above. Therefore, claim
rejected based on the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 8, Adayilamuriyil taught the system according to claim 1, as
described above. Adayilamuriyil further teaches the program steps further comprising collecting metric data about cluster members of the database, (See Adayilamuriyil
paragraph [0150], performing the event to the data selected from a group
consisting of add, drop, detach, discard, and otherwise modify (e.g., compress,
repack, shrink, and other administrative actions) a partition… the data is for
records in a database).
Claim 18 recites the same limitations as claim 8 above. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected based on the same reasoning.
Regarding claim 9, Adayilamuriyil taught the system according to claim 8, as
described above. Adayilamuriyil further teaches wherein the cluster members of the database are particular groups of data structures with assigned identification providing information regarding the data structures, (See Adayilamuriyil paragraph [0150],
performing the event to the data selected from a group consisting of add, drop,
detach, discard, and otherwise modify (e.g., compress, repack, shrink, and other
administrative actions) a partition… the data is for records in a database).
Claim 19 recites the same limitations as claim 9 above. Therefore, claim
19 is rejected based on the same reasoning.
10. Claims 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
ADAYILAMURIYIL et al. (US 2015/0106407 A1) in view of Hobson et al. (US
2018/0191706 A1) and further in view of BAER et al. (US 2017/0109377 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Adayilamuriyil together with Hobson l taught the system
according to claim 1, as described above.
Adayilamuriyil together with Hobson does not explicitly disclose the program steps further comprising indexing table objects by defining global indexes, table constraints, and table triggers.
However, BAER teaches the program steps further comprising indexing table
objects by defining global indexes, table constraints, and table triggers, (See BAER
paragraph [0070], a global partitioned unique index…the table being modified
(e.g., triggers, constraints, ancillary structures, etc.) are retained and/or updated
on the partitioned table as well).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention was made, to modify the program steps
further comprising indexing table objects by defining global indexes, table constraints,
and table triggers of BAER in order to control access to a shared resource based on
a configuration parameter that relates to a relationship between read and write requests
to access the shared resource.
Conclusions/Points of Contacts
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant’s disclosure. See form PTO-892.
Golding (US 11,061,930 B1), Systems and methods are provided to implement a
partitioned data store that transparently manages the partitioning of storage objects.
Keller (US 2019/0065573 A1), database queries that require read access to rows
based on that column can be satisfied by accessing just one of the plurality of partitions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MULUEMEBET GURMU whose telephone number is (571)270-7095. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5pm.
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, Tony Mahmoudi can be reached at 5712724078. 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.
/MULUEMEBET GURMU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2163
Prosecution Insights