Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/505,421

METHOD FOR AUTOMATING CLOUD BUILDING

Non-Final OA §102§103§112
Filed
Nov 09, 2023
Examiner
CHEN, SHIN HON
Art Unit
2431
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Samsung Electronics
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
690 granted / 797 resolved
+28.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +13% lift
Without
With
+13.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
829
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.4%
-27.6% vs TC avg
§103
43.3%
+3.3% vs TC avg
§102
25.2%
-14.8% vs TC avg
§112
3.7%
-36.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 797 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103 §112
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 . Claims 1-14 have been examined. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/9/23 and 6/11/24 are being considered by the examiner. 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. Claim 8 is 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. Claim 8 recites the limitation "the fourth configuration information" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The claims recite steps associated with whether downtime is acceptable. However, the Specification does not describe cloud resource configuration with regard to any downtime events, whether acceptable or unacceptable. The claims will be examined based on broadest reasonable interpretation set forth below. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 2, 7 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Nandagopal et al. U.S. 2018/0136970 (hereinafter Nandagopal). As per claim 1 , Nandagopal discloses a method performed in a computing device including a processor and a storage medium in which one or more programs configured to be executable by the processor are written, the method comprising: receiving configuration information for one of a plurality of processes for building a cloud (Nandagopal: Figs. 21A-D; [0072]: automated application-release-management subsystem for configuring cloud-computing facilities/building a cloud; [0078]: receive configuration file); and processing one of the processes based on the received configuration information (Nandagopal: [0074]: processing the configuration file according to pipeline and stages), wherein the plurality of processes includes one or more sub-processes, and wherein the processing one of the processes includes (Nandagopal: Figs. 23A-23C and [0085]-[0088]: process the task and sub-tasks by workflow-execution engine): determining whether to process a sub-process included in one of the processes based on the configuration information (Nandagopal: [0086]-[0088]: determine if additional configuration files; Figs. 24A-C and [0088]-[0090]: execute according to pipeline and stages for tasks and subtasks based on configuration file), and processing a sub-process determined to be processed as a result of the determination (Nandagopal: [0088]-[0090]: process tasks and subtasks). As per claim 2, Nandagopal discloses the method of claim 1. Nandagopal further discloses wherein the plurality of processes include a cloud configuration process, a software configuration process, an application process, a data migration process and a testing process (Nandagopal: Fig. 11 and [0053]: workflow-based cloud management including automated-application-release-management subsystem that covers cloud configuration, software and application processes, database operations and testing operations). As per claim 7, Nandagopal as modified discloses the method of claim 2. Nandagopal further discloses wherein the sub-process of the application process includes an application building process and an application distributing process, wherein, when third configuration information for the application process is received in the receiving the configuration information, the determining whether to process a sub-process includes: extracting a sub-process corresponding to the third configuration information from among the application building process and the application distributing process; and determining to process the extracted sub-process (Nandagopal: [0053]: build complex cloud-resident applications on the cloud-computing facilities; [0068]: sequentially initiates execution of various workflows that implement a release pipeline; [0073]-[0078]: executing configurations). As per claim 11, Nandagopal discloses the method of claim 2. Nandagopal further discloses wherein, when fifth configuration information for the testing process is received in the receiving the configuration information, the fifth configuration information includes information on whether additional tests are performed according to a test target, a test scenario, and a testing result (Nandagopal: [0072]: testing involving instantiating virtual machines on large number of virtual servers within a cloud-computing facility). As per claim 12, Nandagopal discloses the method of claim 11. Nandagopal further discloses wherein the processing a sub-process includes: accessing a test target cloud resource based on the fifth configuration information; performing the test scenario with respect to the cloud resources; and receiving a testing result from the cloud resources (Nandagopal: [0069]: pipeline is released based on result of execution of tasks within the stage; [0072]: testing). As per claim 13, Nandagopal discloses the method of claim 12. Nandagopal further discloses wherein the processing a sub-process further includes determining whether to perform additional tests based on the fifth configuration information after receiving the testing result (Nandagopal: [0069]; [0072]). As per claim 14, Nandagopal discloses the method of claim 1. Nandagopal further discloses comprising: outputting a processing result of the sub-process as a notification message after the processing a sub-process (Nandagopal: [0069]: indicate pipeline execution advance to next stage). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. Claims 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nandagopal in view of Mathon et al. U.S. 2020/0387357 (hereinafter Mathon). As per claim 3, Nandagopal discloses the method of claim 2. Nandagopal discloses infrastructure administration using the workflow based management, administration and administration facility (WFMAD) for provisioning and configuring cloud resources (Nandagopal: [0066]-[0072]: provisioning cloud resources and configuring cloud-computing facilities in advance of pipeline execution; Figs. 21A-D: configuration ). Nandagopal does not explicitly disclose wherein a sub-process of the cloud configuration process includes an account generation process, a network generation process, an infrastructure generation process and a Kubernetes generation process, wherein, when first configuration information for the cloud configuration process is received in the receiving the configuration information, the determining whether to process a sub-process includes: extracting information included in the first configuration information from among account generation information, network generation information, infrastructure generation information, and Kubernetes generation information; and processing determining the sub-process corresponding to the extracted information. However, Mathon discloses building and updating cloud infrastructure according to user defined configuration files (Mathon: [0006]: build and update complete cloud infrastructure via web-based interface, which involves configuration of network, data storage, business logic capabilities through infrastructure code; (Mathon: [0039]: automate cloud deployment either in sequence/pipeline or by declarative descriptions of the desired end-state for the infrastructure; [0055]-[0057]: deploy and update SuperStack by declaration in stack definitions). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to execute SuperStack to provision and configure necessary resources because they are analogous art. The motivation to combine would be that the recited processes are well known processes associated with cloud resource provisioning and configurations. As per claim 4, Nandagopal as modified discloses the method of claim 3. Nandagopal as modified further discloses wherein the processing one of the processes further includes: generating cloud resources when the first configuration information is initial configuration information, and changing the cloud resources when the first configuration information is configuration changing information for changing previous configuration information (Mathon: [0052]-[0055]: create or update standardized set of cloud-based environment). Same rationale applies here as above in rejecting claim 3. As per claim 5, Nandagopal as modified discloses the method of claim 2. Nandagopal does not explicitly disclose wherein the sub-process of the software configuration process includes a software installation process, a software configuration changing process, a software upgrading process and a software deleting process, wherein, when second configuration information for the software configuration process is received in the receiving the configuration information, the determining whether to process a sub-process includes: extracting a sub-process corresponding to the second configuration information from among the software installation process, the software configuration changing process, the software upgrading process and the software deleting process; and determining to process the extracted sub-process (Mathon: [0039]: automate cloud deployment either in sequence or by declarative descriptions of the desired end-state for the infrastructure; [0045]: continuous monitoring, integration, and delivery; [0075]-[0085]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to continuously deploy changes to cloud infrastructure based on pipeline or declarative definitions because they are analogous art involving automated cloud infrastructure management. Furthermore, the recited processes are well known cloud resource management processes. As per claim 6, Nandagopal as modified discloses the method of claim 5. Nandagopal as modified further discloses wherein the processing a sub-process includes: accessing a cloud resource, which is a process target, based on the second configuration information; and processing the extracted sub-process for the accessed cloud resource (Nandagopal: Figs. 21A-21D.; [0073]-[0078]). Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nandagopal in view of Zou et al. U.S. 2023/0342841 (hereinafter Zou). As per claim 8, Nandagopal discloses the method of claim 2. Nandagopal discloses infrastructure administration using the workflow based management, administration and administration facility (WFMAD) for provisioning and configuring cloud resources (Nandagopal: [0066]-[0072]: provisioning cloud resources and configuring cloud-computing facilities in advance of pipeline execution; Figs. 21A-D: configuration ). Nandagopal does not explicitly disclose wherein a sub-process of the data migration process includes a target generation process, an exporting process, an importing process, an agent installation process, a data synchronization process and a migration success confirmation process, and wherein when the fourth configuration information for the data migration process is received in the receiving the configuration information, the determining whether to process a sub-process includes: determining whether downtime is acceptable based on the fourth configuration information; and extracting a sub-process based on the result of the determination. However, Zou discloses configuring cloud resources based on configuration file, wherein a user can specify resource allocation associated with downtime (Zou: Abstract; [0015]: monitor downtime event to allocate resources based on bidding instance). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure and allocate cloud resources according to downtime tolerance because they are analogous art. The motivation to combine would be to balance resource consumption and data loss. As per claim 9, Nandagopal as modified discloses the method of claim 8. Nandagopal discloses infrastructure administration using the workflow based management, administration and administration facility (WFMAD) for provisioning and configuring cloud resources (Nandagopal: [0066]-[0072]: provisioning cloud resources and configuring cloud-computing facilities in advance of pipeline execution based on conditions or gating rules ; Figs. 21A-D: configuration). Nandagopal as modified does not explicitly disclose wherein, when the fourth configuration information is information about virtual machine migration, the extracting a sub-process includes extracting the target generation process when downtime is acceptable as a result of the determination, and extracting the agent installation process when downtime is unacceptable. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure the cloud resources accordingly when the data loss tolerance due to downtime is acceptable/unacceptable. As per claim 10, Nandagopal as modified discloses the method of claim 8. Nandagopal discloses infrastructure administration using the workflow based management, administration and administration facility (WFMAD) for provisioning and configuring cloud resources (Nandagopal: [0066]-[0072]: provisioning cloud resources and configuring cloud-computing facilities in advance of pipeline execution based on conditions or gating rules ; Figs. 21A-D: configuration). Nandagopal as modified does not explicitly disclose wherein, when the fourth configuration information is about database migration or storage migration, the extracting a sub-process includes: extracting the exporting process and the importing process when downtime is acceptable as a result of the determination, and extracting the agent installation process when downtime is unacceptable. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure the cloud resources accordingly when the data loss tolerance due to downtime is acceptable/unacceptable. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Dzhigarov et al. U.S. 2024/0248694 discloses method to manage a cloud deployment. Kandasamy et al. U.S. 2024/0171466 discloses dynamically harmonizing a management configuration in a cloud environment. Vaknin et al. U.S. 11,900,172 discloses computing cluster bring-up on public cloud infrastructure using expressed intents. Nguyen et al. U.S. 2023/0409346 discloses cloud infrastructure management. Wigglesworth et al. U.S. 2023/0297366 discloses two-way synchronization of infrastructure-as-code templates and instances. Kim et al. U.S. 2023/0214226 discloses edge cloud building method for parallel installation of edge cloud. Vergara et al. U.S. 2023/0035486 discloses managing execution of continuous delivery pipelines for a cloud platform based data center. Ostrand et al. U.S. 2022/0353341 discloses efficient deployment of cloud resources. Benassi et al. U.S. 2022/0210034 discloses method for edge site selection and metrics capture to configure cloud infrastructure. Bawcom U.S. 10,872,029 discloses method for deploying infrastructure to the cloud. Sharma et al. U.S. 2020/0244527 discloses configuration options for cloud environments. Ramachandran U.S. 10,671,443 discloses infrastructure resource monitoring and migration. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIN HON (ERIC) CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3789. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 9am- 7pm. 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, Lynn Feild can be reached at 571-272-2092. 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. /SHIN-HON (ERIC) CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2431
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 09, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 02, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598227
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR CONTROLLING SIGN-ON TO WEB APPLICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592109
BUILDING EQUIPMENT ACCESS MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WITH DYNAMIC ACCESS CODE GENERATION TO UNLOCK EQUIPMENT CONTROL PANELS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587528
DATA MASKING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12585804
APPROACHES OF ENFORCING DATA SECURITY, COMPLIANCE, AND GOVERNANCE IN SHARED INFRASTRUCTURES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12574382
PROVIDING SECURITY WITH DYNAMIC PRIVILEGE LEVEL ASSIGNMENT IN A HYBRID-CLOUD STACK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+13.4%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 797 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