CTNF 19/319,983 CTNF 93592 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA 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 1-11 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over independent claims 11-19 of Patent 12411740 (reference patent). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of the below. Claim 1 of instant application Claim 11 of Application Patent 12411740 A data control apparatus that is connected via a network to a cloud system, which provides an object store, and backs up differential data among a plurality of data of a predetermined volume having a plurality of data as objects of the object store, the data control apparatus comprising: a processor, wherein the processor is programmed to: when backing up the predetermined volume, generate back up data stored in the object store, catalog information including identification information of the predetermined volume and a data as a comparison source according to the backup data, and metadata including difference existence information showing data existence within backup data, in each address of the predetermined volume, store the backup data, the catalog information, and the metadata as objects to the object store, and when restoring the backed up predetermined volume, based on the catalog information, specify the object to be used for restoration. A data control apparatus that is connected via a network to a cloud system, which provides an object store, and backs up differential data among a plurality of snapshots of a predetermined volume having a plurality of data as objects of the object store, the data control apparatus comprising: a processor, wherein the processor is programmed to: when backing up the predetermined volume, generate back up data stored in the object store, catalog information including identification information of the predetermined volume and a snapshot as a comparison source according to the backup data, and metadata including difference existence information showing data existence within backup data, in each address of the predetermined volume, store the backup data, the catalog information, and the metadata as objects to the object store, and when restoring the backed up predetermined volume, based on the catalog information, specify the object to be used for restoration based on bitmap information of the metadata, selectively perform whether to perform data restoration from the backup data for each address of the restoration destination volume, and for each address showing that the bitmap information has a difference, perform data restoration using backup data according to the catalog information of the bitmap information, and for each address showing that the bitmap information has no difference, perform data restoration using another backup data including backup data according to the comparison source snapshot of the backup data. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1, 3-4, 7-8, 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Killamsetti (U.S Pub # 20200167238) in view of Annen (U.S Pub # 20220247766) . With regards to claim 1, Killamsetti discloses a data control apparatus that is connected via a network to a cloud system, which provides an object store, and backs up differential data among a plurality of data of a predetermined volume having a plurality of data as objects of the object store, the data control apparatus comprising: a processor, wherein the processor is programmed to: a processor, wherein the processor is programmed to: when backing up the predetermined volume, generate back up data stored in the object store ([0038] incremental snapshots), catalog information including identification information of the predetermined volume and a data as a comparison source according to the backup data ([0047] snapshot object may include parent or predecessor snapshot data for all objects and metadata may be used to identify prior snapshots from which shared data may be inherited. [0016] a catalog may be generated based on the metadata. The application specific metadata may be used to search a snapshot using search parameters such as a Virtual Machine (“VM”) name or database names that was backed up), when restoring the backed up predetermined volume, based on the catalog information, specify the object to be used for restoration ([0016] Responsive to the search, the system may return a selectable list of snapshots that meet the search parameter(s). The user may then select one or more of the snapshots from the list for restoration). Killamsetti does not disclose however Annen discloses: metadata including difference existence information showing data existence within backup data, in each address of the predetermined volume ([0074] metadata based on changes between a first snapshot and a second snapshot), store the backup data, the catalog information, and the metadata as objects to the object store ([0075] each metadata file may be stored in a cloud-based object store), and It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified the system of Killamsetti by the system of Annen to include metadata indicating change has happened since a previous snapshot and store it in object storage. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to generate metadata file based on snapshots that indicated changes to the corresponding file system (Annen [0017]). With regards to claim 3, Killamsetti further discloses: wherein the comparison source data is a snapshot of the predetermined volume ([0047] snapshot). With regards to claim 4, Killamsetti further discloses: wherein the processor is configured to specify the object to be used for restoration based on the data of the comparison source of the catalog information when restoring the backed up predetermined volume ([0016] snapshot object selected to be restored). With regards to claim 7, Killamsetti further discloses: wherein the processor is configured to restore volumes of restoration target by designating generation of a data and based on the designated generation, the catalog information, and differential existence information of the metadata, and select backup data to be used for the restoration ([0016] restore based on catalog information, user selection and increment data). With regards to claim 8, Killamsetti further discloses: wherein the processor is configured to: receive a designation of a volume to be restored, and acquire catalog information related to the volume to be restored from the object store and cause a candidate generation for restoring the volume to be restored to be selectively displayed based on the catalog information ([0016] application specific metadata may be used to search a snapshot using search parameters such as a Virtual Machine (“VM”) name or database names that was backed up. In this manner, a user may search for snapshots by VM name, database name, and/or other search parameters. Responsive to the search, the system may return a selectable list of snapshots that meet the search parameter(s). The user may then select one or more of the snapshots from the list for restoration) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Killamsetti (U.S Pub # 20200167238) in view of Annen (U.S Pub # 20220247766) and in further view of Stringham (U.S Pat # 8117168) . With regards to claim 5, Killamsetti does not disclose however Stringham discloses: selectively use a plurality of predetermined back up methods among a full back up method regarding dummy data as the other data, incremental back up method regarding a previous backed up data as the other data, and a differential back up method using predetermined data as the other data by plural times ([Col. 5 lines 30-51,Col. 8 lines 41-45] may capture as full, incremental or differential backups. [Col. 14 lines 14-25] the first virtual-disk file may comprise a full backup where the backup module may create a first empty virtual-disk file). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified the system of Killamsetti and Annen by the system of Stringham to create an initial empty backup used for backup generation. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to create and manage backups using virtual-disk files (Stringham [Col. 1 lines 50-60]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Killamsetti (U.S Pub # 20200167238) in view of Annen (U.S Pub # 20220247766) and in further view of Stringham (U.S Pat # 8117168) and Chopra (U.S Pat # 10838912) . With regards to claim 6, Killamsetti further discloses: wherein specification of object to be used for restoration based on data of the comparison source of the catalog information is performed until identification information of data of the comparison source is exhausted ([0060] changes may be identified based on a difference function, comparison of the data blocks that underly the current state of the target volume 240 and the data blocks of the latest prior snapshot). Killamsetti does not disclose however Chopra discloses: wherein catalog information according to the incremental back up and the differential back up has identification information of data of the comparison source and catalog information according to the full back up does not have identification information of data of the comparison source ([Col. 8-9 lines 58-06] catalog may include metadata 253 associated with the various backups including a name or identifier of the source, time and date of backup, backup level (e.g., incremental backup, differential backup, or full backup), size of backup, a history of files included in a backup, location of backed up data, other backup details, and so forth. The file history can be used to determine whether or not a particular file (or version of the file) has already been backed up. If the file is new a full backup of the file may be performed). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified the system of Killamsetti, Annen and Stringham by the system of Chopra to indicate a file history of a backup. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to intelligently and automatically select an appropriate backup level to use for a particular backup (Chopra [Col. 1 lines 42-47]). With regards to claim 9, Killamsetti does not disclose however Chopra discloses: wherein the processor is configured to select the backup method based on a back up time or a back up cost ([Col. 3 lines 15-30] In an embodiment, a backup level such as a full backup, incremental backup, or differential backup is automatically selected for an impending backup based on measuring a degree of data change from a last backup to the impending backup. Depending upon the data change, one level of backup may be more or less efficient than another level of backup in regards to recovery time objectives (RTO), required backup time, other factors, or combinations of these). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified the system of Killamsetti, Annen and Stringham by the system of Chopra to indicate a file history of a backup. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to intelligently and automatically select an appropriate backup level to use for a particular backup (Chopra [Col. 1 lines 42-47]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Killamsetti (U.S Pub # 20200167238) in view of Annen (U.S Pub # 20220247766) and in further view of Geckeler (U.S Pub # 20220391290) . With regards to claim 10, Killamsetti does not disclose however Geckeler discloses: receive an instruction to register an object store for storing a backup of the volume, determine whether the instructed object store is accessible by actually accessing the object store, and when it is determined that the object store is accessible, register the object store as the object store for storing the backup of the volume ([0028] access an object store to read and write database backups to the object store). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified the system of Killamsetti and Annen by the system of Geckeler to determine accessibility to an object store and write backup data to the backup store. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide a database as a service for customers to support scalable storage (Geckeler [0001]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TONY WU whose telephone number is (571)272-2033. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9-5). 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, Sanjiv Shah can be reached at (571) 272-4098. 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. /TONY WU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/319,983 Page 2 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/319,983 Page 3 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/319,983 Page 4 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/319,983 Page 5 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/319,983 Page 6 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/319,983 Page 7 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/319,983 Page 8 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/319,983 Page 9 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/319,983 Page 10 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/319,983 Page 11 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/319,983 Page 12 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/319,983 Page 13 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/319,983 Page 14 Art Unit: 2166 Application/Control Number: 19/319,983 Page 15 Art Unit: 2166
Prosecution Insights