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 .
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 directed towards a system, method, and product which are one of the four statutory categories.
However, they are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. The claims of 1, 8, and 15 are directed to a mental process with the aid of a computer. Specifically, the invention is directed to modeling workflows without redundant time traces in a timed partial order graph.
The Examiner has deemed this to be computer aided mental processes namely MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) III C #2 performing a mental process in a computer environment. (See also, MPEP 2106.04(A)(2) III paragraph 3 citing Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp., 839 F.3d 1138, 1139, 120 USPQ2d 1473, 1474 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (holding those claims to a mental process of "translating a functional description of a logic circuit into a hardware component description of the logic circuit" are directed to an abstract idea, because the claims "read on an individual performing the claimed steps mentally or with pencil and paper"). Also see MPEP 2106.04(A)(2) III paragraph 2. 1st sentence: "mental processes" abstract idea grouping is defined as concepts performed in the human mind, and examples of mental processes include observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions")
Specifically, here, based on the MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) III paragraph 2 test above, all you have is computer aided observations and evaluations to generate workflows. Thus, similar to the example of MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) III paragraph 2 the claims would set forth the abstract mental processes.
This is shown in various claim limitations, such as, storing the timed traces into memory or generating partial timed trace graph.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional limitations, such as, “…computing device… processor…memory…data receiver…partial order graph…clocks…”are all directed at narrowing the abstract idea. Furthermore, the limitations here implemented in a generic computer. This is evidenced by the Applicant’s Specification on Fig. 5 disclosing implementing the software on a generic computer using generic implementing software.
The dependent claims of 2-7, 9-14 and 16-20 do not independently overcome 101, and are therefore, rejected based on their dependency of claim 1, 11. The dependent claims alone are directed towards further narrowing the abstract idea, which does not serve to render the claim patent-eligible.
In addition, the dependent claims 5, 6, 12, 13, 19 and 20 are further rejected as a mathematical formula judicial exception. This is evident by the claims explicit use of a mathematical formula.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “configured to.” Such as, “…data receiver configured to…,” or “…processor configured to…” in claims 1-7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Allowable Subject Matter:
Claim 1-20 are allowed.
Reasons for Allowance:
With respect to the 35 USC 103 rejection, none of the prior art of record, taken individually or in any combination, teach, inter alia.
1.)
A system for use with a plurality of timed traces for performing a task, each of the
plurality of timed traces includes a respective event data and a respective time data, said
system comprising:
a data receiver configured to receive the plurality of timed traces;
a memory having instructions stored therein; and
a processor configured to execute the instructions stored in said memory to cause said
system to:
store the received plurality of timed traces into said memory;
generate a partial order graph of time constraints between all of the plurality
of timed traces;
generate a transitive reduced partial order graph from the partial order graph,
the transitive reduced partial order graph not including redundant time constraints
within the partial order graph; and
generate a timed partial order graph from the transitive reduced partial order
graph, the timed partial order graph having a minimum number of clocks required to
explain the time constraints between all of the plurality of timed traces.
The prior art most closely resembling the Applicant’s Invention are:
-2008/0065448 (Hull)
-2007/00555581 (Shanahan)
-CN113537721A (South China Normal University)
Hull teaches generating a workflow graph from empirical data of a process are described. A processing system obtains data corresponding to multiple instances of a process, the process including a set of tasks, the data including information about order of occurrences of the tasks. The processing system analyzes the occurrences of the tasks to identify order constraints. The processing system partitions nodes representing tasks into subsets based upon the order constraints, wherein the subsets are sequence ordered with respect to each other such that all nodes associated with a given subset either precede or follow all nodes associated with another subset. The processing system partitions nodes representing tasks into subgroups, wherein each subgroup includes one or more nodes that occur without order constraints relative to nodes associated with other subgroups. A workflow graph representative of the process is constructed wherein nodes are connected by edges.
Hull does not teach, generate a transitive reduced partial order graph from the partial order graph, the transitive reduced partial order graph not including redundant time constraints
within the partial order graph; and generate a timed partial order graph from the transitive reduced partial order graph, the timed partial order graph having a minimum number of clocks required to explain the time constraints between all of the plurality of timed traces.
Shanahan teaches, generating a workflow graph from empirical data of a process are described. Data for multiple instances of a process are obtained, the data including information about task ordering. The processing system analyzes occurrences of tasks to identify order constraints. A set of nodes representing tasks is partitioned into a series of subsets, where no node of a given subset is constrained to precede any other node of the given subset unless said pair of nodes are conditionally independent given one or more nodes in an immediately preceding subset, and such that no node of a following subset is constrained to precede any node of the given subset. Nodes of each subset are connected to nodes of each adjacent subset with edges based upon the order constraints and based upon conditional independence tests applied to subsets of nodes, thereby providing a workflow graph.
Shanahan does not teach, generate a transitive reduced partial order graph from the partial order graph, the transitive reduced partial order graph not including redundant time constraints
within the partial order graph; and generate a timed partial order graph from the transitive reduced partial order graph, the timed partial order graph having a minimum number of clocks required to explain the time constraints between all of the plurality of timed traces.
South China Normal University teaches, adjusting local time constraints of business workflow, which can be applied to the technical field of data processing. The method of the present invention includes the following steps: acquiring service requests of multiple different service types; constructing a directed acyclic graph, the directed acyclic graph covering a variety of different types of service requests; Time constraints are assigned to each workflow activity, and the local time constraints of each workflow activity are obtained; the redundant time constraints of workflows of the same type in different business types are determined according to the local time constraints; the local time is adjusted according to the redundant time constraints constraint. By introducing the concept of redundancy, the present invention dynamically adjusts the local time constraints of workflow activities, thereby improving the adaptability of the queuing system where the workflow activities are located, and at the same time, when the average execution time of the workflow activities in the queuing system increases, it can effectively reduce the Necessary resource investment to reduce exception handling costs.
South China Normal University does not teach, within the partial order graph; and generate a timed partial order graph from the transitive reduced partial order graph, the timed partial order graph having a minimum number of clocks required to explain the time constraints between all of the plurality of timed traces.
While the teachings of the above prior art separately address different parts of the
claimed invention, these teachings would not be combinable by one of ordinary skill in the art at
the time of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to provide a predictable
combination that would render the claimed invention obvious. Thus, the novelty of the claimed
invention is in the combination of limitations rather than any single limitation.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment
of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee.
Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for
Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZAHRA ELKASSABGI whose telephone number is (571)270-7943. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 11:30 to 8:00.
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, Rutao Wu can be reached at 571.272.6045. 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.
ZAHRA . ELKASSABGI
Examiner
Art Unit 3623
/RUTAO WU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3623