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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-3,5-13,15-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) mental processes – concepts performed in the human mind.
Regarding claim 1, with the exception of the recitation of the limitations ‘using at least one processing device; using the at least one processing device; by at least one processing device comprising a processor coupled to a memory; using one or more processor-based natural language processing models’, the claim recites concepts performed in the human mind.
The limitations ‘processing at least a portion of the information, from the at least one data structure, to identify, using a processor-readable mapping of a plurality of error descriptions to respective ones of a plurality of error resolution scripts, at least one error resolution script comprising one or more executable processing operations that automatically addresses address at least one of the one or more errors in the at least one pipeline job, wherein the processor-readable mapping is generated prior to the obtaining’ is a mental process – a concept performed in the human mind by observation, evaluation, judgment, and/or opinion.
Step 2A: Prong two
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements ‘accessing at least one data structure comprising information characterizing one or more errors in at least one pipeline job of the software deployment pipeline’ job’ is merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)), in this case data gathering;
‘automatically initiating an execution of the one or more executable processing operations associated with the identified at least one error resolution script by the at least one processing device to automatically address the at least one of the one or more errors in the at least one pipeline job’ is merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Step 2B
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements ‘using at least one processing device; using the at least one processing device; by at least one processing device comprising a processor coupled to a memory; using one or more processor-based natural language processing models; wherein the one or more processor-based natural language processing models are one or more of trained using an error description associated with at least a subset of records in an error database and a corresponding error resolution script to execute to address a given error and retrained using the error description associated with at least a subset of new records added to the error database and the corresponding error resolution script to execute to address a given error; automatically performing the following steps, responsive to an occurrence of a designated event, wherein the designated event comprises one or more of an update of at least one software item associated with a software deployment pipeline and a release of at least one software item associated with the software deployment pipeline’ is directed to generic computer components recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to nothing more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements ‘wherein the one or more executable processing operations comprise one or more of updating at least one software item associated with the software deployment pipeline and updating at least one image associated with the software deployment pipeline’ is simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high-level of generality to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(d)).
USPN 20190087176A1 – paragraph 0005 - Non-limiting examples of an update may include update images and patchsets that are configured to fix application bugs and/or to add or modify features of the application. Update images (e.g., major releases issued once a quarter) may be data packages that include all bug fixes and new features of a particular version of the application. Patchsets (e.g., minor bug fixes issued between the major releases) may be data packages that contain individual bug fixes that were reported since the last update image was released.
USPN 20040073903A1 – paragraph 0007 - Second, in recent years, many software manufacturers have begun releasing updates to their software more frequently in order to keep the software's functionality up-to-date and to quickly fix known bugs in the software.
USPN 5896566A – column 5, lines 22-24 - The updated software can serve to fix known software bugs or the updated software could include new and/or improved features.
Regarding claim 2, the limitation ‘the information characterizing the one or more errors in the at least one pipeline job is obtained by parsing error information in a job log’ is merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)), in this case data gathering.
Regarding claim 3, the limitation ‘the identifying the at least one error resolution script comprises identifying at least one record in an error database, wherein the error database comprises a plurality of records, wherein each record comprises an error description and a corresponding error resolution script pointer, and wherein the one or more processor-based natural language processing models process the information and the error descriptions of the error database to identify the at least one record’ is a mental process – a concept performed in the human mind by observation, evaluation, judgment, and/or opinion.
Regarding claim 5, the limitation ‘each record further comprises an error class associated with a given record, wherein at least one error class of the one or more errors is identified, from among a plurality of error classes, and wherein the processing the at least the portion of the information is based at least in part on the identified at least one error class’ is simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, MPEP 2106.05(d) iv. Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
Regarding claim 6, the limitation ‘wherein one or more errors associated with at least a first error class are resolved automatically using one or more of the at least one error resolution script’ is merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Regarding claim 7, the limitation ‘one or more errors associated with at least a second error class are (i) related to one or more of a periodic update and a new release of at least one software module used by the at least one pipeline job and (ii) resolved automatically using one or more of the at least one error resolution script’ is merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Regarding claim 8, the limitation ‘one or more errors associated with at least a third error class are resolved at least in part by manual intervention’ is merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Regarding claim 9, with the exception of the recitation of the limitations ‘at least one processing device comprising a processor coupled to a memory; the at least one processing device; using the at least one processing device; using one or more processor-based natural language processing models; using the at least one processing device’, the claim recites concepts performed in the human mind.
The limitation ‘processing at least a portion of the information, from the at least one data structure, to identify, using a processor-readable mapping of a plurality of error descriptions to respective ones of a plurality of error resolution scripts, at least one error resolution script comprising one or more executable processing operations that automatically addresses address at least one of the one or more errors in the at least one pipeline job, wherein the processor-readable mapping is generated prior to the obtaining’ is a mental process – a concept performed in the human mind by observation, evaluation, judgment, and/or opinion.
Step 2A: Prong two
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements ‘accessing at least one data structure comprising information characterizing one or more errors in at least one pipeline job of the software deployment pipeline’ job’ is merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)), in this case data gathering;
‘automatically initiating an execution of the one or more executable processing operations associated with the identified at least one error resolution script by the at least one processing device to automatically resolve the at least one of the one or more errors in the at least one pipeline job’ is merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Step 2B
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements ‘at least one processing device comprising a processor coupled to a memory; the at least one processing device; using the at least one processing device; using at least one processing device; using the at least one processing device; by at least one processing device comprising a processor coupled to a memory; using one or more processor-based natural language processing models; wherein the one or more processor-based natural language processing models are one or more of trained using an error description associated with at least a subset of records in an error database and a corresponding error resolution script to execute to resolve a given error and retrained using the error description associated with at least a subset of new records added to the error database and the corresponding error resolution script to execute to resolve a given error; automatically performing the following steps, responsive to an occurrence of a designated event, wherein the designated event comprises one or more of an update of at least one software item associated with a software deployment pipeline and a release of at least one software item associated with the software deployment pipeline’ is directed to generic computer components recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to nothing more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements ‘wherein the one or more executable processing operations comprise one or more of updating at least one software item associated with the software deployment pipeline and updating at least one image associated with the software deployment pipeline’ is simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high-level of generality to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(d)).
USPN 20190087176A1 – paragraph 0005 - Non-limiting examples of an update may include update images and patchsets that are configured to fix application bugs and/or to add or modify features of the application. Update images (e.g., major releases issued once a quarter) may be data packages that include all bug fixes and new features of a particular version of the application. Patchsets (e.g., minor bug fixes issued between the major releases) may be data packages that contain individual bug fixes that were reported since the last update image was released.
USPN 20040073903A1 – paragraph 0007 - Second, in recent years, many software manufacturers have begun releasing updates to their software more frequently in order to keep the software's functionality up-to-date and to quickly fix known bugs in the software.
USPN 5896566A – column 5, lines 22-24 - The updated software can serve to fix known software bugs or the updated software could include new and/or improved features.
Regarding claim 10, the limitation ‘the identifying the at least one error resolution script comprises identifying at least one record in an error database, wherein the error database comprises a plurality of records, wherein each record comprises an error description and a corresponding error resolution script pointer, and wherein the one or more processor-based natural language processing models process the information and the error descriptions of the error database to identify the at least one record’ is a mental process – a concept performed in the human mind by observation, evaluation, judgment, and/or opinion.
Regarding claim 11, the limitation ‘each record further comprises an error class associated with a given record, wherein at least one error class of the one or more errors is identified, from among a plurality of error classes, and wherein the processing the at least the portion of the information is based at least in part on the identified at least one error class’ is simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, MPEP 2106.05(d) iv. Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
Regarding claim 12, the limitation ‘one or more errors associated with at least a first error class are resolved automatically using one or more of the at least one error resolution script’ is merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Regarding claim 13, the limitation ‘one or more errors associated with at least a second error class are (i) related to one or more of a periodic update and a new release of at least one software module used by the at least one pipeline job and (ii) resolved automatically using one or more of the at least one error resolution script and wherein one or more errors associated with at least a third error class are resolved at least in part by manual intervention’ is merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Regarding claim 15, with the exception of the recitation of the limitations ‘A non-transitory processor-readable storage medium having stored therein program code of one or more software programs, wherein the program code when executed by at least one processing device causes the at least one processing device to perform; using the at least one processing device; using one or more processor-based natural language processing models; using the at least one processing device’, the claim recites concepts performed in the human mind.
A human can perform ‘processing at least a portion of the information, from the at least one data structure, to identify, using a processor-readable mapping of a plurality of error descriptions to respective ones of a plurality of error resolution scripts, at least one error resolution script comprising one or more executable processing operations that automatically addresses address at least one of the one or more errors in the at least one pipeline job, wherein the processor-readable mapping is generated prior to the obtaining’ mental processes – a concept performed in the human mind by observation, evaluation, judgment, and/or opinion.
Step 2A: Prong two
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements ‘accessing at least one data structure comprising information characterizing one or more errors in at least one pipeline job of a software deployment pipeline’ job’ is merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)), in this case data gathering;
‘automatically initiating an execution of the one or more executable processing operations associated with the identified at least one error resolution script by the at least one processing device to automatically address the at least one of the one or more errors in the at least one pipeline job’ is merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Step 2B
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements ‘A non-transitory processor-readable storage medium having stored therein program code of one or more software programs, wherein the program code when executed by at least one processing device causes the at least one processing device to perform; using at least one processing device; using the at least one processing device; by at least one processing device comprising a processor coupled to a memory; using one or more processor-based natural language processing models; wherein the one or more processor-based natural language processing models are one or more of trained using an error description associated with at least a subset of records in an error database and a corresponding resolution script to execute to address a given error and retrained using the error description associated with at least a subset of new records added to the error database and the corresponding error resolution script to execute to address a given error; automatically performing the following steps, responsive to an occurrence of a designated event, wherein the designated event comprises one or more of an update of at least one software item associated with a software deployment pipeline and a release of at least one software item associated with the software deployment pipeline’ is directed to generic computer components recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to nothing more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements ‘wherein the one or more executable processing operations comprise one or more of updating at least one software item associated with the software deployment pipeline and updating at least one image associated with the software deployment pipeline’ is simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high-level of generality to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(d)).
USPN 20190087176A1 – paragraph 0005 - Non-limiting examples of an update may include update images and patchsets that are configured to fix application bugs and/or to add or modify features of the application. Update images (e.g., major releases issued once a quarter) may be data packages that include all bug fixes and new features of a particular version of the application. Patchsets (e.g., minor bug fixes issued between the major releases) may be data packages that contain individual bug fixes that were reported since the last update image was released.
USPN 20040073903A1 – paragraph 0007 - Second, in recent years, many software manufacturers have begun releasing updates to their software more frequently in order to keep the software's functionality up-to-date and to quickly fix known bugs in the software.
USPN 5896566A – column 5, lines 22-24 - The updated software can serve to fix known software bugs or the updated software could include new and/or improved features.
Regarding claim 16, the limitation ‘the identifying the at least one error resolution script comprises identifying at least one record in an error database, wherein the error database comprises a plurality of records, wherein each record comprises an error description and a corresponding error resolution script pointer, and wherein the one or more processor- based natural language processing models process the information and the error descriptions of the error database to identify the at least one record’ is a mental process – a concept performed in the human mind by observation, evaluation, judgment, and/or opinion.
Regarding claim 17, the limitation ‘each record further comprises an error class associated with a given record, wherein at least one error class of the one or more errors is identified, from among a plurality of error classes, and wherein the processing the at least the portion of the information is based at least in part on the identified at least one error class’ is simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, MPEP 2106.05(d) iv. Storing and retrieving information in memory, Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
Regarding claim 18, the limitation ‘one or more errors associated with at least a first error class are resolved automatically using one or more of the at least one error resolution script’ is merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Regarding claim 19, the limitation ‘one or more errors associated with at least a second error class are (i) related to one or more of a periodic update and a new release of at least one software module used by the at least one pipeline job and (ii) resolved automatically using one or more of the at least one error resolution script’ is merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)).
Regarding claim 20, the limitation ‘one or more errors associated with at least a third error class are resolved at least in part by manual intervention’ is merely adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)) and a mental process – a concept performed in the human mind by observation, evaluation, judgment, and/or opinion with the aid of a computer is directed to generic computer components recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to nothing more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Regarding claim 21, the limitation ‘creating a branch in software code associated with the software deployment pipeline to execute the identified at least one error resolution script using the at least one processing device; and applying one or more changes generated by the executed at least one error resolution script to the software deployment pipeline to create a modified software deployment pipeline’ is directed to generic computer components recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to nothing more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Regarding claim 22, the limitation ‘creating a branch in software code associated with the software deployment pipeline to execute the identified at least one error resolution script using the at least one processing device; and applying one or more changes generated by the executed at least one error resolution script to the software deployment pipeline to create a modified software deployment pipeline’ is directed to generic computer components recited at a high-level of generality such that they amount to nothing more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components (MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/18/2026 have been fully considered. Concerning the arguments for the 101 rejection on pages 9-14, the ‘automatically performing the following steps, responsive to an occurrence of a designated event…’ limitation is having a generic computer perform particular steps. The mental processes are only for the particular limitations designated in the above rejection. The ‘executable processing operations comprise one or more of updating at least software item… and updating at least one image…’ is well-understood, routine, conventional regardless of the fact that there is a software deployment pipeline, the updating is a known method of resolution of errors.
The prior art rejection is withdrawn because of the newly added limitations.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Yolanda L Wilson whose telephone number is (571)272-3653. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (7:30 am - 4 pm).
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, Bryce Bonzo can be reached at 571-272-3655. 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.
/Yolanda L Wilson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2113