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 claimed amendment filed on September 14, 2026, in which claims 1-20 are presented for further examination.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 September 14, 2026, has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed on September 14, 2026, complies with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609. It has been placed in the application file. The information referred to therein has been considered as to the merits
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot in view of a new ground of rejection necessitated by amendment.
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 1-20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claims 1, 11, 19 and 20 recites “determining, by the intelligent integration system, a set of handlers that remediates the gaps, each of the set of handlers being a component of the intelligent integration system” and “adding, by the intelligent integration system, a workflow implementation to include the set of handlers to a workflow implementation, wherein the set of handlers is utilized by the new avatar at runtime of the workflow implementation, wherein the workflow implementation with the set of handlers is meets requirements of the rule setting entity in conducting the machine-to-machine communications for the conversation”. The claims do not provide any end result under the condition when the set of handlers do not remediate the gaps. It is unclear of what happens when set of handlers meets requirements of the rule setting entity in conducting the machine-to-machine communications for the conversation the. What happens when the set of handlers do not meet requirements of the rule setting entity in conducting the machine-to-machine communications for the conversation.
Claims 2-10, 12-18 are also rejected for incorporating the deficiency of their respective base claims by dependency.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based e-Terminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An e-Terminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about e-Terminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of co-pending Application No. 19/329,235 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-20 under examination are obvious, respectively, by claims 1-20 of the reference co-pending Application. Every limitations in the instant application under examination claims are recited in the conflicting reference co-pending Application claims, and the differences or additional limitations between the claims are highlighted below by underlining and bolding all limitations. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the independent claim 1 of the instant application to stop, by the intelligent integration system, moving the data through the choreography; at design time and continue or restart the workflow implementation in the test mode with the handler that can meet the requirement of the choreography key, in order to ensures stateful recovery, compliance, fault tolerance, and operational efficiency while allowing safe design-time testing.
Note, such deviation would not interfere with the functionality of the claims that are in the co-pending application, and would achieve the same end result.
Please, see the comparison table below:
Application
Co-pending Application
1. A method for intelligent integration, the method comprising: at design time:
creating, by an intelligent integration system having a plurality of avatars and operating in a computing environment, a new avatar in the computing environment where the intelligent integration system operates, the new avatar representing a first-computing system of a rule following entity, the creating the new avatar including determining a set of states, transitions, and data items for a machine-to-machine communication in a conversation with a second avatar in the computing environment, the second avatar representing a second computing system of a rule setting entity, wherein the conversation comprises a series of message exchanges between the first computing system and the second computing system through the machine-to-machine communication, rule setting entity having a choreography for networking actions between entities and workflows thereof, the choreography defined by a signature, the signature specifying a set of rules that must be followed by avatars of the entities involved in the choreography;
determining, by the intelligent integration system, a current configuration of states, state transitions, and validation rules for the plurality of second avatars;
performing, by the intelligent integration system, a gap analysis, the gap analysis identifying gaps between the set of states, transitions, and data items of the new avatar and the current configuration of states, state transitions, and validation rules for the second avatars;
determining, by the intelligent integration system, a set of handlers that remediates the gaps, each of the set of handlers being a component of the intelligent integration system; and
adding, by the intelligent integration system, the set of handlers to a workflow implementation, wherein the set of handlers is utilized by the new avatar at runtime of the workflow implementation, wherein the workflow implementation with the set of handlers meets requirements of the rule setting entity in conducting the machine-to-machine communications for the conversation.
1. A method for intelligent integration, the method comprising: in a test mode of a workflow implementation:
operating, by an intelligent integration system operating in a third computing environment that is different from a first computing environment and a second computing environment, a first avatar to represent a first computing system in the first computing environment and a second avatar to represent a second computing system in the second computing environment;
receiving, by the intelligent integration system, a message from the second computing environment to the first computing environment, the message containing data, wherein arrival of the data triggers an integration activity that follows a choreography, wherein the choreography comprises a choreography key, and wherein moving the data through the choreography is defined and governed by the choreography key; and
stopping, by the intelligent integration system, moving the data through the choreography; at design time:
determining, by the intelligent integration system, a handler that can meet a requirement of the choreography key; and
updating, by the intelligent integration system, the workflow implementation to include the handler; and
continuing or restarting the workflow implementation in the test mode with the handler that can meet the requirement of the choreography key.
Claims 2-10 are rejected for incorporating the deficiency of their respective base claims by dependency.
Application
Co-pending Application
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the gaps comprise a missing state, a missing transition, a missing data item operation, or a combination thereof.
3. The method according to claim 1, further comprising: determining a missing transition, a missing state, or a missing data item operation for the new avatar;
automatically generating a handler for remediating the missing transition, the missing state, or the missing data item operation for the new avatar that cannot be remediated by the set of handlers.
4. The method according to claim 1, wherein a handler of the set of handlers is operable to, at runtime, generate a file utilizing an initial state and initial data in an initial transaction.
5. The method according to claim 1, wherein a handler of the set of handlers is operable to, at runtime, trigger an integration activity for pushing data from one state to another state in the workflow implementation.
6. The method according to claim 1, wherein the rule setting entity is a rule setter for the conversation.
7. The method according to claim 1, wherein a handler of the set of handlers is operable to, at runtime, trigger an integration activity for populating transaction data of another entity that facilitates the conversation.
8. The method according to claim 1, wherein the workflow implementation comprises the new avatar, the set of handlers, and the choreography.
9. The method according to claim 1, wherein the rule following and rule setting entities shares a transition and wherein the gap analysis comprises comparing validation rules for the transition.
10. The method according to claim 1, further comprising: generating a report that summarizes a gap of the gaps.
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the choreography defines a scope of behaviors that need to be implemented in order to communicate with the first computing system in the first computing environment.
3. The method according to claim 1, wherein the choreography key comprises a set of rules that must be followed by avatars involved in the choreography.
4. The method according to claim 1, wherein a first application on the first computing system in the first computing environment controls states of the choreography and wherein a second application on the second computing system in the second computing environment is required to meet requirements of the first application so as to follow the choreography.
5. The method according to claim 4, wherein the requirements of the first application are subject to change from time to time unbeknownst to the second application on the second computing system in the second computing environment.
6. The method according to claim 1, wherein the integration activity comprises utilizing a plurality of handlers for:
creating a data set conforming to a data model, the data set initially empty; transforming the data from a first format to a second format; inserting the data in the second format into the data set; and changing a corresponding state in the data set.
7. The method according to claim 6, wherein the plurality of handlers is capable of interacting with multiple application programming interfaces (APIs), files, and databases to extract or inject necessary data for a plurality of integration activities.
As to claim 11, one having skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify the independent claim 11 of the instant application to stop, by the intelligent integration system, moving the data through the choreography; at design time and continue or restart the workflow implementation in the test mode with the handler that can meet the requirement of the choreography key, in order to ensures stateful recovery, compliance, fault tolerance, and operational efficiency while allowing safe design-time testing.
Note, such deviation would not interfere with the functionality of the claims that are in the co-pending application, and would achieve the same end result.
Please, see the comparison table below:
Application
Co-pending Application
11. A method, comprising:
determining, by a system executing on a processor, requirements of a first entity for a machine-to-machine communication, the first entity comprising a first computing system operating in a first computing environment, wherein the first entity sets rules for the machine-to- machine communication;
comparing, by the system, the requirements of the first entity with requirements of a second entity, the second entity comprising a second computing system operating in a second computing environment, the system operating in a third computing environment, the first computing environment, the second computing environment, and the third computing environment being different from one another;
determining, by the system, additional requirements needed by the second entity to meet the requirements of the first entity for the machine-to-machine communication;
performing, by the system based at least in part on the rules set by the first entity, a gap analysis on the additional requirements, for the machine-to-machine communication;
determining, by the system, a set of handlers that meets the additional requirements for the machine-to-machine communication, each of the set of handlers being a component of the system;
determining, by the system, any of the additional requirements not met by the setoff set of handlers; and
generating, by the system, one or more handlers for meeting any of the additional requirements not met by the set of handlers.
1. A method for intelligent integration, the method comprising: in a test mode of a workflow implementation:
operating, by an intelligent integration system operating in a third computing environment that is different from a first computing environment and a second computing environment, a first avatar to represent a first computing system in the first computing environment and a second avatar to represent a second computing system in the second computing environment;
receiving, by the intelligent integration system, a message from the second computing environment to the first computing environment, the message containing data, wherein arrival of the data triggers an integration activity that follows a choreography, wherein the choreography comprises a choreography key, and wherein moving the data through the choreography is defined and governed by the choreography key; and
stopping, by the intelligent integration system, moving the data through the choreography; at design time:
determining, by the intelligent integration system, a handler that can meet a requirement of the choreography key; and
updating, by the intelligent integration system, the workflow implementation to include the handler; and
continuing or restarting the workflow implementation in the test mode with the handler that can meet the requirement of the choreography key.
Claims 12-18 are rejected for incorporating the deficiency of their respective base claims by dependency.
Application
Co-pending Application
12. The method according to claim 11, wherein the requirements of the first entity pertain to a process controlled by an application running on the first computing system, the process having a set of predefined states, the requirements of the first entity including a data processing requirement for transitioning from one state to another state in the process.
13. The method according to claim 12, wherein the process is initiated by a message from the first entity.
14. The method according to claim 13, wherein the message comprises initial data, wherein arrival of the initial data triggers invocation of a handler for transforming the initial data from a first format to a second format, for inserting the initial data in the second format into transaction data stored in a data store, and for changing a state in the transaction data.
15. The method according to claim 14, wherein behavior of the handler is guided by a configuration file.
16. The method according to claim 1, wherein the gap analysis comprises: identifying new states and transitions required by a fourth entity, the fourth entity having a fourth computing system operating in a fourth computing environment.
17. The method according to claim 16, further comprising: adding, to a workflow implementation associated with the first entity, handlers for the new states and transitions required by the fourth entity.
18. The method according to claim 11, further comprising: generating a report summarizing automatic adaptions and any remaining gaps from the gap analysis.
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the choreography defines a scope of behaviors that need to be implemented in order to communicate with the first computing system in the first computing environment.
3. The method according to claim 1, wherein the choreography key comprises a set of rules that must be followed by avatars involved in the choreography.
4. The method according to claim 1, wherein a first application on the first computing system in the first computing environment controls states of the choreography and wherein a second application on the second computing system in the second computing environment is required to meet requirements of the first application so as to follow the choreography.
5. The method according to claim 4, wherein the requirements of the first application are subject to change from time to time unbeknownst to the second application on the second computing system in the second computing environment.
6. The method according to claim 1, wherein the integration activity comprises utilizing a plurality of handlers for:
creating a data set conforming to a data model, the data set initially empty; transforming the data from a first format to a second format; inserting the data in the second format into the data set; and changing a corresponding state in the data set.
7. The method according to claim 6, wherein the plurality of handlers is capable of interacting with multiple application programming interfaces (APIs), files, and databases to extract or inject necessary data for a plurality of integration activities.
As to claim 19, one having skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify the independent claim 19 of the instant application to stop, by the intelligent integration system, moving the data through the choreography; at design time and continue or restart the workflow implementation in the test mode with the handler that can meet the requirement of the choreography key, in order to ensures stateful recovery, compliance, fault tolerance, and operational efficiency while allowing safe design-time testing.
Note, such deviation would not interfere with the functionality of the claims that are in the co-pending application, and would achieve the same end result.
Please, see the comparison table below:
Application
Co-pending Application
19. A intelligent integration system, comprising: a processor; a non-transitory computer-readable medium; and instructions stored on the non-transitory computer-readable medium and translatable by the processor for:
creating a new avatar to represent, in a computing environment where the intelligent integration system operates, with a plurality of avatars, a first computing system of a rule following entity, the creating the new avatar including determining a set of states, transitions, and data items for a machine-to-machine communication in a conversation with a second avatar in the computing environment, the second avatar representing a second computing system of a rule setting entity, wherein the conversation comprises a series of message exchanges between the first computing system and the second computing system through the machine-to-machine communication, the rule setting entity having a choreography for networking actions between entities and workflows thereof, the choreography defined by a signature, the signature specifying a set of rules that must be followed by avatars of the entities involved in the choreography;
determining a current configuration of states, state transitions, and validation rules for the plurality of second avatars;
performing a gap analysis, the gap analysis identifying gaps between the set of states, transitions, and data items of the new avatar and the current configuration of states, state transitions, and validation rules for the second avatars;
determining a set of handlers that remediates the gaps, each of the set of handlers being a component of the intelligent integration system; and
adding, to a workflow implementation to include, the set of handlers, wherein the set of handlers is utilized by the new avatar at runtime of the workflow implementation so that the workflow implementation meets requirements of the rule setting entity in conducting the machine-to-machine communications for the conversation.
8. A intelligent integration system, comprising: a processor; a non-transitory computer-readable medium; and
instructions stored on the non-transitory computer-readable medium and translatable by the processor for: in a test mode of a workflow implementation:
operating a first avatar to represent a first computing system in a first computing environment and a second avatar to represent a second computing system in a second computing environment, the intelligent integration system operating in a third computing environment that is different from the first computing environment and the second computing environment;
receiving a message from the second computing environment to the first computing environment, the message containing data, wherein arrival of the data triggers an integration activity that follows a choreography, wherein the choreography comprises a choreography key, and wherein moving the data through the choreography is defined and governed by the choreography key; and
stopping moving the data through the choreography; at design time:
determining a handler that can meet a requirement of the choreography key; and
updating the workflow implementation to include the handler; and
continuing or restarting the workflow implementation in the test mode with the handler that can meet the requirement of the choreography key.
As to claim 20, one having skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found it obvious to modify the independent claim 20 of the instant application to stop, by the intelligent integration system, moving the data through the choreography; at design time and continue or restart the workflow implementation in the test mode with the handler that can meet the requirement of the choreography key, in order to ensures stateful recovery, compliance, fault tolerance, and operational efficiency while allowing safe design-time testing.
Note, such deviation would not interfere with the functionality of the claims that are in the co-pending application, and would achieve the same end result.
Please, see the comparison table below:
Application
Co-pending Application
20. A system, comprising: a processor; a non-transitory computer-readable medium; and instructions stored on the non-transitory computer-readable medium and translatable by the processor for:
requirements of a first entity for a machine-to-machine
communication, the first entity comprising a first computing system operating in a first computing environment, wherein the first entity sets rules for the machine-to-machine communication;
comparing the requirements of the first entity with requirements of a second entity, the second entity comprising a second computing system operating in a second computing environment, the system operating in a third computing environment, the first computing environment, the second computing environment, and the third computing environment being different from one another;
determining additional requirements needed by the second entity to meet the requirements of the first entity for the machine-to-machine communication;
performing, based at least in part on the rules set by the first entity, a gap analysis on the additional requirements for the machine-to-machine communication;
determining a set of handlers that meets the additional requirements, each of the set of handlers being a component of the system;
determining any of the additional requirements not met by the set of handlers; and
generating one or more handlers for meeting any of the additional requirements not met by the set of handlers.
15. A computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions translatable by a processor of an intelligent integration system for:
in a test mode of a workflow implementation:
operating a first avatar to represent a first computing system in a first computing environment and a second avatar to represent a second computing system in a second computing environment, the intelligent integration system operating in a third computing environment that is different from the first computing environment and the second computing environment;
receiving a message from the second computing environment to the first computing environment, the message containing data, wherein arrival of the data triggers an integration activity that follows a choreography, wherein the choreography comprises a choreography key, and wherein moving the data through the choreography is defined and governed by the choreography key; and
stopping moving the data through the choreography; at design time:
determining a handler that can meet a requirement of the choreography key; and
updating the workflow implementation to include the handler; and
continuing or restarting the workflow implementation in the test mode with the handler that can meet the requirement of the choreography key.
This is a provisional non-statutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20210240640 (involved in an integration system that includes a source data store containing a plurality of workloads (e.g., data packets). A processing platform may retrieve a workload from the source data store via first unikernel-based workload processing. The processing platform may then process the workload (e.g., filtering or dropping) to generate an output result and arrange for the output result to be provided to a sink destination via second unikernel-based workload processing (e.g., associated with a Linux event loop model of input output multiplexing). In some embodiments, the processing platform initially evaluates the workload in the source data store to determine if the workload meets a predetermined condition. If the workload does not meet the predetermined condition, the retrieving and arranging may be performed via container-based workload processing instead of unikernel-based workload processing).
US 20190197150 (involved in integrating data from multiple data sources with a transaction-related workflow are provided. The disclosed techniques include, in response to determining that a contact record was retrieved from a second data source, concurrently with the assigning of a role to the contact record, instantiating a version of the contact record in a first data source using data obtained from the second data source.)
US 20060224702 (involved in executing business process logic between two more business applications is disclosed. A global workflow container stores one or more business processes, each business process having process logic that defines communication between the two or more business applications. A local workflow builder defines a local workflow, the local workflow having one or more local events that include logic for processing information external to the process logic of a business process. A local workflow container stores the local workflow, and is accessible by the business process to receive and/or send data from and/or to the local workflow.)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEAN M CORRIELUS whose telephone number is (571)272-4032. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6:30a-10p(Midflex).
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, Ann J Lo can be reached at (571)272-9767. 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.
/JEAN M CORRIELUS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2159 September 18, 2026
Prosecution Insights