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 .
This Office Action is in response to the amendment filed 9/2/2025.
Claims 1, 4, 7-10, 12, and 14-20 have been amended.
Claims 1-20 remain pending and have been considered below.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1 is rejected because it is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Under Prong 1 Step 2A, the claim recites “select one of the plurality of configurations based on a current version of the platform service” as drafted, recite function that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers function that could reasonably be performed in the mind, including with the aid of pen and paper, but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, the limitation as drafted, recite functions that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers functions that could reasonably be performed in the mind, including with the aid of pen and paper. Thus, these limitations recite and fall within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas.
Under Prong 2, Step 2A, the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the following additional elements “a non-transitory machine-readable medium having instructions stored thereon which, when executed by a processor” are merely instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer, with instructions, as a tool to perform the abstract idea according to MPEP 2106.05(f), thus, not indicative of an integration into a practical application. The additional elements “receive a request to configure a platform service associated with a container orchestration system” and “collect a plurality of configurations corresponding to the platform service, from a deployment chart of an application service managed by the container orchestration system, wherein each of the plurality of configurations includes platform service configuration data associated with a particular version of the platform service” which are merely insignificant extra solution activity of gathering data which does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application, and the claim is therefore directed to the judicial exception according to MPEP 2106.05(f). The additional element “configure the platform service using the selected configuration” is merely applying the judicial exception or abstract idea at the high level of generality according to MPEP 2106.05(f).
Under Step 2B, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements “a non-transitory machine-readable medium having instructions stored thereon which, when executed by a processor” are the mere use of generic computer to implement the abstract idea, as discussed above, which does not amount to significantly more, thus, not an inventive concept. The additional elements “receive a request to configure a platform service associated with a container orchestration system” and “collect a plurality of configurations corresponding to the platform service, from a deployment chart of an application service managed by the container orchestration system, wherein each of the plurality of configurations includes platform service configuration data associated with a particular version of the platform service” which are merely insignificant extra solution activity of gathering data, storing data and outputting the results of the abstract idea and the courts have identified gathering data, storing data, and outputting the result is well-understood, routine and conventional activity. The additional element “configure the platform service using the selected configuration” merely applying the judicial exception or abstract idea at a high level of generality (Berkheimer v. HP, Inc., 881 F.3d 1360, 1368, 125 USPQ2d 1649, 1654 (Fed. Cir. 2018)), thus, cannot amount to an inventive concept. Therefore, none of the additional elements recite an inventive concept. The claimed invention is patent ineligible under 35 USC 101. See MPEP 2106.05(d).
Claims 10 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite a method and system, respectively, for performing the steps recited in claim 1 and therefore are rejected for the same reason given for claim 1 above.
Claims 7, 14, and 18 are also directed to the abstract idea as a human can perform “discard versions of the configurations larger than the current version of the platform service” in the mind including with the aid of pen and paper. Since the claim lacks of additional elements indicative of integration into a practical application or amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea, the claim is ineligible.
Claims 9, 16, and 20 are also directed to the abstract idea as a human can perform “write platform service configuration data from the selected configuration to a configuration file of the platform service” in the mind including with the aid of pen and paper. Since the claim lacks of additional elements indicative of integration into a practical application or amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea, the claim is ineligible.
Claims 2-6, 8, 11-13, 15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because these claims recite the additional elements that do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The post-solution activity is well-understood, routine, and conventional activity. Therefore, it does not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Accordingly, the claims do not appear to be patent eligible under 35 USC 101. See MPEP 2106.05(d).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are considered allowable when reading the claims in light of the specification. The prior arts of record do not teach or reasonably suggest the combination of the limitations specified in the independent claims 1, 10, and 17. More specifically, the cited prior arts do not teach “collect a plurality of configurations corresponding to the platform service, from a deployment chart of an application service managed by the container orchestration system, wherein each of the plurality of configurations includes platform service configuration data associated with a particular version of the platform service; select one of the plurality of configurations based on a current version of the platform service; and configure the platform service using the selected configuration” when taken in the context of the claim as a whole.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILLIP H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1070. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Wei Zhen can be reached at (571) 272-3708. 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.
/PHILLIP H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2191