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 .
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/12/2025 is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-18 and 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,430,076 contains every element of claims 1-15 of the instant application and as such anticipates claims 1-15 of the instant application.
Claim 1 of the present application corresponds to claims 1-3 of the ‘076 patent, where “A storage device…” corresponds to claim 1, line 1 of the ‘076 patent; where “a memory for storing…” corresponds to claim 1, line 2 of the ‘076 patent; “a controller…” corresponds to claim 1, line 3 of the ‘076 patent; “receive a compression write command from an outside…” corresponds to claim 1, lines 4-5 of the ‘076 patent; “determine whether a compression level indicated by the compression write command…” corresponds to claim 1, lines 6-9 and claim 2 of the ‘076 patent; “compress the original data into compressed data using the compression level…” corresponds to claim 1, lines 11-12 and 15-18, and claim 3 of the ‘076 patent; “compress the original data into compressed data using a preset compression level…” corresponds to claim 1, lines 12-14 and 19-22, and claim 3 of the ‘076 patent; and “store the compressed data…” corresponds to claim 1, line 10 of the ‘076 patent.
Claim 2 of the present application corresponds to claim 4 of the ‘076 patent, where “wherein the compression level indicates whether a first compression algorithm being used…” corresponds to claim 4 of the ‘076 patent.
Claim 3 of the present application corresponds to claim 5 of the ‘076 patent, where “wherein the controller further stores information indicating a second compression level into the memory…” corresponds to claim 5 of the ‘076 patent.
Claim 4 of the present application corresponds to claim 6 of the ‘076 patent, where “wherein the controller stores information indicating the second compression level as metadata…” corresponds to claim 6 of the ‘076 patent.
Claim 5 of the present application corresponds to claim 7 of the ‘076 patent, where “wherein the controller decompresses the compressed data…” corresponds to claim 7 of the ‘076 patent.
Claim 6 of the present application corresponds to claim 8 of the ‘076 patent, where “wherein the controller receives a decompression read command from the outside…” corresponds to claim 8, lines 1-3 of the ‘076 patent; and “wherein the controller decompresses, based on whether a third compression level that correspond to the decompression read command coincide…” corresponds to claim 8, lines 4-11 of the ‘076 patent.
Claim 7 of the present application corresponds to claim 10 of the ‘076 patent, where “wherein the controller of the storage device decompresses the compressed data into the original data when the outside has an amount…” corresponds to claim 10 of the ‘076 patent; and
“transmits the original data to the outside…” corresponds to claim 10, lines 5-6 of the ‘076 patent.
Claim 8 of the present application corresponds to claim 11 of the ‘076 patent, where “wherein the controller transmits the compressed data to the outside and the outside decompresses the compressed data…” corresponds to claim 11 of the ‘076 patent.
Claim 9 of the present application corresponds to claims 12-13 of the ‘076 patent, where “An operating method…” corresponds to claim 12, line 1 of the ‘076 patent; “receiving a compression write command from an outside…” corresponds to claim 12, lines 2-4 of the ‘076 patent; “determining whether a compression level indicated by the compression write command…” corresponds to claim 12, lines 5-7 of the ‘076 patent; “compressing the original data into compressed data using the compression level…” corresponds to claim 12, lines 15-19 and claim 13 of the ‘076 patent; “compressing the original data into compressed data using a preset compression level…” corresponds to claim 12, lines 19-23, and claim 13 of the ‘076 patent; and “storing the compressed data…” corresponds to claim 12, line 13-14 of the ‘076 patent.
Claim 10 of the present application corresponds to claim 14 of the ‘076 patent, where “wherein the compression level indicates whether a first compression algorithm being used…” corresponds to claim 14 of the ‘076 patent.
Claim 11 of the present application corresponds to claim 15 of the ‘076 patent, where “storing information indicating a second compression level into the memory…” corresponds to claim 15 of the ‘076 patent.
Claim 12 of the present application corresponds to claim 16 of the ‘076 patent, where “wherein the information indicating the second compression level is stored in the memory as metadata…” corresponds to claim 16 of the ‘076 patent.
Claim 13 of the present application corresponds to claim 17 of the ‘076 patent, where “decompressing the compressed data into the original data…” corresponds to claim 17, lines 2-3 of the ‘076 patent; and “transmitting the original data to the outside…” corresponds to claim 17, line 4 of the ‘076 patent.
Claim 14 of the present application corresponds to claim 18 of the ‘076 patent, where “receiving a decompression read command from the outside…” corresponds to claim 18, lines 2-3 of the ‘076 patent; “determining whether a third compression level that correspond to the decompression read command coincide…” corresponds to claim 18, lines 4-7 of the ‘076 patent; “decompressing, based on whether a third compression level coincide with the second compression level…” corresponds to claim 18, lines 8-13 of the ‘076 patent; and “transmitting the original data to the outside…” corresponds to claim 18, line 14 of the ‘076 patent.
Claim 15 of the present application corresponds to claim 20 of the ‘076 patent, where “decompressing the compressed data into the original data when the outside has an amount…” corresponds to claim 20, lines 2-5 of the ‘076 patent; and “transmitting the original data to the outside…” corresponds to claim 20, line 6 of the ‘076 patent.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adelmann (US 2004/0228533) in view of Anand (US 10,579,597).
With respect claim 1, Adelmann teaches a memory for storing data (see paragraph 21; removable storage device including memory); and
a controller (see paragraph 21; processor) configured to:
receive a compression write command from an outside of the storage device to compress and write original data (see paragraph 42; data compression operations performed during saving for "on save," or inline, compression. As data is received, compression preferences are accessed to check for the level and/or type of compression to be performed (i.e., compression is performed when write data/command is received));
determine whether a compression level indicated by the compression write command is supported by the controller (see paragraphs 41-42; compression preferences are accessed to check for the level and/or type of compression to be performed. If the data can be compressed according to the preferences set (in block 112), then compression is performed by the removable storage device, as in block 114… data compression operations performed during saving for "on save," or inline, compression. As data is received, compression preferences are accessed to check for the level and/or type of compression to be performed (in block 120). If compression is enabled, as in block 122, then the data is written to the removable storage device in a compressed form, as in block 126 (i.e., checking if compression is supported/enabled));
compress the original data into compressed data using the compression level when the compression level is supported (see paragraphs 41-42; compression preferences are accessed to check for the level and/or type of compression to be performed. If the data can be compressed according to the preferences set (in block 112), then compression is performed by the removable storage device, as in block 114… data compression operations performed during saving for "on save," or inline, compression. As data is received, compression preferences are accessed to check for the level and/or type of compression to be performed (in block 120). If compression is enabled, as in block 122, then the data is written to the removable storage device in a compressed form, as in block 126. Accordingly, during inline compression, as in block 126, data compression and saving take place concurrently (i.e., if compression is supported/enabled, data is compressed using the type and level determined)); and
store the compressed data in the memory (see paragraph 42; compression is enabled, as in block 122, then the data is written to the removable storage device in a compressed form).
Adelmann does not teach compress the original data into compressed data using a preset compression level when the compression level is not supported..
However, Anand teaches it is determined if the cold tier configuration request indicates a cold tier compression policy for the cold tier that is to be configured. If a cold tier compression policy is not indicated, a default compression policy is selected at 424, such as no compression (i.e., if a compression algorithm is not indicated/not supported a default compression policy is selected). Alternatively, if a compression policy is indicated in the cold tier configuration request, at 426 a cold tier compression policy corresponding to the indication is selected for configuring the cold tier (i.e., if compression algorithm indicated/supported a cold tier compression policy is selected) (see column 18, lines 45-49).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device taught by Adelmann to include the above mentioned to improve performance of the storage (see Anand, column 8, lines 6-17 and column 18, lines 45-66).
With respect claim 2, Adelmann teaches wherein the compression level indicates whether a first compression algorithm being used to compress the original data into the compressed data is a lossy compression algorithm or a lossless compression algorithm (see paragraph 25; wherein the processor may be able to determine the optimal compression level for the type of compression algorithm selected, such that data to be compressed according to a lossless algorithm will be compressed to a minimum possible size without loss of data or that data compressed according to a lossy compression will still maintain a reasonable representation of the original received data).
With respect claim 3, Adelmann teaches wherein the controller further stores information indicating a second compression level into the memory, the second compression level being used to compress the original data into the compressed data (see paragraphs 1, 3, 25 and 42; compression preferences/information may indicate multiple (i.e., second) compression types and or levels).
With respect claim 9, Adelmann teaches receiving a compression write command from an outside of the storage device to compress and write original data (see paragraph 42; data compression operations performed during saving for "on save," or inline, compression. As data is received, compression preferences are accessed to check for the level and/or type of compression to be performed (i.e., compression is performed when write data/command is received));
determining whether a compression level indicated by the compression write command is supported (see paragraphs 41-42; compression preferences are accessed to check for the level and/or type of compression to be performed. If the data can be compressed according to the preferences set (in block 112), then compression is performed by the removable storage device, as in block 114… data compression operations performed during saving for "on save," or inline, compression. As data is received, compression preferences are accessed to check for the level and/or type of compression to be performed (in block 120). If compression is enabled, as in block 122, then the data is written to the removable storage device in a compressed form, as in block 126 (i.e., checking if compression is supported/enabled));
compressing the original data into compressed data using the compression level when the compression level is supported (see paragraphs 41-42; compression preferences are accessed to check for the level and/or type of compression to be performed. If the data can be compressed according to the preferences set (in block 112), then compression is performed by the removable storage device, as in block 114… data compression operations performed during saving for "on save," or inline, compression. As data is received, compression preferences are accessed to check for the level and/or type of compression to be performed (in block 120). If compression is enabled, as in block 122, then the data is written to the removable storage device in a compressed form, as in block 126. Accordingly, during inline compression, as in block 126, data compression and saving take place concurrently (i.e., if compression is supported/enabled, data is compressed using the type and level determined)); and
storing the compressed data into a memory of the storage device (see paragraph 42; compression is enabled, as in block 122, then the data is written to the removable storage device in a compressed form).
Adelmann does not teach compressing the original data into compressed data using a preset compression level when the compression level is not supported.
However, Anand teaches it is determined if the cold tier configuration request indicates a cold tier compression policy for the cold tier that is to be configured. If a cold tier compression policy is not indicated, a default compression policy is selected at 424, such as no compression (i.e., if a compression algorithm is not indicated/not supported a default compression policy is selected). Alternatively, if a compression policy is indicated in the cold tier configuration request, at 426 a cold tier compression policy corresponding to the indication is selected for configuring the cold tier (i.e., if compression algorithm indicated/supported a cold tier compression policy is selected) (see column 18, lines 45-49).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Adelmann to include the above mentioned to improve performance of the storage (see Anand, column 8, lines 6-17 and column 18, lines 45-66).
With respect claim 10, Adelmann teaches wherein the compression level indicates whether a first compression algorithm being used to compress the original data into the compressed data is a lossy compression algorithm or a lossless compression algorithm (see paragraph 25; wherein the processor may be able to determine the optimal compression level for the type of compression algorithm selected, such that data to be compressed according to a lossless algorithm will be compressed to a minimum possible size without loss of data or that data compressed according to a lossy compression will still maintain a reasonable representation of the original received data).
With respect claim 11, Adelmann teaches storing information indicating a second compression level into the memory, the second compression level being used to compress the original data into the compressed data (see paragraphs 1, 3, 25 and 42; compression preferences/information may indicate multiple (i.e., second) compression types and or levels).
Claim(s) 4-5 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adelmann (US 2004/0228533) in view of Anand (US 10,579,597) as applied to claims 3 and 15 above, and further in view of Scarpino et al. (US 2014/0215170).
With respect claim 4, Adelmann and Anand do not teach teaches wherein the controller stores the information indicating the second compression level as metadata for the compressed data or as a part of mapping data indicating a mapping relationship between a logical address and a physical address corresponding to the compressed data.
However, Scarpino et al. teaches metadata that includes compression information when the data content 101 is compressed for storage. The compression information is added when compressing the data (e.g., during storage) and may be used to decompress the data (e.g., during retrieval). For example, a compression algorithm adds the compression information to the metadata 102 during the compression of the data content 101. The compression information can then be used by a corresponding decompression algorithm to decompress the data content 101 (see paragraph 13).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device taught by Adelmann and Anand to include the above mentioned because in that way the system can be configured to remember the details of the compassion, for example by storing the details in the metadata of the object or in a related file, so that the compressed data can be automatically (without the user involvement) decompressed upon retrieval (see Scarpino, paragraph 19).
With respect claim 5, Adelmann and Anand do not teach wherein the controller decompresses the compressed data into the original data using the stored second compression level.
However, Scarpino et al. teaches metadata that includes compression information when the data content 101 is compressed for storage. The compression information is added when compressing the data (e.g., during storage) and may be used to decompress the data (e.g., during retrieval). For example, a compression algorithm adds the compression information to the metadata 102 during the compression of the data content 101. The compression information can then be used by a corresponding decompression algorithm to decompress the data content 101 (see paragraph 13).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device taught by Adelmann and Anand to include the above mentioned because in that way the system can be configured to remember the details of the compassion, for example by storing the details in the metadata of the object or in a related file, so that the compressed data can be automatically (without the user involvement) decompressed upon retrieval (see Scarpino, paragraph 19).
With respect claim 12, Adelmann and Anand do not teach wherein the information indicating the second compression level is stored in the memory as metadata for the compressed data or as a part of mapping data indicating a mapping relationship between a logical address and a physical address corresponding to the compressed data.
However, Scarpino et al. teaches metadata that includes compression information when the data content 101 is compressed for storage. The compression information is added when compressing the data (e.g., during storage) and may be used to decompress the data (e.g., during retrieval). For example, a compression algorithm adds the compression information to the metadata 102 during the compression of the data content 101. The compression information can then be used by a corresponding decompression algorithm to decompress the data content 101 (see paragraph 13).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Adelmann and Anand to include the above mentioned because in that way the system can be configured to remember the details of the compassion, for example by storing the details in the metadata of the object or in a related file, so that the compressed data can be automatically (without the user involvement) decompressed upon retrieval (see Scarpino, paragraph 19).
With respect claim 13, Adelmann and Anand do not teach decompressing the compressed data into the original data using the stored second compression level; and transmitting the original data to the outside.
However, Scarpino et al. teaches metadata that includes compression information when the data content 101 is compressed for storage. The compression information is added when compressing the data (e.g., during storage) and may be used to decompress the data (e.g., during retrieval). For example, a compression algorithm adds the compression information to the metadata 102 during the compression of the data content 101. The compression information can then be used by a corresponding decompression algorithm to decompress the data content 101 (see paragraph 13).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device taught by Adelmann and Anand to include the above mentioned because in that way the method can be configured to remember the details of the compassion, for example by storing the details in the metadata of the object or in a related file, so that the compressed data can be automatically (without the user involvement) decompressed upon retrieval (see Scarpino, paragraph 19).
Claim(s) 7 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adelmann (US 2004/0228533) in view of Anand (US 10,579,597) as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Jean (US 2021/0048961).
With respect claim 7, Adelmann and Anand do not teach wherein the controller of the storage device decompresses the compressed data into the original data when the outside has an amount of memory less than a threshold amount, or a processor idle percentage is less than a threshold value, or both, and transmits the original data to the outside.
However, Jean teaches wherein the host systems, such as mobile electronic devices (e.g., smart phones, tablets, internet-of-things (IOT) devices, etc.), can be characterized by periods of heavy use (e.g., bursts) followed by periods (often longer) of relative inactivity (e.g., 5% active to 95% inactive, 10% active to 90% inactive (see paragraph 46)… wherein the storage system can wait to perform requested operations until idle time (see paragraph 50)… a second version of the compressed data associated with the write command is decompressed. The data can be decompressed as it is received, at idle time, and once decompression has occurred, the decompressed second version of the data can be stored on the group of non-volatile memory (see paragraph 61).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device taught by Adelmann and Anand to include the above mentioned to reduce bus traffic between the host processor and the storage system processor, to improve host processor performance, or to reduce energy use by the host processor (see Jean, paragraph 62).
With respect claim 15, Adelmann and Anand do not teach decompressing the compressed data into the original data when the outside has an amount of memory less than a threshold amount, or a processor idle percentage is less than a threshold value, or both; and transmitting the original data to the outside.
However, Jean teaches wherein the host systems, such as mobile electronic devices (e.g., smart phones, tablets, internet-of-things (IOT) devices, etc.), can be characterized by periods of heavy use (e.g., bursts) followed by periods (often longer) of relative inactivity (e.g., 5% active to 95% inactive, 10% active to 90% inactive (see paragraph 46)… wherein the storage system can wait to perform requested operations until idle time (see paragraph 50)… a second version of the compressed data associated with the write command is decompressed. The data can be decompressed as it is received, at idle time, and once decompression has occurred, the decompressed second version of the data can be stored on the group of non-volatile memory (see paragraph 61).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method taught by Adelmann and Anand to include the above mentioned to reduce bus traffic between the host processor and the storage system processor, to improve host processor performance, or to reduce energy use by the host processor (see Jean, paragraph 62).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adelmann (US 2004/0228533) in view of Anand (US 10,579,597) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Makela et al. (US 2005/0132161).
With respect claim 8, Adelmann and Anand do not teach wherein the controller transmits the compressed data to the outside and the outside decompresses the compressed data, when the outside has one or more resources sufficient to decompress the compressed data into the original data.
However, Makela et al. teaches monitoring whether sufficient memory space is available in said memory and decompressing compressed portions of memory content of said memory as soon as sufficient memory space is available in said memory (see paragraphs 16, 40 and claim 12).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device taught by Adelmann and Anand to include the above mentioned to use the memory space available more efficiently (see Makela, paragraph 16).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 14 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.
No prior art or combination of prior art teaches or suggest wherein the controller decompresses, based on whether a third compression level that correspond to the decompression read command coincide with the second compression level, the compressed data into the original data as recited in claim 6; and determining whether a third compression level that correspond to the decompression read command coincide with the second compression level; decompressing, based on whether the third compression level coincide with the second compression level, the compressed data into the original data as recited in claim 14.
Zhao et al. (US10,382,751) teaches wherein storing the data in the first data chunk to the persistent storage comprises a first data compression algorithm compressing data in the first data chunk, and storing the data in the second data chunk to the persistent storage comprises a second data compression algorithm compressing the data in the second data chunk… wherein retrieving the first data from the first data chunk in the persistent storage comprises a first data compression algorithm decompressing the retrieved first data, and retrieving the second data from the second data chunk in the persistent storage comprises a second data compression algorithm decompressing the retrieved second data (i.e., data is decompressed based on a previously used/stored compression algorithm) (see claims 11 and 13-14).
However, Zhao et al. does not teach determining whether a third compression level that correspond to the decompression read command coincide with the second compression level; decompressing, based on whether the third compression level coincide with the second compression level, the compressed data into the original data as recited in claims 6 and 14.
Pandey et al. (US8,635,194) teaches receiving a request to access a first portion of the large object, wherein the first portion of multiple portions of the large object corresponds to a first identifier that indicates a first compression state of the first portion, and the first compression state includes an uncompressed state, a first compressed state associated with a first compression scheme, and a second compressed state associated with a second compression scheme; decompressing the first portion from a first compression unit in storage using the first compression scheme when the first compression state of the first portion indicates the first compressed state; decompressing the first portion using the second compression scheme from the first compression unit in the storage when the first compression state of the first portion indicates the second compressed state (i.e., data is decompressed based on a compression scheme associated with the requested data) (see claim 34).
However, Pandey et al. does not teach determining whether a third compression level that correspond to the decompression read command coincide with the second compression level; decompressing, based on whether the third compression level coincide with the second compression level, the compressed data into the original data as recited in claims 6 and 14.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pavlichin et al. (US2024/0111439) teaches determining which compression algorithm of several supported domain specific compression algorithms to use for a given data set to be compressed.
Ponnuswamy et al. (US2022/0171555) teaches wherein each client in the dedup domain supports a set of compression algorithms. Compression algorithms that are known to be implemented by all clients in the dedup domain may be marked at each client as “OK to use for compression”. There might be some compression algorithms that are not marked as “OK to use for compression”.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARACELIS RUIZ whose telephone number is (571)270-1038. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 11:00am-7:30pm.
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, Reginald G. Bragdon can be reached at (571)272-4204. 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.
/ARACELIS RUIZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2139
Prosecution Insights