Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 17/349,362

SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MESSAGE BROKER MIGRATION IN AN APPLICATION ENVIRONMENT MIGRATION

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jun 16, 2021
Examiner
JORDAN, KIMBERLY L
Art Unit
2194
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Hexaware Technologies Limited
OA Round
5 (Non-Final)
69%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
4y 3m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 69% — above average
69%
Career Allow Rate
292 granted / 424 resolved
+13.9% vs TC avg
Strong +34% interview lift
Without
With
+34.0%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 3m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
444
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
13.0%
-27.0% vs TC avg
§103
50.7%
+10.7% vs TC avg
§102
17.4%
-22.6% vs TC avg
§112
10.3%
-29.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 424 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED ACTION This Office action is in response to the amendment filed January 22, 2025. Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-12, 14, and 16-24 are pending and have been examined. Claims 1, 2, and 11 have been amended. Claims 3, 5, 13, and 15 have been canceled. Claims 21-24 have been added. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/22/2025 has been entered. 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 . Response to Amendment Claim Objections Claim 22 is objected to because of the following informalities: it does not end with a period. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-12, 14, and 16-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. Claim 1, line 16 recites “breaking” the source message broker while retaining the connections. It is unclear in the claim what the meaning of “breaking” is as it could encompass breaking or rendering the source message broker inoperable. It is assumed “breaking” means to break up the source message broker into granular components (as recited in the specification above table A). Claim 11 suffers from a similar deficiency. Claim 2, line 3 recites the quantum change for migrating the broker is calculated based on “complexity.” This is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “complexity” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The specification discusses balancing the complexity of existing applications especially old brokers or applications without an SME and repeats that the broker’s size and complexity is assessed. Claims 1, 4, 6-10, 12, 14, and 16-24 are rejected to because of their dependency from rejected claims. Appropriate correction is required. Response to Arguments Rejection of claims under §103: Applicant's arguments and amendments filed 01/22/2025 have been considered and are persuasive and compelling that the prior art does not anticipate nor render obvious the claims as a whole. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIMBERLY L JORDAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5481. The examiner can normally be reached Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday 9am-3pm. 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, Kevin Young can be reached on (571) 270-3180. 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. /KIMBERLY L JORDAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2194
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jun 16, 2021
Application Filed
Jul 01, 2022
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Sep 09, 2022
Response Filed
Dec 17, 2022
Final Rejection — §112
Mar 22, 2023
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 28, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 13, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §112
Apr 18, 2024
Response Filed
Aug 16, 2024
Final Rejection — §112
Nov 21, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Jan 22, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jan 27, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 10, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Feb 10, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jan 22, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602268
METHODS FOR EVENT PRIORITIZATION IN NETWORK FUNCTION VIRTUALIZATION USING RULE-BASED FEEDBACK
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12591470
MECHANISM TO PROVIDE RELIABLE RECEIPT OF EVENT MESSAGES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12561186
Connected Reference Architecture and Toolkit
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12554563
OPEN SERVICE BROKER COMPLIANT SERVICE BROKER USING SERVERLESS FUNCTIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12474964
CENTRALIZED PARAMETER MANAGEMENT FOR AUTOMATIC EXECUTION OF PARAMETERIZED INSTRUCTIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Nov 18, 2025
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
69%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+34.0%)
4y 3m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 424 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month