DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements filed 3/2/23 and 9/18/24 have been considered
Drawings
The drawings filed 3/2/23 have been reviewed and accepted.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 9 and 15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding independent claims 1, 9 and 15, “identifying, from a configuration table, an ML model…” should be “identifying, from a configuration table, a machine learning model (ML) model…”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because claim 9 includes a system without including a hardware component within the system. This is interpreted as software per se. The memory element within claim 9 is interpreted as not required to be within the system. In addition, the adapter is defined within the specification as software (para [0010]). In addition, there are no other structural components within the claim. Dependent claims 10-14 fail to cure the deficiencies of the independent claim and are thus similarly rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 8-10, 12, 14-15, 17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yellin United States Patent Application Publication US 2020/0285891 in view of Dwiveldi United States Patent US 10,754,638.
Regarding claim 1, Yellin discloses a method comprising:
receiving, from a web-based service platform, a set of inputs associated with detection of a trigger event (Yellin, para [0040-41], mobile platform 330 represents a web-based service platform. Mobile platform collects various data points of edge devices. Model training manager collects training data sets to trigger AI system to train and build new models);
identifying, from a configuration table (Yellin, para [0042], model policies 350), an ML model having execution trigger criteria satisfied by the set of inputs, the ML model being one of multiple selectable ML models identified in the configuration table (Yellin, para [0042], model policies table 350 holds information for each model stored in model storage 340);
retrieving, from the configuration table, a data contract for the ML model, the data contract indicating an expected format of inputs to the ML model and an expected format of outputs generated by the ML model (Yellin, para [0042-43], model policies contain user characteristics, representing ‘data contract’ with information on edge device attributes);
constructing a call, based on the data contract, to the ML model, the call including input parameter values associated with the trigger event (Yellin, para [0047, 51], with regards to fig 4, element 408, SDK generates calls including user characteristics to update device profile); and
translating, based on the data contract, output received from the ML (Yellin, para [0051], generates scores based on collected data to update model policies database 350).
Yellin does not disclose:
translating, based on the data contract, output received from the ML model to a unified object consumable by web-based service platform; and
providing the unified object to the web-based service platform.
Dwiveldi discloses:
translating, based on the data contract, output received to a unified object consumable by web-based service platform (Dwiveldi, col 22, rows 12-22, transforms event data output via a configuration file); and
providing the unified object to the web-based service platform (Dwiveldi, col 24, indexer stores transformed event).
Before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified providing a database with data to include transformed data to be included in a specific storage structure. The motivation for doing so would have been to efficiently store massive quantities of data for later retrieval (Dwiveldi, col 1, rows 38-46).
Regarding claim 2, Yellin in view of Dwiveldi discloses the method of claim 1. Yellin does not disclose the additional limitations of claim 2.
Dwiveldi discloses wherein the unified object is of a consistent form regardless of which of the source the output (Dwiveldi, with regards to fig 5B, items stored field-value pairs with field 511A and values 511B for multiple events from various event sources).
Before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified providing a database with data to include transformed data to be included in a specific storage structure. The motivation for doing so would have been to efficiently store massive quantities of data for later retrieval (Dwiveldi, col 1, rows 38-46).
Regarding claim 8, Yellin in view of Dwiveldi discloses the method of claim 1. Yellin additionally discloses further comprising: retrieving, from the configuration table, mapping information for mapping the outputs generated by the ML model to the unified object, wherein translating the output received from the ML model depends upon the mapping information (Yellin, para [0051], generates scores based on collected data to update model policies database 350).
Regarding independent claim 9, it is substantially similar to claim 1, besides the memory component contained within the system. Yellin additionally discloses memory within each computing device (Yellin, fig 7, elements 722 and 706).
Regarding claim 10, it is substantially similar to claim 2 and is thus similarly rejected.
Regarding claim 12, it is substantially similar to claim 4 and is thus similarly rejected.
Regarding claim 14, it is substantially similar to claim 8 and is thus similarly rejected.
Regarding independent claim 15, it is substantially similar to claim 1, besides the computer readable storage component. Yellin additionally discloses a computer program product within each computing device (Yellin, fig 7, elements 722).
Regarding claim 17, it is substantially similar to claim 8 and is thus similarly rejected.
Regarding claim 20, Yellin in view of Dwiveldi discloses the tangible computer-readable storage media of claim 15. Yellin additionally discloses wherein the computer process further comprises: wherein the web-based service platform defines and detects the trigger event (Yellin, para [0040-41], mobile platform 330 represents a web-based service platform. Mobile platform collects various data points of edge devices. Model training manager collects training data sets to trigger AI system to train and build new models).
Claims 3, 11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yellin United States Patent Application Publication US 2020/0285891 in view of Dwiveldi United States Patent US 10,754,638 in further view of Leopold United States Patent Application Publication US 2014/0129493.
Regarding claim 3, Yellin in view of Dwiveldi discloses the method of claim 1. Yellin in view of Dwiveldi does not disclose the additional limitations of the present claim.
Leopold discloses determining, based on the configuration table, an authentication token for communicating with the ML model and a URL for accessing the ML model; and providing the authentication token to the URL (Leopold, para [0077], matches an auth (authentication) token with a URL to access a specific application).
Before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified accessing data to include an authentication process between client and a server. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide an extended connection between a user trying to access information on a server (Leopold, para [0077])
Regarding claims 11 and 16, they are substantially similar to claim 3 and are thus similarly rejected.
Claims 4, 12, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yellin United States Patent Application Publication US 2020/0285891 in view of Dwiveldi United States Patent US 10,754,638 in further view of Chai United States Patent Application Publication US 2022/0091837.
Regarding claim 4, Yellin in view of Dwiveldi discloses the method of claim 1. Yellin in view of Dwiveldi does not disclose the additional limitations of the present claim.
Chai discloses wherein the trigger event is detected in response to a user interaction with a user interface of the web-based service platform (Chai, para [0035], user selects model to be incorporated).
Before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the trigger to be based on user interaction. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide comprehensive services for management of machine learning models (Chai, para [0002]).
Regarding claim 12, it is substantially similar to claim 4 and is thus similarly rejected.
Regarding claim 18, Yellin in view of Dwiveldi discloses the tangible computer-readable storage media of claim 15. Yellin in view of Dwiveldi does not disclose the additional limitations of the present claim.
Chai discloses wherein the trigger event is detected in response to a user interaction with a user interface of the web-based service platform and the unified object is automatically rendered to the user interface (Chai, para [0035], user selects model to be incorporated; Chai, para [0176], user interface displays output graphs).
Before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the trigger to be based on user interaction. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide comprehensive services for management of machine learning models (Chai, para [0002]).
Regarding claim 19, Yellin in view of Dwiveldi discloses the tangible computer-readable storage media of claim 15. Yellin in view of Dwiveldi does not disclose the additional limitations of the present claim.
Chai discloses wherein the computer process further comprises: in response to storing the unified object in the repository, automatically rendering the unified object to a user interface of the web-based service platform (Chai, para [0035], user selects model to be incorporated; Chai, para [0176], user interface displays output graphs).
Before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the trigger to be based on user interaction. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide comprehensive services for management of machine learning models (Chai, para [0002]).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yellin United States Patent Application Publication US 2020/0285891 in view of Dwiveldi United States Patent US 10,754,638 in further view of Leopold United States Patent Application Publication US 2014/0129493 as modified by Chai United States Patent Application Publication US 2022/0091837.
Regarding claim 5, Yellin in view of Dwiveldi in further view of Leopold discloses the method of claim 3. Yellin in view of Dwiveldi does not disclose the additional limitations of the present claim.
Chai discloses further comprising: accessing the configuration table using a first application programming interface (API) and placing the unified object in a repository using a second API, the repository being accessible to one or more user interfaces of the web-based service platform (Chai, para [0078, 189], fig 5, with regards to elements “console”, “MI SDK”, “API(s)” and “platform backend”, Separate/different APIs can be used to carry out support from console and MI SDK to handle different services)
Before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the API structure. The motivation for doing so would have been to provide comprehensive services for management of machine learning models (Chai, para [0002]).
Claim(s) 6-7 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yellin United States Patent Application Publication US 2020/0285891 in view of Dwiveldi United States Patent US 10,754,638 in further view of Schott United States Patent Application Publication US 2021/0256427.
Regarding claim 6, Yellin in view of Dwiveldi discloses the method of claim 1. Yellin in view of Dwiveldi does not disclose the additional limitations of the present claim.
Schott discloses wherein the ML model executes asynchronously from a processing thread that constructs the call to the ML model and wherein translating the output received from the ML model is performed in response to a call initiated by the ML model (Schott, para [0054], output of models can write inferences asynchronously).
Before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the output to be asynchronous. The motivation for doing so would have been to reduce waiting time for data to be synchronized (Schott, para [0054]).
Regarding claim 7, Yellin in view of Dwiveldi discloses the method of claim 1. Yellin in view of Dwiveldi does not disclose the additional limitations of the present claim.
Schott discloses wherein the ML model executes synchronously with a processing thread that constructs the call to the ML model and wherein translating the output received from the ML model is performed in response to receiving the output from the ML model (Schott, para [0056], in another example, interface can be synchronized).
Before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the output to be synchronous. The motivation for doing so would have been to receive date in predetermined time intervals (Schott, para [0056]).
Regarding claim 13, it is substantially similar to claim 6 and is thus similarly rejected.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOPE C SHEFFIELD whose telephone number is (303)297-4265. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9:00 am-5:00pm PT.
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, Matt Ell can be reached at (571)270-3264. 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.
/HOPE C SHEFFIELD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2141