`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`PO. Box 1450
`Alexandria. Virginia 22313-1450
`www,usplo.gov
`
`APPLICATION NO.
`
`FILINGVDATE
`
`FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
`
`ATTORNEY DOCKET NO.
`
`CONFIRMATION NO.
`
`95/000,479
`
`05/28/2009
`
`I
`
`7161506
`
`080272-0012
`
`2572
`
`12/15/2009
`
`1473
`7590
`ROPMGRAYLLP
`PATENT DOCKETING 39/361
`1211 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS
`NEW YORK, NY 10036-8704
`
`.
`
`I
`
`mgcumsnmv
`
`3992
`
`MAIL DATE
`
`12/ l 5/2009
`
`"PE" NUMBER
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`PAPER
`
`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.
`
`
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`NetApp; Rackspace
`
`Exhibit 1007
`
`Page 1
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 1
`
`

`

`‘
`
`'
`
`.
`
`
`
`If UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Commissioner for Patents
`United States Patents and Trademark Office
`P.O.Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 223 l 3-l450
`www.uspto.gov
`
`DO NOT USE IN PALM PRINTER
`
`THIRD PARTY REQUESTER'S CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS
`MCDERMOTT WILL & EMERY LLP
`600 13TH STREET N.W.
`WASHINGTON, DC. 20005-3096
`
`DatMNLED
`
`09
`
`DEC 1 5 20
`CENTRALREEXAMlNATION 11"“
`
`Transmittal of Communication to Third Party Requester
`Inter Partes Reexamination
`
`REEXAMINATION CONTROL NO. : 95000479
`
`PATENT NO. : 7161506
`
`.
`
`TECHNOLOGY CENTER : 3999
`
`ART UNIT : 3992
`
`Enclosed is a copy of the latest communication from the United States Patent and Trademark
`Office in the above identified Reexamination proceeding. 37 CFR 1.903.
`
`Prior to the filing of a Notice of Appeal, each time the patent owner responds to this
`communication, the third party requester of the inter partes reexamination may once file
`written comments within a period of 30 days from the date of service of the patent owner's
`response. This 30-day time period is statutory (35 U.S.C. 314(b)(2)), and, as such, it cannot
`be extended. See also 37 CFR 1.947.
`
`If an ex parte reexamination has been merged with the inter partes reexamination, no
`responsive submission by any ex parte third party requester is permitted.
`
`All correspondence relating to this inter partes reexamination proceeding should be directed
`to the Central Reexamination Unit at the mail, FAX, or hand-carry addresses given at the end
`of the communication enclosed with this transmittal.
`
`PTOL-2070(Rev.O7-04)
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Page2
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 2
`
`

`

`Control No.
`
`Patent Under Reexamination
`
`REEXAMINA TION
`
`Examiner
`
`Art Unit-
`
`-- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet with the correspondence address. --
`
`Responsive to the communication(s) filed by:
`Patent Owner on
`
`Third Party(ies) on 28 May 2009
`
`RESPONSE TIMES ARE SET TO EXPIRE AS FOLLOWS:
`
`For Patent Owner's Response:
`2 MONTH(S) from the mailing date of this action. 37 CFR 1.945. EXTENSIONS OF TIME ARE
`GOVERNED BY 37 CFR 1.956.
`
`For Third Party Requester's Comments on the Patent Owner Response:
`30 DAYS from the date of service of any patent owner's response. 37 CFR 1.947. NO EXTENSIONS
`OF TIME ARE PERMITTED. 35 U.S.C. 314(b)(2).
`
`All correspondence relating to this inter partes reexamination proceeding should be directed to the Central
`Reexamination Unit at the mail, FAX, or hand-carry addresses given at the end of this Office action.
`
`This action is not an Action Closing Prosecution under 37 CFR 1.949, nor is it a Right of Appeal Notice under
`37 CFR 1.953.
`
`10. [3 Other
`
`PART I. THE FOLLOWING ATTACHMENT(S) ARE PART OF THIS ACTION:
`
`1.1:] Notice of References Cited by Examiner, PTO-892
`2E] Information Disclosure Citation, PTO/SB/08
`3!]
`
`PART II. SUMMARY OF ACTION:
`
`1a. IX] Claims See Continuation Sheet are subject to reexamination.
`
`1b. IX] Claims See Continuation Sheet are not subject to reexamination.
`
`2. I] Claims __ have been canceled.
`
`. E] Claims __ are confirmed. [Unamended patent claims]
`
`. I] Claims
`
`are patentable. [Amended or new claims]
`
`IX] Claims See Continuation Sheet are rejected.
`.
`. E] Claims
`are objected to.
`E] are acceptable D are not acceptable.
`. E] The drawings filed on
`. D The drawing correction request filed on
`is:
`El approved. El disapproved.
`. I] Acknowledgment is made of the claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)—(d). The certified copy has:
`[:1 been received. D not been received.
`.
`El been filed in Application/Control No 95000479.
`
`US. Patent and Trademark Office
`PTOL-2064 (08/06)
`
`Paper No. 20091116
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Pages
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 3
`
`

`

`Control No. 95/000,479
`Continuation Sheet (PTOL-2064)
`Continuation of SUMMARY OF ACTION: 18. Claims subject to reexamination are 1-9,11,16.17.20-23,27.39,41-43,69—73,79,8132.84-90.96
`and 98.
`
`Continuation of SUMMARY OF ACTION: 1b. Claims not subject to reexamination are 10,12-15,18,19.24-26,28-38.40.44-68,74—
`78.80,83,91-95.97 and 99.
`
`Continuation of SUMMARY OF ACTION: 5. Claims rejected are 1-9.11,16,17.20—23,27,39,41-43,69-73.79,81,82.84-90,96 and 98.
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Page4
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 4
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 95/000,479
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Reexamination
`
`1.
`
`Claims 1-9, 11, 16, 17, 20-23, 27, 39, 41-43, 69-73, 79, 81, 82, 84-90, 96, and 98 of
`
`Fallon (US 7,161,506 B2) are being reexamined.
`
`Priority
`
`2.
`
`Fallon, US 7,161,506 B2, is a continuation of application number 10/016,355 (US
`
`6,624,761 B2 filed on 29 October 2001, which is a continuation-in-part of application number
`
`09/705,446 (US 6,309,424 B1) filed on 03 November 2000, which is a continuation of
`
`application 09/210,491 (US 6,195,024 B1) filed on 11 December 1998.
`
`3.
`
`Claims 1-9, 11, 16, 17, 20-23, 27, 39, 41-43, 69-73, 79, 81, 82, 84-90, 96, and 98 are
`
`supported for purposes of 35 USC. 112 by Figures 13-18 and the additional disclosure that first
`
`appeared in application number 10/016,355. Therefore, claims 1-9, 11, 16, 17, 20-23, 27, 39, 41-
`
`43, 69-73, 79, 81, 82, 84-90, 96, and 98 are entitled to a priority date of 29 October 2001.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
`
`4.
`
`The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 USC. 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 —
`
`(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on
`sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
`i
`
`(e) the invention was described in (1) an application for patent, published under section 122(b), by another filed
`in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent or (2) a patent granted on an application for
`patent by another filed in the United States before the invention by the applicant for patent, except that an
`international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) shall have the effects for purposes of this
`subsection of an application filed in the United States only if the international application designated the United
`States and was published under Article 21(2) of such treaty in the English language.
`
`5.
`
`Claims 69-73, 79, 81, 84-90, 96, and 98 are rejected under 35 USC. 102(b) as being
`
`anticipated by French (French et al., US 5,794,229 A).
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Page5
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 5
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 95/000,479
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 3
`
`These rejections are adopted essentially as proposed by the third party requester in the
`
`request for reexamination. On page 93 of the request, the requester asserted that “claims 69-73,
`
`79, 81, 84-88, 90, 96, and 98 are anticipated by French” but further included a proposed rejection
`
`ofclaim 89 based on FrenCh on page 126. Also, on page 93 ofthe request, the requester titled the
`
`proposed claim rejections “Invalidity of US. Patent No. 7,161,506 pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)
`
`and (e)...by French” but 35 U.S.C. 102(b) is applied in the following rejections.
`
`Regarding claim 69, French discloses a method comprising:
`
`receiving a data block (i.e., a-“page”) in an uncompressed form, the data block being
`included in a data stream (column 4, lines 8-44);
`
`analyzing the data block to determine a type ofthe data block (column 27, lines 50-60);
`
`and
`
`compressing the data block to provide a compressed data block, wherein if one or more
`
`encoders are associated to the type, compressing the data block with at least one of the one or
`
`more encoders, else compressing the data block with a data compression encoder (Figures 4A-D
`
`and 5; column 14, lines 35-52; column 15, lines 19—26; column 24, lines 1019; column 27, lines
`
`50-60).
`
`Regarding claims 70 and 71, French discloses outputting the data block in the
`
`uncompressed form with a descriptor representative of no compression if the compressed data
`
`block is indicative of data expansion (column 42, lines 38—65).
`
`Regarding claims 72 and 73, French discloses outputting the compressed data block with
`
`a descriptor representative of the compression technique used to compress the data block
`
`- (column 14, lines 35-52; column 15, lines 19-26).
`
`'1‘.
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Page6
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 6
`
`

`

`
`
`Application/Control Number: 95/000,479
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`i
`
`Page 4
`
`Regarding claims 79 and 81, French discloses that the data compression encoder is
`
`Iossless and the at least one ofthe one or more encoders is Iossless (i.e., French discloses Iossless
`
`LZW, LZS, and RLE compression techniques; column 14, lines 1-14 and lines 35-52).
`
`Regarding claim 84, French discloses analyzing the size of the compressed data block to
`
`determine whether to output the data block in the uncompressed form or to output the
`
`compressed data block (column 42, lines 38-65).
`
`Regarding claim 85, French discloses performing an analysis using the size ofthe
`
`compressed data block and a compression threshold to determine whether to output the data
`
`block in the uncompressed form or to output the compressed data block (column 42, lines 38-
`
`65).
`
`Regarding claim 86, French discloses a method comprising:
`
`receiving a data block (Le, a “page”), wherein the data block is included in a data stream
`
`(column 4, lines 8-44);
`
`determining whether to otttput the data block in received form or in a compressed form
`
`(column 42, lines 38-65); and
`
`outputting the data block in received form or the compressed form based on the
`
`determination, wherein outputting the data block in the compressed form comprises determining
`
`whether to compress the data block with content dependent data compression based on the type
`
`of the data block or to compress the data block with a single data compression encoder (Figures
`
`4A-D and 5; column 14, lines 35-52; column 15, lines 19-26; column 24, lines 10—19; column 27,
`
`lines 50-60).
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Page?
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 7
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 95/000,479
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 5
`
`Regarding claims 87 and 88, French discloses compressing the data block to provide the
`
`data block in the compressed form in accordance with the determination whether to compress the
`
`data block with content dependent data compression or the single data compression encoder
`
`(column 16, lines 3-25); and
`
`outputting'the data block in received form with a descriptor representative of no
`
`compression if the compressing causes the size the data block in the compressed form to expand
`
`with respect to the data block in received form (column 42, lines 38-65).
`
`Regarding claims 89 and 90, French discloses compressing the data block to provide the
`
`data block in the compressed form in accordance with the determination whether to compress the
`
`data block with content dependent data compression or the single data compression encoder
`
`(column 16, lines 3—25); and
`
`outputting the data block in the compressed form with a descriptor representative of the
`
`technique used to compress the data block to provide the data block in the compressed form
`
`(column 14, lines 35-52; column 15, lines 19-26).
`
`Regarding claims 96 and 98, French discloses that the single data compression encoder
`
`is lossless and at least one encoder associated with the content dependent data compression is
`
`lossless (i.e., French discloses lossless LZW, LZS, and RLE compression techniques; column 14,
`
`lines 1-14 and lines 35—52).
`
`6.
`
`Claims 1-6, 8, 9, 11, 17, 21-23, 41-43, 69, 72, 73, 79, and 81 are rejected under 35
`
`U.S.C._102(e) as being anticipated by Sebastian (US 6,253,264 Bl).
`
`These rejections are adopted essentially as proposed by the third party requester in the
`
`request for reexamination.
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`~Page8
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 8
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 95/000,479
`Art Unit: 3992 '
`
`Page 6
`
`Regarding claim 1, Sebastian discloses a method for compressing data, comprising the
`
`steps of:
`
`analyzing a data block of an input data stream to identify one or more data types ofthe
`
`data block, the input data stream comprising a plurality of disparate data types (i.e., using
`
`elements including filters 1021-2 and filter selection system 22 in encoder 3; column 1, lines 50-
`
`52; column 2, lines 1-42; column 3, lines 66-67; column 4, lines 1-25);
`
`performing‘content dependent data compression, ifa data type ofthe data block is
`
`identified. (column 2, lines 33-42; column 5, lines 14—18; column 6, lines 22-40);
`
`performing data compression with a single data compression encoder, if a data type of the
`
`data block is not identified (i.e., Sebastian discloses a generic compression system; column 1,
`
`lines 55—60; column 4, lines 9-20).
`
`Regarding claims 2—4, Sebastian discloses appending a data compression type descriptor
`
`to a compressed data block and outputting the compressed data block with the appended data
`
`compression type descriptor (column 3, lines 31-36; column 5, lines 14-18).
`
`Regarding claim 5, Sebastian discloses that the performing content dependent data
`
`compression further comprises enabling at least one encoder associated to the data type to
`
`compress the data block (column 1, lines 55-57; column 2, lines 33-42.
`
`Regarding claim 6, Sebastian discloses that the performing content dependent data
`
`compression further comprises:
`
`associating a plurality of encoders to the data type (column 2, lines 33-42);
`
`determining which one of the plurality of encoders associated to the identified data type
`
`is to at least output a compressed data block (column 2, lines 33-42).
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Page9
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 9
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 95/000,479
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 7
`
`Regarding claim 8, Sebastian discloses that the performing content dependent data
`
`compression further comprises compressing the data block with cascaded encoders that are
`
`associated to the data type (column 17, lines 15-28; column 19, lines 31—48).
`
`g
`
`g
`
`Regarding claim 9, Sebastian discloses that the content dependent compression is lossless
`
`(column 2, lines 43—47; column 3, lines 37-41).
`
`Regarding claim 11, Sebastian discloses that the data compression is lossless (column 2,
`
`lines 43-47; column 3, lines 37-41; column 4, lines 9-20).
`
`Regarding claim 17, Sebastian discloses that the input stream is an uncompressed input
`
`stream (column 1, lines 19-23).
`
`Regarding claim 21, Sebastian discloses buffering the input data stream (i.e., using
`
`FILE_BUFFER; column 7, lines 25-27).
`
`Regarding claim 22, Sebastian discloses buffering a compressed data block (i.e., using
`
`ARRAY; column 7, lines 25-27).
`
`Regarding claim 23, Sebastian discloses outputting a compressed data block; and
`
`providing a compression type descriptor with the compressed data block representative of
`
`the type of compression used to provide the compressed data block (column 3, lines 31—36;
`
`column 5, lines 14-18).
`
`Regarding claim 41, Sebastian discloses that the performing content dependent data
`
`compression further comprises:
`
`associating a plurality of encoders to the data type; and
`
`compressing the data block using at least two ofthe associated encoders (Figures 4 and 5;
`
`column 18, lines 41-67; column 19, lines 1-12).
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Page10
`
`
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 10
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 95/000,479
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`‘
`
`Page 8
`
`Regarding claim 42, Sebastian discloses that the performing content dependent data
`
`compression further comprises:
`
`associating a plurality of encoders to the data type;
`
`compressing the data block using at least two of the associated encoders (Figures 4 and 5;
`
`column 18, lines 41-67; column 19, lines 1-12); and
`
`determining which of the at least two of the associated encoders produced the highest
`
`compression (column 27, lines 6-11).
`
`Regarding claim 43, Sebastian discloses that the performing content dependent data
`
`compression further comprises compressing the data block using at least two encoders (Figures 4
`
`and 5; column 18, lines 41—67; column 19, lines lf12).
`
`Regarding claim 69, Sebastian discloses a method comprising:
`
`receiving a data block in an uncompressed form, the data block being included in a data
`
`stream (column 1, lines 19—23);
`
`analyzing the data block to determine a type ofthe data block (i.e., using elements
`
`.including filters 10a-z and filter selectionsystem 22 in encoder 3; column 1, lines 50—52; column
`
`2, lines 1-42; column 3, lines 66-67; column 4, lines 1-25); and
`
`compressing the data block to provide a compressed data block, wherein if one or more
`
`encoders are associated to the type, compressing the data block with at least one of the one or
`
`more encoders (column 2, lines 33—42; column 5, lines 14-18; column 6, lines 22—40) else
`
`compressing the data block with a data compression encoder (i.e., Sebastian discloses a generic
`
`compression system; column 1, lines 55—60; column 4, lines 9-20).
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Page11
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 11
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`Application/Control Number: 95/000,479
`
`.
`
`Page 9
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Regarding claims 72 and 73, Sebastian discloses outputting the compressed data block
`
`with a descriptor representative of the compression technique used to compress the data block
`
`(column 3, lines 31-36; column 5, lines 14-18).
`
`Regarding claims 79 and 81, Sebastian discloses that the data compression encoder is
`
`lossless and the at least one ofthe one or more encoders is lossless (column 2, lines 43—47;
`
`column 3, lines 37-41; column 4, lines 9-20).
`
`7.
`
`Claims 1-7, 9, 11, 17, 20, 23, 39, 41-43, 69-73, 79, 81, 82, 84-90, 96, and 98 are rejected
`
`under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Franaszek (Franasezk et al., US 5,870,036 A).
`
`These rejections are adopted essentially as proposed by the third party requester in the
`
`request for reexamination. On page 238 ofthe request, the requester asserted that “claim 1, 2, 3,
`
`4, 5,6, 7, I7, 20, 23,27, 39,41, 42, 43,69—73, 79, 81, 82, 84—90, 96, 98 are anticipated by
`Franaszek” but further included prOposed rejections of claims 9 and 1 1 based on Franaszek on
`
`pages 268-269.
`
`Regarding claim 1, Franaszek discloses a method for compressing data, comprising the
`
`steps of:
`
`analyzing a data block of an input data stream to identify one or more data types of the
`
`data block, the input data stream comprising a plurality of disparate data types (Figure 2; column
`
`4, lines 25—35; column 5, lines 49-54);
`
`performing content dependent data compression, if a data type of the data block is
`
`identified (column 5, lines 49-53);
`
`performing data compression with a single data compression encoder, if a data type of the
`
`data block is not identified (column 5, lines 53-54).
`
`NetApp;Ra'ckspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Page12
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 12
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 95/000,479
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`'
`
`Page 10
`
`Regarding claims 2—4, Franaszek discloses appending a data compression type descriptor
`to a compressed data block and outputting the Compressed data block with the appended data
`
`compression type descriptor (column 4, lines 55—59).
`
`Regarding claim 5, Franaszek discloses that the performing content dependent data
`
`compression further comprises enabling at least one encoder associated to the data type to
`
`compress the data block (column 5, lines 49-67; column 6, lines 1-50),-
`
`Regarding claim 6, Franaszek discloses that the performing content dependent data
`
`compression further cOmprises:
`
`associating a plurality of encoders to the data type (column 4, lines 36-59);
`
`determining which one ofthe plurality of encoders associated to the identified data type
`
`is to at least output a compressed data block (column 5, lines 49—67; column 6, lines 1-50).
`
`Regarding claim 7, Franaszek discloses that the performing content dependent data
`
`compression further comprises:
`
`compressing the data block with a plurality ofencoders that are associated to the data 9
`
`type (column 5, lines 49—67; column 6, lines 1-20);
`
`determining which one of the plurality of encoders yields the highest compression ratio
`
`(column 6, lines 21-50).
`
`Regarding claims 9 and 11, Franaszek discloses that the content dependent compression
`
`and the data compression are lossless (i.e., Franaszek discloses lossless LZl compression;
`
`column 7, lines 56—65).
`
`Regarding claim 17, Franaszek discloses that the input stream is an uncompressed input
`
`stream (column 4, lines 25-35).
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Page13
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 13
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 95/000,479
`
`Alt Unit: 3992
`
`Page 11
`
`Regarding claim 20, Franaszek discloses counting the size ofthe data block (column 5,
`
`lines 19-38).
`
`Regarding claim 23, Franaszek discloses outputting a compressed data block; and
`
`pr0viding a compression type descriptor with the compressed data block representative of
`
`the type of compression used to provide the compressed data block (column 4, lines 55-59).
`
`Regarding claim 27, Franaszek discloses that the data compression further comprises
`
`providing a compressed data block from the single compression encoder so long as the
`
`compression ratio of the compressed data block exceeds a compression threshold (column 5,
`
`lines 19-38).
`
`Regarding claim 39, Franaszek discloses providing a compression threshold; and
`
`outputting a compressed data block that exceeds the compression threshold (column '5,
`
`lines 19—38).
`
`I Regarding claims 41 and 42, Franaszek discloses that the performing content dependent
`
`data compression further comprises:
`
`associating a plurality of encoders to the data type (column 5, lines 49-54);
`
`compressing the data block using at least two of the associated encoders (column 5, lines
`
`49-67; column 6, lines 1-20); and
`
`determining which of the at least two of the associated encoders produced the highest
`
`compressioni(column 6, lines 21-50).
`
`Regarding claim 43, Franaszek discloses that the performing content dependent data
`
`compression further comprises compressing the data block using at least two encoders (column
`
`5, lines 49-67; column 6, lines 150).
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Page14
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 14
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 95/000,479
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 12
`
`Regarding claim 69, Franaszek discloses a method comprising:
`
`receiving a data block in an uncompressed form, the data block being included in a data
`
`stream (Figure 2; column 4, lines 25—35);
`
`analyzing the data block to determine a type ofthe data block (column 5, lines 49-54);
`
`and
`
`compressing the data block to provide a compressed data block, wherein if one or more
`
`encoders are associated to the type, compressing the data block with at least one of the one or
`
`more encoders, else compressing the data block with a data compression encoder (column 5,
`
`lines 49-54).
`
`Regarding claims 70 and 71, Franaszek- discloses outputting the data block in the
`
`uncompressed form with a descriptor representative of no compression if the compressed data
`
`block is indicative of data expansion (column 4, lines 55-59; column 5, lines 19-38; column 6,
`
`lines 41—50).
`
`Regarding claims 72 and 73, Franaszek discloses outputting the compressed data block
`
`with a descriptor representative ofthe compression technique used to compress the data block
`\
`
`(column 4, lines 55-59).
`
`Regarding claims 79 and 81, Franaszek discloses that the data compression encoder is
`
`lossless and the at least one of the one or more encoders is lossless (i.e., Franaszek discloses
`
`lossless LZl compression; column 7, lines 56-65).
`
`Regarding claim 82, Franaszek discloses that the at least one of the one or more encoders
`
`comprises a plurality of encoders provided in parallel (column 6, lines 29-32).
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Page 15
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 15
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 95/000,479
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 13
`
`Regarding claims 84 and 85, Franaszek discloses performing an analysis using the size
`
`of the compressed data block and a compression threshold to determine whether to output the
`
`data block in the uncompressed form or to output the compressed data block (column 5, lines 26-
`
`29).
`
`Regarding claim 86, Franaszek discloses a method comprising:
`
`receiving a data block, wherein the data block is included in a data stream (Figure 2;
`
`column 4, lines 25—35);
`
`determining whether to output the data block in received form or in a compressed form
`
`(column 5, lines 19-38); and
`
`outputting the data block in received form or the compressed form based on the
`
`determination, wherein outputting the data block in the compressed form comprises determining
`
`whether to compress the data block with content dependent data compression based on the type
`
`of the data block or to compress the data block with a single data compression encoder (column
`
`5, lines 49-54).
`
`Regarding claims 87 and 88, Franaszek discloses compressing the data block to provide
`
`the data block in the compressed form in accordance with the determination whether to compress ,
`
`the data block with content dependent data compression or the single data compression encoder;
`
`and
`
`outputting the data block in received form with a descriptor representative of no
`
`compression ifthe compressing causes the size the data block in the compressed form to expand
`
`with respect to the data block in received form (column 4, lines 55-59; column 5, lines 19-38;
`
`column 6, lines 41-50).
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Page16
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 16
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 95/000,479
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 14
`
`Regarding claims 89 and 90, Franaszek discloses compressing the data block to provide
`
`the data block in the compressed form in accordance with the determination whether to compress
`
`the data block with content dependent data compression or the single data compression encoder;
`
`and
`
`outputting the data block in the compressed form with a descriptor representative of the
`
`technique used to compress the data block to provide the datablock in the compressed form
`
`(column 4, lines 55-59; column 5, lines 19-38; column 6, lines 41—50).
`
`Regarding claims 96 and 98, Franaszek discloses that the single data compression
`
`encoder is lossless and at least one encoder associated with the content dependent data
`
`compression is lossless (i.e., Franaszek discloses lossless LZl compression; column 7, lines 56-
`
`65).
`
`8.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
`
`obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
`
`(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in
`section l02 ofthis title, ifthe differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are
`such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person
`having ordinary skill in the an to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the
`manner in which the invention was made.
`
`9.
`
`The following 35 USC. 103(a) rejections are based on Sebastian (US 6,253,264 B 1) as
`
`the primary reference
`
`10.
`Claim 16 is rejected under 35 USC. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sebastian in
`view ofO’Bricn (US-4,988,998 A) or Craft (US 5,627,534 A).
`
`This rejection is adopted essentially as proposed by the third party requester in the
`
`request for reexamination.
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Page17
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 17
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 95/000,479
`Art Unit: 3992‘
`’
`
`.
`
`Page 15
`
`Regarding claim 16, Sebastian discloses a method as discussed above with regard to
`
`claim 1 but does not specifically disclose that the input stream is a compressed input stream.
`
`However, O’Brien teaches a system that is related to the one described by Sebastian,
`
`including data compression, and teaches further compressing an already compressed input stream
`
`(i.e., Figure 1 shows “encode repeat counts 1 12” compressing data that has already been
`
`compressed by “compress data using textual substitution 1 1 1” and “replace runs with repeat
`
`counts 1 10”; column 6, lines 7-51). Craft also teaches a system that is related to the one
`
`described by Sebastian, including data compression, and teaches further compressing an already
`
`compressed input stream (i.e., Figure 2 shows LZ-l compressor 11 compressing data that has
`alreadyibeen compressed by run length compressor 9; column 4, lines 66-67; column 5, lines 1-
`
`1 5).
`
`Regarding claim 16, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to
`
`provide a compressed input stream as taught by O’Brien or Craft in the method disclosed by
`
`Sebastian in order to compress the data more than once and provide a highly compressed output.
`
`1 1.
`
`Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sebastian in
`
`view of Franazek (Franaszek et al., US 5,870,036 A) or Reynar (Reynar et al., US 5,951,623
`
`A).
`
`This rejection is adopted essentially as proposed by the third party requester in the
`
`request for reexamination.
`
`Regarding claim 20, Sebastian discloses a method as discussed above with regard-to
`
`claim 1 but does not specifically disclose counting the size ofthe data block.
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Page18
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 18
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 95/000,479
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 16
`
`However, Franazek teaches a system that is related to the one described by Sebastian,
`
`including data compression, and teaches counting the size of the data block (column 5', lines 19-
`
`38). Reynar also teaches a system that is related to the one described by Sebastian, including data
`
`compression, and teaches counting the size of the data block (i.e., the length of the document or
`
`document portion; column 14, lines 66-67; column 15, lines 1-13).
`
`Regarding claim 20, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to
`
`count the size of the data block as taught by Franazek and Reynar in the method disclosed by
`
`Sebastian in order toadvantageously compare the sizes of the block before and after compression
`
`and determine the efficiency of the compression.
`
`Claims 27 and 39 are rejected 'under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over
`12.
`Sebastian in view of CCITT V.42 bis (“Data Compression Procedures for Data Circuit
`
`Terminating Equipment [DCE] Using Error Correction Procedures,” CCITT Recommendation
`
`' V.42 bis, 1990) or Reynar.
`
`These rejections are adopted essentially as proposed by the third party requester in the
`
`request for reexamination.
`
`Regarding claim 27, Sebastian discloses a method as discussed above with regard to
`
`claim 1 but does not specifically disclose that the data compression further comprises providing a
`
`' compressed data block from the single compression encoder so long as the compression ratio of
`
`the compressed data block exceeds a compression threshold. Similarly, regarding claim 39,
`
`Sebastian discloses a method as discussed above with regard to claim 1 but does not specifically
`
`disclose providing a compression threshold and outputting a compressed data block that exceeds
`
`the compression threshold.
`
`NetApp;Rackspace
`
`Exhibit1007
`
`Page19
`
`NetApp; Rackspace Exhibit 1007 Page 19
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 95/000,479
`
`‘
`
`Art Unit: 3992
`
`Page 17
`
`'
`
`However, CCITT V.42 bis teaches a system that is related to the one described by
`
`Sebastian, including data compression. CCITT v.42 bis teaches providing a compression
`
`threshold and outputting a compressed data block that exceeds the compression threshold at least
`
`in the sense that CCITT V.42 bis