Ex Parte McCune et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Aug 30, 2016

12814404 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 30, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
12/814,404 06/11/2010
46917 7590 09/01/2016
KONRAD RA YNES DAVDA & VICTOR, LLP.
ATTN: IBM37
350 SOUTH BEVERLY DRIVE, SUITE 360
BEVERLY HILLS, CA 90212
Franklin Emmert McCune
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
TUC920100031US1 9202
EXAMINER
ALMAN!, MOHSEN
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2159
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
09/01/2016 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address( es):
krvuspto@ipmatters.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte FRANKLIN EMMERT McCUNE, MIGUEL ANGEL PEREZ,
DAVID CHARLES REED, and MAX DOUGLAS SMITH
Appeal2015-001884
Application 12/814,404
Technology Center 2100
Before JEFFREYS. SMITH, MICHAEL J. STRAUSS, and NABEEL U.
KHAN, Administrative Patent Judges.
KHAN, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellants 1 appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Non-Final
Rejection of claims 1-20. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ).
We reverse.
1 According to Appellants, the real party in interest is International Business
Machines Corporation. App. Br. 1.
Appeal2015-001884
Application 12/814,404
THE INVENTION
Appellants' invention relates to a computer program product, system
and method for updating class assignments for data sets during a recall
operation in a storage environment having a plurality of storage devices.
Abstract.
Exemplary independent claim 1 is reproduced below.
1. A computer program product for managing data sets in a
storage environment having a plurality of storage devices
including a first storage and a second storage, the computer
program product comprising at least one of computer readable
storage medium having computer readable program code
embodied therein and a hardware device that executes to perform
operations, the operations comprising:
processing information on a data set to determine at least
one current attribute of the data set;
determining whether the determined at least one current
attribute satisfies a criteria;
indicating in a catalog to change a class associated with
the data set in response to determining that the at least one current
attribute satisfies the criteria, wherein the class is used to
determine how to manage the data set;
migrating the data set from the first storage to the second
storage in the storage environment;
initiating a recall operation to recall the data set from the
second storage after the migration and indicating the change in
the catalog, wherein indication to change the class associated
with the data set is determined as part of migration or before
migration and implemented at the time of the recall operation
when the data set is recalled; and
in response to the recall operation and determining that the
catalog indicates to change the class associated with the data set,
performing:
processing the catalog to determine to change the class for
the data set from a first class to a second class; and
2
Appeal2015-001884
Application 12/814,404
performing a management operation on the data set to
conform the data set to the second class when recalling the data
set.
REFERENCES and REJECTIONS
1. Claims 1-5, 7, 10-14, and 16-19 stand rejected under 35
U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Tsirigotis et al. (US 8,131,689 B2;
Mar. 6, 2012), Cabrera et al. (US 6,269,382 Bl; July 31, 2001) and Adams
et al. (US 5,659,743; Aug. 19, 1997).
2. Claims 6, 8, 9, 15, and 20 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Tsirigotis, Cabrera, Adams, and Koclanes et
al. (US 2004/0243699Al; Dec. 2, 2004).
ANALYSIS
The Examiner finds Tsirigotis's "records repository" teaches or
suggests the claimed "catalog" and that "analyzing the current attributes of a
dataset is an indication of change of class of the dataset." Non-Final Act 3
(citing Tsirigotis 2:55---64 and 4:16-26). Specifically, the Examiner finds
the records repository stores updated information about the attributes of a
data set. Ans. 8-9 (citing Tsirigotis 2: 55---64); see also Tsirigotis 7:18-28.
The records repository is used to determine if the attributes of the dataset
have changed, and if so, whether data migration is necessary based on
whether the attribute satisfies a criteria or policy. Ans. 8-9. The Examiner
further finds that the "storage class or management class of a dataset are tied
to attributes of the dataset" (Ans. 5) and therefore "the indication of the class
change comes from the current attributes itself' (Ans. 8). According to the
Examiner, "[t]he fact that the dataset is selected based on the current
3
Appeal2015-001884
Application 12/814,404
attribute to be moved to the other storage put the dataset under another
storage management." Ans. 8.
Appellants argue2 "using file attributes to select files to migrate does
not teach using attributes to determine whether to indicate in a catalog to
change the class associated with a data set, where the class is used to
determine how to manage the data set." App. Br. 6. Appellants further
argue "[t]he Examiner has not shown where Tsirigotis teaches that the
records repository 340 indicates a change of a class for a data set when the
data set satisfies a criteria, such that the change of the class will be made
when the data set is recalled after being migrated." Id.
We are persuaded by Appellants' arguments. We do not agree with
the Examiner that recording attributes of a dataset in a records repository
and the subsequent migration of the data set from one storage to another
teaches indicating in a catalog a change to a class associated with the data
set in response to determining that the at least one current attribute satisfies
the criteria, wherein the class is used to determine how to manage the data
set. In other words, the claim requires not only determining whether an
attribute of a data set satisfies a criteria and migrating the data set, but also
the additional step of indicating a change to a class of the data set in
response to such determination. Because the Examiner relies only upon the
attributes of the data sets and their subsequent migration as indicating
changes to the class of the data set, the Examiner has not established that
Tsirigotis teaches or suggests "indicating in a catalog to change a class
2 Appellants present additional arguments in their Appeal Brief. However,
because the identified argument is dispositive of the appeal, we do not reach
the merits of these additional arguments.
4
Appeal2015-001884
Application 12/814,404
associated with the data set in response to determining that the at least one
current attribute satisfies the criteria wherein the class is used to determine
how to manage the data set."
Accordingly, we do not sustain the Examiner's rejection of
independent claim 1, and of independent claims 10 and 16, which contain
substantially the same limitation and were rejected under substantially the
same basis. See Non-Final Act. 11-12 and 17. We also do not sustain the
Examiner's rejection of claims 2-9, 11-15, and 17-20 which depend from
one of claims 1, 10, or 16.
DECISION
The Examiner's rejection of claims 1-20 is reversed.
REVERSED
5