Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 18, 2026
Application No. 18/434,546

DATA PROCESSING SYSTEM WITH MANIPULATION OF LOGICAL DATASET GROUPS

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Feb 06, 2024
Examiner
NGUYEN, KIM T
Art Unit
2153
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
AB Initio Technology LLC
OA Round
4 (Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
1607 granted / 1844 resolved
+32.1% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
13 currently pending
Career history
1857
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.0%
-30.0% vs TC avg
§103
22.7%
-17.3% vs TC avg
§102
36.5%
-3.5% vs TC avg
§112
19.0%
-21.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1844 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
DETAILED ACTION Response to Arguments 1. Applicant’s arguments filed on 02/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for the following reasons: Applicant argues that Morton does not disclose “storing, in a data structure, a representation of the designated group of datasets as including the selected at least one dataset, the storing comprising storing, in the data structure, information about privileges of one or more users for accessing information about the designated group of datasets; means for storing representations of a plurality of groups of datasets in a data structure comprising information about privileges of one or more users for accessing information about the groups of datasets; and storing, in a data structure, a representation of the designated group as comprising the selected dataset and information about privileges of one or more users for accessing the designated group”. However, Morton discloses (on figs. 4A, 4B, 6B, [0031]-[0032], [0085]-[0086], [0089]) a graphical diagram illustrating a linked trading partner object map defining a plurality of dataset field names for dataset field values managed by the trading partner, remotely from the user that modeled the integration process, according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. As described herein, the object map graphical user interface 400 may be used to map relationships between different dataset field names for the same dataset field value. For example, a user may model an integration process to transmit a dataset field value having a field name “locale” at the user enterprise system/network to a trading partner, where the dataset field value may be stored under the dataset field name “location.” In such a scenario, an object map graphical user interface 400 in embodiments described herein may display a link 443 between the dataset 413 having a field name “locale” within the enterprise user object map 410 and the dataset 433 having a field name “location” within the trading partner object map 430. Such a link 443 may indicate the dataset field value associated with the field name “locale” at the user enterprise system/network may be stored, pursuant to the user-modeled integration process, with the dataset field name “location” at the trading partner. In addition, Morton discloses such a mapping may be repeated for each dataset identified within the enterprise user object map 410 in an embodiment. For example, a link 442 may be formed between a dataset 412 having a field name “humidity” at the user enterprise system/network, and a dataset 432 having a field name “humidity” at the trading partner. As another example, a link 444 may be formed between a dataset 414 having a field name “name” at the user enterprise system/network, and a dataset 434 having a field name “device_name” at the trading partner. In yet another example, a link 445 may be formed between a dataset 415 having a field name “ambient_temperature_c” at the user enterprise system/network, and a dataset 435 having a field name “temperature_C” at the trading partner. In such a way, the enterprise user object map may include dataset field names for each dataset to be migrated between an enterprise user and a trading partner, according to a user-modeled integration process in an embodiment. Lastly, Morton discloses each dataset may contain a user-defined or proprietary dataset field name, which may be associated with a dataset field value. In other words, datasets may be modeled using a fieldname:value pairing. For example, a dataset managed by the user enterprise system/network 514 may include a dataset having a dataset field name “locale.” In contrast, a trading partner receiving the dataset value associated with the dataset field name “locale” at the user enterprise system/network 514 may store such a dataset field value under the field name “location,” as described with reference to FIG. 4B. Thus, a single dataset field value may be described in a single integration process using a plurality of dataset field names (e.g., “locale”/“location,” “name”/“device_name,” “ambient_temperature_c”/“temperature_C,”), each adhering to the naming conventions set by databases, the APIs, applications, enterprises, or trading partners through or among which the dataset field value is programmed to integrate. The user enterprise object map 542 in an embodiment may map the various dataset field names that may be associated with a single dataset field value throughout the course of a modeled integration process, as described in greater detail with reference to FIG. 4B. Applicant argues that Examiner is entitled to give claim limitations their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification. See MPEP 2111 [R-1 ] Interpretation of Claims-Broadest Reasonable Interpretation During patent examination, the pending claims must be ‘given the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification’. Applicant always has the opportunity to amend the claims during prosecussion and broad interpretation by the examiner reduces the possibility that the claim, once issued, will be interpreted more broadly than is justified. In re Prater, 162 USPW 541,550-51 (CCPA 1969). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 2. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 3. Claims 22-46 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Michael J. Morton (US-20220036437-A1). As per claim 22, Morton teaches “a method for enabling efficient operation of a data processing system in an environment with multiple datasets by forming groups of datasets, the method comprising”: “rendering a first user interface in which one or more datasets are identified, in association with a data processing operation, the first user interface comprising at least one user interface element configured to receive user input designating a group of datasets and selecting at least one of the identified datasets for inclusion in the designated group of datasets” ([0030]-[0032]); “receiving user input through the at least one user interface element designating a group of datasets and selecting at least one of the identified datasets for inclusion in the designated group of datasets,” (fig. 4B, [0030]-[0032], [0044], [0085]); and “storing, in a data structure, a representation of the designated group of datasets as including the selected at least one dataset, the storing comprising storing, in the data structure, information about privileges of one or more users for accessing information about the designated group of datasets,” (fig. 4B, [0030]-[0032], [0085]). As per claim 23, Morton further shows “for each group of a the plurality of groups of datasets, storing, in the data structure, information regarding one or more users authorized to access the group,” ([0031]-[0032], [0085]-[0086], [0089]). As per claim 24, Morton further shows “wherein the method further comprises: rendering a second user interface associated with user configuration of the data processing system to perform an operation related to data access, wherein the second user interface comprises a dataset selection portion,” ([0031]-[0032]); and “rendering the second user interface comprises presenting a representation of one or more groups of a plurality of groups of datasets in the dataset selection portion,” ([0031]-[0032]). As per claim 25, Morton further shows “wherein the method further comprises: selecting based on a persona of a user the one or more groups of the plurality of groups of datasets for presentation in the second user interface,” ([0031]-[0032]). As per claim 26, Morton further shows “wherein: the second user interface comprises a user interface in a program development environment,” ([0031]-[0032]); and “the operation related to data access comprises configuring a component in a program under development to access a dataset or a group of datasets,” ([0031]-[0032]). As per claim 27, Morton further shows “wherein: the first user interface comprises a dataset search interface that displays results of a search operation,” ([0032]). As per claim 28, Morton further shows “wherein: the dataset search interface comprises a faceted search interface,” ([0031]-[0032]).; and “facets in the faceted search interface are based on values of metadata associated with the one or more datasets,” ([0031]-[0032]).. As per claim 29, Morton further shows “wherein: the first user interface comprises a user interface displaying lineage of a dataset,” ([0030]-[0032]). As per claim 30, Morton further shows “ wherein: the first user interface comprises a user interface displaying metadata related to a dataset of the one or more datasets,” ([0030]-[0032]). As per claim 31, Morton teaches “a data processing system operable in an environment with multiple datasets, the data processing system comprising”: “means for storing representations of a plurality of groups of datasets in a data structure comprising information about privileges of one or more users for accessing information about the groups of datasets,” (fig. 4B, [0030]-[0032], [0085]); “means for enabling a user to manage the plurality of groups of datasets, wherein the means for enabling is configured to manage the plurality of groups of datasets based on user input received through at least one user interface element,” (fig. 4B, [0030]-[0032], [0085]); and means for rendering a first user interface in which: “one or more datasets are identified in association with a data processing operation,” (fig. 4B, [0030]-[0032], [0085]); and “the at least one user interface element is accessible to a user such that at least one of the identified datasets is selectable for inclusion in a group of datasets,” (fig. 4B, [0030]-[0032], [0085]). As per claim 32, Morton further shows “means for rendering a second user interface associated with user configuration of the data processing system to perform an operation related to data access, wherein the second user interface comprises a dataset selection portion,” ([0031]-[0032]); and “means for rendering the second user interface comprises presenting a representation of one or more groups of the plurality of groups of datasets in the dataset selection portion,” ([0031]-[0032]). As per claim 33, Morton further shows “means for selecting based on a persona of a user the one or more groups of the plurality of groups of datasets for presentation in the second user interface,’ ([0031]-[0032]). As per claim 34, Morton teaches “a method for creating dataset groups in a data processing system operable with a plurality of datasets, the method comprising, with at least one hardware processor”: “identifying a set of datasets that are available for use in performing an operation by the data processing system, the operation relating to data access with the data processing system,” ([0030]-[0032]); “presenting the identified set of datasets in a first user interface associated with the operation,” ([0030]-[0032]); “presenting in connection with the first user interface at least one user interface element through which a dataset of the presented identified set of datasets is selectable for inclusion in a group of datasets,” (fig. 4B, [0030]-[0032], [0044], [0085]); “receiving, via the at least one user interface element, a user designation of a group and a selection of a dataset from the presented identified set of datasets for inclusion in the designated group of datasets,” (fig. 4B, [0030]-[0032], [0044], [0085]); “storing, in a data structure, a representation of the designated group as comprising the selected dataset and information about privileges of one or more users for accessing the designated group,” (fig. 4B, [0030]-[0032], [0085]). As per claim 35, Morton further shows “wherein identifying the set of datasets that are available for use in performing an operation relating to data access with the data processing system comprises: receiving, via a second user interface, a search query specifying one or more values of facets that describe the plurality of datasets defined in the data processing system,” ([0031]-[0032]); and “executing a search based on the search query to generate search results, the search results including the set of datasets that are available for use in performing the operation,” ([0031]-[0032]). As per claim 36, Morton further shows “wherein the search query comprises a faceted search query, the faceted search query including one or more facets for filtering the search results,” ([[0031]-[0032]). As per claim 37, Morton further shows “wherein the one or more facets comprises a facet indicating whether a dataset is registered in a catalog associating information for accessing a physical dataset to a logical dataset,” ([0035]-[0036]). As per claim 38, Morton further shows “wherein: the user interface for receiving the search query comprises second user interface elements representing a plurality of fields for receiving user input identifying values for the one or more facets; and the plurality of fields comprise fields for receiving values of logical, physical and/or operational metadata associated with the plurality of datasets,” ([0035]-[0036]). As per claim 39, Morton further shows “wherein the operation relating to data access comprises configuring components of an application executed by the data processing system,” ([0030]). As per claim 40, Morton further shows “receiving, via a second user interface, a command to update the group, the command including a request to add one or more datasets to the group or a request to delete one or more datasets from the group,” ([0030]-[0031]). As per claim 41, Morton further shows “presenting, via the first user interface, metadata regarding a dataset of the identified set of datasets in response to user input requesting metadata relating to the dataset,” ([0030]-[0031]). As per claim 42, Morton further shows “wherein: the group is a second group,” ([0030-0031]); and “receiving the user selection of the dataset comprises receiving a selection of a previously defined first group of datasets such that the second group comprises a hierarchical grouping of datasets,” ([0030-0031]). As per claim 43, Morton further shows “wherein the information about privileges of one or more users for accessing the designated group indicates a scope for the group,” ([0030], [0085]-[0086], [0089]). As per claim 44, Morton further shows “wherein the information about privileges comprises identification of the one or more users authorized to access the group,” ([0031]-[0032]). As per claim 45, Morton further shows “determining whether to grant access to the designated group based on the scope for the group,” ([0031]-[0032], [0085]-[0086], [0089]). As per claim 46, Morton further shows “rendering a second user interface associated with user configuration of the data processing system to perform the operation relating to data access, wherein the second user interface includes a dataset selection portion, and rendering the second user interface comprises presenting a representation of the designated group comprising the selected dataset in the dataset selection portion,” ([0030]-[0032]). As per claim 47, Morton further shows “the user interface element includes a button selectable to add the at least one of the identified datasets to the designated group,” ([0030]-[0032], [0085]). As per claim 48, Morton further shows “selection of the user interface element causes inclusion of the at least one or the identified datasets in an existing group of the plurality of groups of datasets or a new group,’ (fig. 4B, [0030]-[0032], [0085]). Conclusion 4. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL, Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action. Contact Information 5. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIM T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1757. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Thurs 6-4:30pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kavita Stanley can be reached on (571)272-8352. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. Apr. 01, 2026 /KIM T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2153
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 06, 2024
Application Filed
Apr 22, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Aug 05, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 19, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Jan 21, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 22, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Apr 18, 2025
Final Rejection — §102
Oct 16, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 25, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 06, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Feb 09, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 02, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602388
GENERATIVE SEARCH ENGINE TEXT DOCUMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596735
SEMANTIC TEXT ANALYSIS FOR GLOSSARY MAINTENANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596688
Managed Directories for Virtual Machines
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591579
Aggregation Operations In A Distributed Database
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12586095
METHODS AND APPARATUS TO ANALYZE AND ADJUST DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+8.4%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 1844 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month