Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/533,029

INTELLIGENT EVENT STREAMING GENERATOR FOR MICRO-SERVICES BASED ON SYNCHRONOUS MESSAGING FRAMEWORKS

Non-Final OA §101§103
Filed
Dec 07, 2023
Examiner
GELAGAY, SHEWAYE
Art Unit
2436
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
SAP SE
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
72%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
4y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 72% — above average
72%
Career Allow Rate
199 granted / 278 resolved
+13.6% vs TC avg
Strong +45% interview lift
Without
With
+45.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
4y 10m
Avg Prosecution
13 currently pending
Career history
291
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
17.3%
-22.7% vs TC avg
§103
49.1%
+9.1% vs TC avg
§102
11.2%
-28.8% vs TC avg
§112
16.1%
-23.9% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 278 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §103
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 original application filed on 12/07/2023. Claims 1-20 are examined. 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 abstract idea without significantly more. Claims 1, 10 and 19 recite the abstract idea of extracting a system landscape, determining clusters indicative of call patterns, and providing a proposal for converting the system from synchronous API calls to asynchronous event messaging that are directed to mental steps/mathematical operations . T hese steps amount to data gathering, data analysis, and recommendation generation, which are abstract ideas. The additional elements recited, such as a plurality of entities and a database instance, are generic computing components used to perform the analysis. The claim does not recite any specific technical improvement to the functioning of the computer or other technology, nor does it recite unconventional steps that amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the claim is not eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims do not recite any concrete technical steps for configuring asynchronous messaging, modifying database operations, or altering the functioning of the entities or the database instance. Instead, the proposal is merely an output of the analysis . The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because a plurality of entities and a database instance, are generic computing components used to perform the analysis. Dependent claims 2-9, 11-18 and 20 further recite the abstract or generic computer components that does not integrate the abstract idea into practical application, therefore, are also rejected for being directed to abstract idea. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claim (s) 1- 4, 6-13 and 15- 20 a re rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al US 11,354,120 (hereinafter Zhang) in view of Zimmerman et al. EP3262815 (hereinafter Zimmerman) in view of Gougol US 2024/0385819 . Claims 1: Zhang teaches a system, comprising: at least one processor; (Fig. 8. 810A-810N, processors) and at least one memory including program code which when executed by the at least one processor causes operations (Fig. 8, 820 system memory) comprising: extracting a system landscape from a target system [[ being converted from using synchronous application program interface calls among a plurality of entities and a database instance to using an asynchronous event messaging among the plurality of entities and the database instance ]] ; ( col, 7, lines 5-25, The ML models 122 can include individual models or ensembles of models. Such models include parameters (e.g., for a neural network, weights of connections between nodes in different layers) that are learned from data during the training process in which the parameters are tuned to produce expected outputs given corresponding inputs in training data. Thus, a ML model is an adaptive system that is configured to change its structure (e.g., connection configuration and/or weights) based on information that flows through the model during training, and the learned parameters of the hidden layers can be considered as an encoding of meaningful patterns in the data. It will be appreciated that during inference (the phase of machine learning in which a trained model is used to make recommendations or predictions based on new input data), these learned parameters and the structure (e.g., flow of information, computations) of the model are stored in computer hardware (e.g. disk or memory) and then executed by one or more processors; col, 7, lines 45-65, modernization tools used to help users analyze application codebases, collect dynamic application performance information, perform or assist with modernization operations such as application migration, rehosting, refactoring, etc.), data generated by various applications and cloud provider services used to modernize applications (e.g., resource migration services, hardware virtualization services, et c. ) determining, based on the extracted system landscape, clusters indicative of call patterns among the plurality of entities and the database instance; ( col, 9, lines 28-65, analysis of per component behavior to identify candidates for modernization one or more binary or multi-class classifiers are trained and can be applied to various application components to produce one or more labels ( e.g. , corresponding to modernization tools and strategies) providing, using the clusters, at least one proposal to convert the system to the asynchronous event messaging among the plurality of entities and the database instance. ( col. 13, lines 1-28, generating modernization recommendations and reports that include “re architecting” and migrating to architectures such as microservices and serveries - r ecommended modernization strategies included in the report include, but are not limited to, rehosting (e.g., “lift-and-shift” migration, wherein an on-premises based application is moved from on-premises infrastructure to cloud provider infrastructure, e.g., using resources provided by a hardware virtualization service 112); refactoring (e.g., wherein a codebase is updated for portability, containerization using a container service 114, or other updates); re- architecting (e.g., decomposing a monolithic application into a collection of microservices that can be built, deployed, and managed independently, or converting an application into a serverless architecture with an on-demand code execution service 116 and API gateway service 118; converting an application designed using a middleware pattern using specified provider network services, etc.); rebuilding the application (e.g., a complete rebuilding using cloud native applications and services); replace the application (retire the legacy application completely and replace it with a cloud based solution), and so forth. ) . While Zhang discloses converting an application designed using a middleware pattern using specified provider network services , Zhang does not explicitly teach the system being converted from using synchronous application program interface calls among a plurality of entities and a database instance to using an asynchronous event messaging among the plurality of entities and the database instance . However, Zimmerman in analogous art, teaches the system being converted from using synchronous application program interface calls among a plurality of entities and a database . ( para. [ 0016] -[00 20 ] - collection of cloud-native security services that are accessible through a series of interfaces, such as application programming interfaces (APIs) … connector APIs 108 (which enable connection to the APIs, ports, interfaces, event logs, and the like of various cloud platforms, [0031] , [0247] , The system may include various extractors, such as tika™, outside in™, keyview™ and extractors invoked over remote API calls. The system may be highly robust, with reliable components with robustness to error conditions connector APIs and app discovery across heterogeneous cloud platforms, collecting event logs, SSO/IAM, CDN/DNS and other telemetry and building an application index/service inventory… aggregate telemetry from many sources to create a unified view of applications and their interactions ) It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention is filed to modify the system disclosed by Zhang with the teaching of Zimmerman in order to provide a system with enhanced security to enterprise computing environments that has a plurality of enterprise APIs for connecting to the information technology infrastructure. (see para. [0009], Zimmerman) While Zhang in view of Zimmerman discloses collection or c onnector and profiling service-map concepts, they don’t explicitly teach using an asynchronous event messaging among the plurality of entities and the database instance. However, Gougol in analogous art discloses using an asynchronous event messaging among the plurality of entities and the database instance. ( see pa ra [0036][0048]-[0056] , building call/call-path artifacts from runtime … every function call in application can be annotated and instrumented so that when it gets invoked it is added to the trace along with information about the caller … diverts to different path ). It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention is filed to modify the system disclosed by Zhang in view Zimmerman with Gougol a person ordinary skill in the art would therefore be motivated to extract a system landscape representing entities and their synchronous API call dependencies and database accesses. Claim s 2 , 11 , 20 : Zhang in view Zimmerman in view of Gougol teaches the system of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the plurality of entities are comprised in at least one of a microservice or an application ( Zhang, Col. 13, lines 20-21 microservices ) . Claim 3 , 12 : Zhang in view Zimmerman in view of Gougol teaches the system of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the microservice of the target system comprises a plurality of microservices ( Zhang, Col. 13, lines 20-21 collection of microservices) . Claim 4 , 13 : Zhang in view Zimmerman in view of Gougol teaches the system of claim 1 and further discloses coupling to the target system to extract an identity of which of the plurality of entities calls, using the synchronous application program interface calls, one or more data entities ( Zhang, Col, 9, lines 30-45, API calls via a console obtains profile data for the identified software application ) . Claim s 6 , 15 : Zhang in view Zimmerman in view of Gougol teaches the system of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the synchronous application program interface calls cause at least one of a create, a read, an update, or a delete of one or more data entities of the database instance ( Zhang, Col, 9, lines 30-45, API calls via a console obtains profile data for the identified software application ). Claim 7 , 16 : Zhang in view Zimmerman in view of Gougol teaches the system of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the calls comprise calls among the plurality of entities and a plurality of database instances ( see Gougol, para [0048]-[0056], building call/call-path artifacts from runtime … every function call in application can be annotated and instrumented ). The same motivation as claim 1 applies. Claim 8 , 17 : Zhang in view Zimmerman in view of Gougol teaches the system of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the at least one proposal comprises at least one of at least one code proposal and at least one structural change ( Zhang, col. 13, lines 1-28, recommended modernization strategy ) Claim 9 , 18 : Zhang in view Zimmerman in view of Gougol teaches the system of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the at least one structural change comprises an addition of an event broker to handle event messages among the plurality of entities. ( Zhang, Col, 9, lines 30-45, API calls via a console obtains profile data for the identified software application ). Claim 10: Claim 10 recites limitations substantially similar in scope as claim 1, therefore, is also rejected under the same rationale set forth above. Claim 19: Claim 19 recites limitations substantially similar in scope as claim 1, therefore, is also rejected under the same rationale set forth above. In addition, Zhang further discloses a non-transitory computer ridabl0065 medium storing a program when executed by at least one processor causes operations (see Fig. 5) Claim(s) 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al US 11,354,120 (hereinafter Zhang) in view of Zimmerman et al. EP3262815 (hereinafter Zimmerman) in view of Gougol US 2024/0385819 and further in view of Park et al. US 20190094827 (hereinafter Park). Claims 5 and 14: Zhang in view Zimmerman in view of Gougol teaches the system of claim 1 , none of the references explicitly disclose wherein the synchronous application program interface calls comprise calls made using a restful protocol. Park in analogues art, however, discloses wherein the synchronous application program interface calls comprise calls made using a restful protocol. ( para [0151], expose legacy data points to be updated from remote mobile applications and make such points accessible from internet protocols (e.g., a resource in RESTful protocol) . It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention is filed to modify the system disclosed by Zhang in view Zimmerman in view of Gougol with Park a person ordinary skill in the art would therefore be motivated in order to provide protocol translation and make it available to services and applications (para [0151], Park) Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2022 / 0308950 CULLY – system and method directed to handling system calls during execution of an application over a plurality of nodes including a first node and a second node, includes receiving a system call from a thread running on the first node, determining that executing the system cal l i nvolves resources present on the second node, sending the system call and arguments of the system call to the second node for the second node to execute the system call, receiving the results of the system call from the second node, and returning the results of the system call to the thread. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Shewaye Gelagay whose telephone number is (571)272-4219. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8 A.M. - 4 P.M. 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, Amy C. Johnson can be reached at (571) 272-2238. 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. /SHEWAYE GELAGAY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2436
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 07, 2023
Application Filed
Mar 17, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12566858
Computer System for Failing a Secure Boot in a Case Tampering Event
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12563030
PER-SERVER CUSTOMIZED ACCESS CREDENTIALS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 8943581
CONTROLLED ACCESS TO FUNCTIONALITY OF A WIRELESS DEVICE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2015
Patent 8924716
COMMUNICATION DEVICE AND COMMUNICATION METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 30, 2014
Patent 8918895
PREVENTION OF INFORMATION LEAKAGE FROM A DOCUMENT BASED ON DYNAMIC DATABASE LABEL BASED ACCESS CONTROL (LBAC) POLICIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Dec 23, 2014
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
72%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+45.3%)
4y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 278 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