Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/591,528

COMPUTER SYSTEM AND INFRASTRUCTURE OPERATION HISTORY MANAGEMENT METHOD

Non-Final OA §101§112
Filed
Feb 29, 2024
Examiner
ST LEGER, GEOFFREY R
Art Unit
2192
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Hitachi, Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
82%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 9m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 82% — above average
82%
Career Allow Rate
524 granted / 635 resolved
+27.5% vs TC avg
Strong +22% interview lift
Without
With
+21.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 9m
Avg Prosecution
28 currently pending
Career history
663
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
16.6%
-23.4% vs TC avg
§103
48.2%
+8.2% vs TC avg
§102
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
§112
12.7%
-27.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 635 resolved cases

Office Action

§101 §112
DETAILED ACTION 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 submitted for examination and are pending further prosecution by the United States Patent & Trademark Office. Allowable Subject Matter With respect to independent claim 1, the prior art of record does not teach or suggest, either solely or in combination, the limitations "when the manifest file is updated, the computer system receives a notification including a change identification corresponding to the version of the manifest file from the version management system, and transmits an execution instruction including the change identification for performing a change operation to the infrastructure management system so as to store an operation history of the change operation that is associated with the command and the change identification." when considered in combination with the other limitations of claim 1. Note that claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as being directed towards software per-se and 112(b) (see below). With respect to independent claim 9, the prior art of record does not teach or suggest, either solely or in combination, the limitations " a first step of causing the computer system to receive a notification including a change identification corresponding to the version of the manifest file from the version management system due to the update of the manifest file; and a second step of causing the computer system to transmit an execution instruction including the change identification for performing a change operation to the infrastructure management system so as to store an operation history of the change operation that is associated with the command and the change identification." when considered in combination with the other limitations of claim 9. Thus, claims 9 and 10 are allowed. Note that claims 11-14 are objected (see below). Claim Objections The following claims are objected to because of informalities and antecedence issues. It is suggested Applicants amend these claims as follows: Claim 3 -- dependencies exist between [[the]] objects at different hierarchical levels, -- Claim 4 -- wherein an [[the]] operation history is data including fields for storing time, contents of an operation, an [[the]] object to be operated, and a [[the]] change identification, -- -- the output instruction includes identification information specifying an [[the]] object and two change identifications, and -- -- acquires a [[the]] change identification of the manifest file that indicates the object specified by the output instruction and has a registration time included in a time range determined by the identified registration times, and -- -- extracts, from the database, an [[the]] operation history that includes either a [[the]] change identification included in the output instruction or a [[the]] change identification acquired from the version management system. -- Claim 6 -- wherein an [[the]] operation history is data including fields for storing time, contents of an operation, an [[the]] object to be operated, and a [[the]] change identification, -- -- the output instruction includes identification information specifying an [[the]] object and a time range; -- -- accesses the version management system and acquires a [[the]] change identification of the manifest file that relates to the object specified by the output instruction and has a registration time included in the time range, and -- -- extracts, from the database, an [[the]] operation history that includes a identification Claim 7 -- wherein the computer system extracts, from the database, an [[the]] operation history that has the registration time included in the time range and that does not include the change identification acquired from the version management system or includes a [[the]] change identification different from the change identification acquired from the version management system. -- Claim 8 -- wherein, when the notification is received, the computer system accesses the version management system, acquires the updated manifest file, and acquires a [[the]] manifest file of another object included in the service including an [[the]] object corresponding to the updated manifest file, and -- -- generates configuration information indicating a configuration of the other object included in the service by using a [[the]] plurality of acquired manifest files, and stores the configuration information in association with the change identification, and -- -- when the output instruction is received, the computer system identifies a latest one of a plurality of [[the]] change identifications, and generates [[the]] configuration information associable with an [[the]] identified change identification and display information for displaying the extracted operation history, and outputs the generated configuration information. -- Claim 11 -- dependencies exist between [[the]] objects at different hierarchical levels, -- Claim 12 -- wherein an [[the]] operation history includes data that is contained in fields for storing time, contents of an operation, an [[the]] object to be operated, and a [[the]] change identification, -- -- the output instruction includes identification information specifying an [[the]] object and two change identifications, and -- -- a step of causing the computer system to acquire a [[the]] change identification of the manifest file that indicates the object specified by the output instruction and has a registration time included in a time range determined by the [[two]] identified registration times, -- -- a step of causing the computer system to extract, from the database, an [[the]] operation history that includes either a [[the]] change identification included in the output instruction or a [[the]] change identification acquired from the version management system, and -- -- a step of causing the computer system to extract, from the database, the operation history that relates to the object specified by the output instruction, that has the registration time included in the time range, and that does not include the change identification acquired from the version management system or includes a [[the]] change identification different from the change identification included in the output instruction and different from the change identification acquired from the version management system. -- Claim 13 -- wherein an [[the]] operation history includes data that is contained in fields for storing time, contents of an operation, an [[the]] object to be operated, and a [[the]] change identification, -- -- the output instruction includes identification information specifying an [[the]] object and a time range, and -- -- a step of causing the computer system to access the version management system and acquire a [[the]] change identification of the manifest file relating to the object specified by the output instruction and having a registration time included in the time range, -- -- a step of causing the computer system to extract, from the database, an [[the]] operation history that includes a change identification -- a step of causing the computer system to extract, from the database, an [[the]] operation history that has the registration time included in the time range and that does not include the change identification acquired from the version management system or includes a [[the]] change identification different from the change identification acquired from the version management system. -- Claim 14 -- a step of causing the computer system to access the version management system, acquire the updated manifest file, and acquire a [[the]] manifest file of another object included in the service including an [[the]] object corresponding to the updated manifest file, and -- -- a step of causing the computer system to generate configuration information indicating a configuration of the other object included in the service by using a [[the]] plurality of acquired manifest files, and store the configuration information in association with the change identification; and -- -- a step of causing the computer system to identify a latest one of a plurality of [[the]] change identifications, and -- -- a step of causing the computer system to generate [[the]] configuration information associable with an [[the]] identified change identification and display information for displaying the extracted operation history, and output the generated configuration information. -- Claim 5 is also objected to due to its dependence on an objected parent claim. Appropriate correction is required. 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 1-8 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. The claims directed to computing system. However, bodies of claims do not recite any elements but functions. Thus, it is unclear what the claimed computer system is comprised of. For the examination purposes, lines 1-3 of claim 1 will be treated as --A system comprising: a computing system, wherein the computing system is connected to an infrastructure, a version management system, and an infrastructure management system,--. 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 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim 1 recites "A computer system" featuring "an infrastructure", "a version management system", and "an infrastructure management system", none of which are recited as embodying hardware or implemented by hardware components. Thus, under a broadest reasonable interpretation, the computer system could be implemented purely in software, which is non-statutory. See MPEP 2106. It is suggested that Applicants amend this claim by reciting that hardware components, such as a processor and memory, are used to implement the recited features. Dependent claims 2-8 inherit the deficiency of claim 1 and, therefore, are also rejected. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20220353289 A1 discloses a system and method for evaluating proposed configuration changes to a cloud environment whereby, in a first step, a unified cloud configuration evaluation (UCCE) system updates a first model of a hosted cloud environment based on harvested data about the cloud environment and, in a second step, a cloud configuration definition proposing configuration changes to the cloud environment is received and, in a third step, a second model is updated to reflect the proposed configuration changes in the cloud configuration definition and, in a fourth step, the second model is evaluated using compliance rules and a compliance result of the configuration changes is provided. US 20160034269 A1 discloses an apparatus and method for updating software, or changing configuration of software installed in a plurality of terminals, and includes a change history database for storing last update date and time, a configuration change ID, and a state. JP 2024131765 A discloses a development support apparatus which detects difference information between first definition information defined for constructing an environment of a target system and second definition information, and modifying settings values of the target system according to the difference information, and includes a change history database that manages the change history of definition files defined for constructing environments of target systems. The NPL document "Cloud Infrastructure Self Service Delivery System using Infrastructure as Code" proposes a system for provisioning cloud infrastructure resources using Infrastructure as Code (IaC) templates. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GEOFFREY R ST LEGER whose telephone number is (571)270-7720. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (IFP) ~9:00-5:00 pm. 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, Hyung S Sough can be reached at 571-272-6799. 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. /GEOFFREY R ST LEGER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2192
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 29, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 12, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §101, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602214
DYNAMIC EVALUATION AND IMPROVEMENT OF ENERGY EFFICIENCY OF COMPUTER CODE
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596939
AUTOMATIC LABELING OF DATA BY AN ENTITY GATHERING THE DATA
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591716
METHODS AND APPARATUS FOR SECURE EXECUTION ON SMART NETWORK INTERFACE CARDS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12572829
MONITORING MACHINE LEARNING MODELS IN RESOURCE CONSTRAINED SETTINGS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12572628
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR EXECUTABLE GRAPH-BASED MODEL OWNERSHIP
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
82%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+21.6%)
2y 9m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 635 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