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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the application filed on 07/06/2026.
Claims 1, 4, 15 and 18 are amended by the applicants.
Claims 2-3 are cancelled by the applicants.
Claims 21-22 are added by the applicants.
Claims 1 and 4-22 are pending.
Examiner’s Note
Please note that Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirely as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 21 is objected as being a substantial duplicate of claim 20.
20. (Original) The article of manufacture of claim 18,
wherein at least one other service of the plurality of services generates one or more message-oriented-middleware provider exchanges and queues based at least in part on one or more of the plurality of features.
21. (New) The article of manufacture of claim 18,
wherein at least one other service of the plurality of services generates one or more message-oriented-middleware provider exchanges and queues based at least in part on one or more of the plurality of features.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-6 and 8-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPN 20210132935 to Dinh et al. to USPN 20160248868 to Fichtenholtz et al.
Per claim 1:
Dinh discloses:
1. A method, comprising:
receiving a request for integration of a plurality of computing instances, (Paragraph [0038] “code requests 107 can be received at the microservice development platform 110… a user interface (e.g. user interface 506 or CLI 508) on a user device 102/502) wherein the request Paragraph [0055] “feedback (i.e., in response to request) regarding enterprise integration patterns (i.e., features)); comprises a plurality of features for the integration (Paragraph [0041, 0064] “the input code in connection with features such as… enterprise logic, endpoints, data sources, messaging queues, web services and templates in the code… GitHub provides access control and collaboration features such as, for example, wikis, task management, bug tracking and feature requests for code development projects”));
implementing a plurality of services (Paragraph [0023] ““microservice” or “microservices” refer to a collection of loosely coupled services”) based at least in part on the plurality of features (Paragraph [0024] “Microservices corresponding to different features of an application”), wherein at least one service of the plurality of services comprises at least one code generation service (The platform implements an analysis engine, microservice code generator with pattern recognition engine (Paragraph [0074] “microservices code generator 130, the validation engine 160 and other components of the microservices development platform 110”) Paragraph [0043] “extract configuration properties related to web server and servlet containers for implementing servlet and server page specifications, and providing an HTTP web server environment in which code can be executed”);
generating code for the integration using the at least one code generation service (Paragraph [0055] “microservice code generator 130 to generate microservice code that is compatible with the integration patterns of an enterprise”); and
pushing the generated code for the integration to at least one development and information technology operations platform (Paragraph [0062] “the code is provided to a deployment component 175 which configures the code for deployment and/or deploys the code on one or more cloud computing platforms, for example, as part of FaaS, CaaS and/or PaaS offerings”);
wherein the steps of the method are executed by a processing device operatively coupled to a memory (Paragraph [0072] “microservices development platform 110 and the components thereof may be implemented at least in part in the form of software that is stored in memory and executed by a processor”).
integration, wherein the request is generated via a portal (Paragraph [0026] “user devices 102 can comprise, for example, Internet of Things (IoT) devices, desktop, laptop or tablet computers, mobile telephones, or other types of processing devices capable of communicating”) comprising one or more templates configured to enable a user to specify the plurality of features (Paragraph [0046, 0047] “one or more code templates from the template repository 132, and one or more code snippets from the code snippet repository 133. The template repository 132 includes, for example, code templates for REST (Representational State Transfer) and SOAP (Simple Object Access Protocol) APIs, as well as code templates for messaging (i.e., features), databases and files… code snippets may include vacancies for the microservice generator 130 and/or developers to insert functionality specific to an enterprise”).
Dinh does not explicitly disclose wherein the request is generated via a portal comprising one or more templates configured to enable a user to specify the plurality of features, and the plurality of features comprising one or more message-oriented-middleware messaging integration patterns.
However, Fichtenholtz discloses in an analogous computer system wherein the request is generated via a portal comprising one or more templates (paragraph [0041] “template-based workflows may be created or otherwise configured by the client application computers 106 for effectively routing, translating, configuring, and/or formatting requests from the client application computers 106”)configured to enable a user to specify the plurality of features (paragraph [0051] “user interface 300 may be configured to enable a user and/or developer to create one or more template resources such as, but not limited to, the workflow template 132”), and the plurality of features comprising one or more message-oriented-middleware messaging integration patterns (paragraph [0039] “the service bus module 124 may be utilized as a mediator, translator, or type of proxy service (i.e., message-oriented-middleware) proxy between the client application computers 106 and the service provider computers 108”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the method of wherein the request is generated via a portal comprising one or more templates configured to enable a user to specify the plurality of features, and the plurality of features comprising one or more message-oriented-middleware messaging integration patterns as taught by Fichtenholtz into the method of deploy the code on a cloud platform as taught by Dinh. The modification would be obvious because of one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to add/incorporate the features of wherein the request is generated via a portal comprising one or more templates configured to enable a user to specify the plurality of features, and the plurality of features comprising one or more message-oriented-middleware messaging integration patterns to provide an efficient technique for using middleware so as to integrate disparate applications from different middleware platforms to avoid time consuming and errors as suggested by Fichtenholtz (paragraph [0002-0003]).
Per claim 4:
Dinh discloses:
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more message-oriented-middleware messaging integration patterns comprise at least one of a point-to-point without routing message-oriented-middleware messaging integration pattern, a point-to-point without routing and with load balancing message-oriented-middleware messaging integration pattern, a many-to-one point-to-point without routing message-oriented-middleware messaging integration pattern, a point-to-point with routing message-oriented-middleware messaging integration pattern, a fan-out message-oriented-middleware messaging integration pattern and a publisher/subscriber message-oriented-middleware messaging integration pattern (Since this appears to be MARKUSH type language requiring at a minimum just one from the list, Dinh teaches generation including P2P and messaging queue Paragraph [0041,0055] “messaging queues… identify enterprise integration patterns, such as, for example, collection, distribution, peer-to-peer (p2p) and batch”).
Per claim 5:
Dinh discloses:
5. The method of claim 1, wherein:
at least one other service of the plurality of services generates one or more externalized configurations based at least in part on (Paragraph [0049] “platform configuration accelerator 143 also externalizes properties and provides for automatic refreshing”) one or more of the plurality of features (Paragraph [0024] “Microservices corresponding to different features of an application); and
the method further comprises pushing the one or more externalized configurations to the at least one development and information technology operations platform (Paragraph [0049] “platform configuration accelerator 143 implements functionality for use of deployment descriptors… (e.g., web applications, enterprise applications) are to be deployed”).
Per claim 6:
Dinh discloses:
6. The method of claim 1, wherein:
at least one other service of the plurality of services generates one or more deployment manifests for a cloud platform as a service based at least in part on one or more of the plurality of features (Paragraph [0066] “the orchestration service 580 (arrow 5), which then sends the generated microservice code to a deployment component 575 (arrow 6) to configure the microservice code for deployment… web-based DevOps lifecycle tools that provide a repository manager with Cl/CD pipeline features”); and
the method further comprises pushing the one or more deployment manifests to the at least one development and information technology operations platform (Paragraph [0067] “a software development tool URL, and ESB service name, and permits a user to select options for committing into a software development tool (e.g., DevOps tool) and/or downloading the validated and generated microservice code as a zip file”).
Per claim 8:
Dinh discloses:
8. The method of claim 1, wherein at least one other service of the plurality of services configures one or more transaction alerts for the integration based at least in part on (Paragraph [0047] “code snippet repository 133 may include, for example, code related to alert/notification generation, assignments, transformations, error handling, and replacements… for the microservice generator 130 and/or developers to insert functionality specific to an enterprise”) one or more of the plurality of features (Paragraph [0024] “Microservices corresponding to different features of an application).
Per claim 9:
Dinh discloses:
9. The method of claim 1, wherein at least one other service of the plurality of services generates one or more electronic messages comprising a location of the at least one development and information technology operations platform (Paragraph [0063] “specified location can be retrieved and converted to microservice code for deployment on a cloud platform… a location of microservice code from a source, so that the microservice code from the specified location can be retrieved”).
Per claim 10:
The rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and further, Dinh does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one other service of the plurality of services generates one or more message-oriented-middleware provider exchanges and queues based at least in part on one or more of the plurality of features.
However, Fichtenholtz discloses in an analogous computer system wherein at least one other service of the plurality of services generates one or more message-oriented-middleware provider exchanges and queues based at least in part on one or more of the plurality of features (Paragraph [0027] “the service bus may marshal the user of redundant services and/or may cater to commonly needed commodity services such as, but not limited to, event handling, event choreography, data transformation, data mapping, message and/or event queuing and/or sequencing, security and/or exception handling, protocol conversion (i.e., translating), and/or the enforcement of proper quality of communications and/or services”).
The feature of providing wherein at least one other service of the plurality of services generates one or more message-oriented-middleware provider exchanges and queues based at least in part on one or more of the plurality of features would be obvious for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Per claim 11:
The rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and further, Dinh does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one other service of the plurality of services generates one or more message-oriented-middleware provider topics based at least in part on one or more of the plurality of features.
However, Fichtenholtz discloses in an analogous computer system wherein at least one other service of the plurality of services generates one or more message-oriented-middleware provider topics based at least in part on one or more of the plurality of features (Paragraph [0027] “service bus may monitor and/or control routing of message exchanges between service… service bus may marshal the user of redundant services and/or may cater to commonly needed commodity services such as, but not limited to, event handling, event choreography, data transformation, data mapping, message and/or event queuing and/or sequencing, security and/or exception handling, protocol conversion (i.e., translating), and/or the enforcement of proper quality of communications and/or services”).
The feature of providing wherein at least one other service of the plurality of services generates one or more message-oriented-middleware provider topics based at least in part on one or more of the plurality of features would be obvious for the reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Per claim 12:
Dinh discloses:
12. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of services respectively comprise at least one application programming interface (Paragraph [0054] “microservice code generator 130 further includes the event driven API 152 to trigger actions in response to changes in states (“events”).”).
Per claim 13:
Dinh discloses:
13. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of features comprise one or more enterprise integration services messaging values (Paragraph [0047] “code related to alert/notification generation… assignments assign values to variables, the transformations modify the structure of a payload using, for example, XQuery, XSLT, etc.”).
Per claim 14:
Dinh discloses:
14. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of computing instances comprise at least one of a plurality of applications, a plurality of microservices, a plurality of platforms, a plurality of databases and a plurality of devices (Since this appears to be MARKUSH type language requiring at a minimum just one from the list, Dinh teaches Paragraph [0023] ““microservice” or “microservices” refer to a collection of loosely coupled services which execute different features of an application”).
Claims 15-16 is/are the apparatus/system claim corresponding to method claims 1 and 6 respectively, and rejected under the same rational set forth in connection with the rejection of claims 1 and 6 respectively, as noted above.
Claims 17 is/are the apparatus/system claim corresponding to method claim 10 and rejected under the same rational set forth in connection with the rejection of claim 10 as noted above.
Claims 18-19 is/are the medium/product claim corresponding to method claims 1 and 6 respectively, and rejected under the same rational set forth in connection with the rejection of claims 1 and 6 respectively, as noted above.
Claims 20 and 21 is/are the medium/product claim corresponding to method claim 10 and rejected under the same rational set forth in connection with the rejection of claim 10 as noted above.
Claims 22 is/are the medium/product claim corresponding to method claim 11 and rejected under the same rational set forth in connection with the rejection of claim 11 as noted above.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over USPN 20210132935 to Dinh et al. in view of USPN 20160248868 to Fichtenholtz et al. and further in view of USPN 20050262192 to Mamou et al.
Per claim 7:
The rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and further, neither Dinh nor Fichtenholtz explicitly disclose wherein at least one other service of the plurality of services generates inventory metadata for the integration based at least in part on one or more of the plurality of features.
However, Mamou discloses in an analogous computer system wherein at least one other service of the plurality of services generates inventory metadata for the integration based at least in part on one or more of the plurality of features (Paragraph [0217] “an inventory system, a customer relations system, and an accounting system, may be connected to a data integration system 104… a vendor-specific transformation engine that provides metadata models for the external data sources 102”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the method of wherein at least one other service of the plurality of services generates inventory metadata for the integration based at least in part on one or more of the plurality of features as taught by Mamou into the method of deploy the code on a cloud platform as taught by combination system of Dinh and Fichtenholtz. The modification would be obvious because of one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to add/incorporate the features of wherein at least one other service of the plurality of services generates inventory metadata for the integration based at least in part on one or more of the plurality of features to provide an efficient technique for deploying different computer applications that use different data structures which utilized the inventory metadata so as to sharing of data across different applications is optimized as suggested by Mamou (paragraph [0028-0031]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejections.
With respect to claim 7, no arguments are presented thus, no response is given.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Satish Rampuria whose telephone number is 571-272-3732. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8:30 AM to 5:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Chat Do, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3721. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
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.
/Satish Rampuria/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2193
*****
Prosecution Insights