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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/19/2025 has been entered.
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 1-2,5, 8-9, 12, 15-16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sexton, Alice et al (PGPUB Document No. 20200366706), hereafter referred as to “Sexton”, in view of Ashokkumar, Kumar et al (PGPUB Document No. 20200233750), hereafter, referred to as “Ashokkumar”, in further view of Bennah, Albert et al (PGPUB Document No. 20140157037), hereafter, referred to as “Bennah”, in further view of Seck, Mohamed et al (PGPUB Document No. 20250036758 ), hereafter, referred to as “Seck”.
Regarding Claim 1 (Currently Amended), Sexton teaches A method for managing data protection scripts, the method comprising(Sexton, para 0053 discloses a protection method for software applications “the process 300 of FIG. 3 may be implemented via a security auditing application that is executed on the security auditing component. In some designs, the security auditing application is implemented as a library that updates a plugin database as plugins are executed (e.g., during a security audit scan of an enterprise network”): obtaining, by a backup server, registration information associated with a set of applications operating on a production environment; performing application discovery on the production environment using the registration information to obtain application information(Sexton, para 0128 discloses obtaining application registration information (which can be performed on any environment) “the system scanner, plugin, or library may call the function add_finding( ). The function then determines at 1002 if the product is registered with the system; if not, the product is registered at 1003 before continuing. After determining the product or application is registered, the details (e.g. version) of the application are returned to the function at 1004”); after performing the application discovery, obtaining a request for executing a data protection script by an application of the set of applications(Sexton, para 0126 discloses listing of patch/scripts and 0068 discloses applying/installing patches/scrips to reduce security issues “In some designs, integrating a patching application may allow solutions related to missing patches or updates to be applied automatically. In some designs, determining a reduced or minimum set of solutions using the first, second and third embodiments may allow the patching application to apply patches more efficiently by only installing a reduced or minimum number of patches to resolve the security issues discovered”),
But Sexton does not explicitly teach and wherein the data protection workload is one of: a backup of one of the set of applications and a recovery of the backup to the production environment, and wherein the data protection script specifies at least one action comprising one of a list consisting of: suspending virtual machine operation before the backup, re-activating the virtual machine operation after completion of the backup, re-activating the virtual machine operation after completion of the recovery, mounting a file system for the application data, unmounting the file system, pausing operation of a database in one of the set of applications, and obtaining transaction logs of the application data; applying a portion of the application information corresponding to the application to a script processing engine to obtain a script recommendation, wherein the script recommendation indicates not allowing the data protection script from executing on the production environment; implementing the script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the script recommendation comprises enforcing the disablement of the data protection script from executing on the production environment; obtaining a second request for executing a second data protection script by a second application of the set of applications; applying a portion of the application information corresponding to the application to the script processing engine to obtain a second script recommendation, wherein applying the portion of the application information comprises converting the application information to a format readable to the script processing engine to obtain a formatted input, and applying the formatted input to a machine learning algorithm of the script processing engine to generate the second script recommendation, and wherein the second script recommendation indicates allowing the second data protection script to be executed in the production environment; and implementing the second script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the second script recommendation comprises notifying the application that the data protection script is allowed.
However, in the same area of endeavor of data protection management Ashokkumar teaches wherein the data protection script is associated with a data protection workload, and wherein the data protection workload is one of: a backup of one of the set of applications and a recovery of the backup to the production environment(Ashokkumar, 0055 discloses script is associated with protection such as backing up host “Each of the pre-snapshot scripts (322A) may specify an application (314, 318) to quiesce. The pre-snapshot scripts (322A) may be sent to the VM to be executed. Following the method of FIG. 2A, the backup agent generates a VM snapshot (312) of the source VM after the selection of applications are quiesced” ),
and wherein the data protection script specifies at least one action comprising one of a list consisting of:(Ashokkumar, para 0021 discloses script is specified to perform suspending/quiesce and re-activating/unquiescing virtual machine operation “The application discovery analysis includes identifying applications that are active on the source VM (110) and generating scripts to both quiesce the applications executing on the VM (110) prior to generating a snapshot (e.g., 112) and unquiescing the applications on the VM (110) after the snapshot (112) has been generated. In one embodiment of the invention, quiescing the application results in the application being temporarily paused or suspended such that a snapshot can be obtained for the VM on which the application is executing”);
applying a portion of the application information corresponding to the application to a script processing engine to obtain a script recommendation (Ashokkumar, para 0021 further discloses a script recommendation is being generated by identified application information using application discovery analysis “The application discovery analysis includes identifying applications that are active on the source VM (110) and generating scripts to both quiesce the applications executing on the VM (110) prior to generating a snapshot” ); obtaining a second request for executing a second data protection script by a second application of the set of applications; applying a portion of the application information corresponding to the application to the script processing engine to obtain a second script recommendation(Ashokkumar, Fig. 3 and para 0054-0055 disclose application is getting selected based on obtain information from discovery analysis and application backup request or protection script (which can be for first, second or any applications ) and obtaining script listing or recommendation “The backup agent (322) may generate a selection of applications based on the obtained information and the criteria included in the backup storage request.….The backup agent (322), using the selection of applications and a pre-snapshot template, generates pre-snapshot scripts (322A)……. After the snapshot is generated, the backup agent (322) may generate post-snapshot scripts (322B)” ), wherein applying the portion of the application information comprises converting the application information to a format readable to the script processing engine to obtain a formatted input (Ashokkumar, para 0045 and 0047 discloses obtaining application information such as name, path and state of applications using application discovery “ application information of the application is obtained. In one or more embodiments of the invention, the information obtained may include a name of the application, a logical path to access the application in a file system, a state of the application”; para 0055 further discloses obtained information or input is getting utilized by scripting process thus, which suggests conversion of input form initial application information to task specific script generation “The backup agent (322), using the selection of applications and a pre-snapshot template, generates pre-snapshot scripts (322A). Each of the pre-snapshot scripts (322A) may specify an application (314, 318) to quiesce” ),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of applying script for software application management of Ashokkumar into obtained registered applications information of Sexton to produce an expected result of applying script to applications running on host for protection management. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to improve application backup process by maintaining application consistency using scripts(Ashokkumar, para 0062).
But Sexton and Ashokkumar don’t explicitly teach wherein the script recommendation indicates not allowing the data protection script from executing on the production environment; implementing the script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the script recommendation comprises enforcing the disablement of the data protection script from executing on the production environment; and applying the formatted input to a machine learning algorithm of the script processing engine to generate the second script recommendation, and wherein the second script recommendation indicates allowing the second data protection script to be executed in the production environment; and implementing the second script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the second script recommendation comprises notifying the application that the data protection script is allowed.
However, in the same area of endeavor of installed software management Bennah teaches wherein the script recommendation indicates not allowing the data protection script from executing on the production environment; and implementing the script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the script recommendation comprises enforcing the disablement of the data protection script from executing on the production environment(Bennah, claim 37-38 discloses listing or recommending software applications which are to prevented from being executed or installed (which can similarly be applied for any environment such as production) “computer usable program code for providing the list to at least one other computer system…….in response to receiving the list, to avoid installation of any of the software applications on the list”; para 0025 and claim 23 further disclose disabling by removing software application “…the method may further comprise removing the identified software application, presumably if the identified software application was responsible for an increase in instability….”),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of recommending software which are not to be installed of Bennah into obtained registered applications information of Sexton and Ashokkumar to produce an expected result of proving a list of software which should be prevented being executed. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to fix system problem impacted by software updates by using management tool which collects data related to system performance impact (Bennah, para 005).
But Sexton, Ashokkumar and Bennah don’t explicitly teach and applying the formatted input to a machine learning algorithm of the script processing engine to generate the second script recommendation, and wherein the second script recommendation indicates allowing the second data protection script to be executed in the production environment; and implementing the second script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the second script recommendation comprises notifying the application that the data protection script is allowed.
However, in the same area of endeavor of installed software management Seck teaches and applying the formatted input to a machine learning algorithm of the script processing engine to generate the second script recommendation, and wherein the second script recommendation indicates allowing the second data protection script to be executed in the production environment(Seck, para 0034 discloses machine learning model to generate recommended remediation/patch or software updates scripts which are to applied/executed “the remediation engine may apply the machine learning model in order to generate an automated script representing the recommended remediation procedure. For example, the compliance server may generate the script in response to the recommended remediation procedure. The automated script may instruct the cloud provider to perform an action for a cloud-based application associated with the selected compliance activity. For example, the automated script may trigger a patch and/or other software update to a cloud-based application or trigger a refresh”; where prior art Ashokkumar in para 0055 discloses input for script generation); and implementing the second script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the second script recommendation (Seck, para 0034 further teaches implementation of the generated scripts(patch or software updates) to software application hosting environment “the automated script may trigger a patch and/or other software update to a cloud-based application or trigger a refresh (also referred to as a “reboot” or a “rehydration”) for a cloud-based storage supporting the cloud-based application”) comprises notifying the application that the data protection script is allowed(Seck, para 0004 further teaches notifying or providing indications that generated scripts for protecting against security vulnerability and thus, allowed for protection “The set of instructions, when executed by one or more processors of the device, may cause the device to receive an indication of a set of planned remediation steps associated with the set of security vulnerabilities…..”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of recommending software patches/updates which are to be applied of Seck into obtained registered applications information of Sexton, Ashokkumar and Bennah to produce an expected result of proving a list of software which should executed or applied for protecting software application against security vulnerability. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to implement script generation to protect hosted software applications form security vulnerability (Seck, para 0004).
Regarding claim 2(Original), Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck teach all the limitations of claim 1 and Ashokkumar further teaches wherein the data protection script is one of: a pre-backup script, a post-backup script, a pre-recovery script, and a post-recovery script(Ashokkumar , 0055 discloses pre-backup or pre-snapshot script generation “Each of the pre-snapshot scripts (322A) may specify an application (314, 318) to quiesce. The pre-snapshot scripts (322A) may be sent to the VM to be executed. Following the method of FIG. 2A, the backup agent generates a VM snapshot (312) of the source VM after the selection of applications are quiesced”).
Regarding claim 5 (Original), Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck teach all the limitations of claim 1 and Seck further teaches wherein applying the portion of the application information to the script processing engine comprises inputting the portion of the application information to a machine learning algorithm of the script processing engine, wherein the machine learning algorithm outputs the script recommendation (Seck, para 0034 discloses generating a list/recommendation of scripts need for installation “the remediation engine may apply the machine learning model in order to generate an automated script representing the recommended remediation procedure. …… the automated script may trigger a patch and/or other software update to a cloud-based application or trigger a refresh (also referred to as a “reboot” or a “rehydration”) for a cloud-based storage supporting the cloud-based application, among other examples”).
Claim 6-7, cancelled.
Regarding Claim 8 (Currently Amended), Sexton teaches A non-transitory computer readable medium comprising computer readable program code(Sexton, para 0139 discloses non-transitory stores for strong program codes “Computer-readable media may include storage media and/or communication media including any non-transitory medium that may facilitate transferring a computer program from one place to another”), which when executed by a computer processor enables the computer processor to perform a method for managing data protection scripts the method comprising(Sexton, para 0053 discloses a protection method for software applications “the process 300 of FIG. 3 may be implemented via a security auditing application that is executed on the security auditing component. In some designs, the security auditing application is implemented as a library that updates a plugin database as plugins are executed (e.g., during a security audit scan of an enterprise network”): obtaining, by a backup server, registration information associated with a set of applications operating on a production environment; performing application discovery on the production environment using the registration information to obtain application information (Sexton, para 0128 discloses obtaining application registration information (which can be performed on any environment) “the system scanner, plugin, or library may call the function add_finding( ). The function then determines at 1002 if the product is registered with the system; if not, the product is registered at 1003 before continuing. After determining the product or application is registered, the details (e.g. version) of the application are returned to the function at 1004”); after performing the application discovery, obtaining a request for executing a data protection script by an application of the set of applications (Sexton, para 0126 discloses listing of patch/scripts and 0068 discloses applying/installing patches/scrips to reduce security issues “In some designs, integrating a patching application may allow solutions related to missing patches or updates to be applied automatically. In some designs, determining a reduced or minimum set of solutions using the first, second and third embodiments may allow the patching application to apply patches more efficiently by only installing a reduced or minimum number of patches to resolve the security issues discovered”),
But Sexton does not explicitly teach wherein the data protection script is associated with a data protection workload, and wherein the data protection workload is one of: a backup of one of the set of applications and a recovery of the backup to the production environment, and wherein the data protection script specifies at least one action comprising one of a list consisting of: suspending virtual machine operation before the backup, re-activating the virtual machine operation after completion of the backup, re-activating the virtual machine operation after completion of the recovery, mounting a file system for the application data, unmounting the file system, pausing operation of a database in one of the set of applications, and obtaining transaction logs of the application data; applying a portion of the application information corresponding to the application to a script processing engine to obtain a script recommendation,
wherein the script recommendation indicates not allowing the data protection script from executing on the production environment; and implementing the script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the script recommendation comprises enforcing the disablement of the data protection script from executing on the production environment, obtaining a second request for executing a second data protection script by a second application of the set of applications; applying a portion of the application information corresponding to the application to the script processing engine to obtain a second script recommendation, wherein applying the portion of the application information comprises converting the application information to a format readable to the script processing engine to obtain a formatted input, and applying the formatted input to a machine learning algorithm of the script processing engine to generate the second script recommendation, and wherein the second script recommendation indicates allowing the second data protection script to be executed in the production environment; and implementing the second script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the second script recommendation comprises notifying the application that the data protection script is allowed.
However, in the same area of endeavor of data protection management Ashokkumar teaches wherein the data protection script is associated with a data protection workload, and wherein the data protection workload is one of: a backup of one of the set of applications and a recovery of the backup to the production environment(Ashokkumar, 0055 discloses script is associated with protection such as backing up host “Each of the pre-snapshot scripts (322A) may specify an application (314, 318) to quiesce. The pre-snapshot scripts (322A) may be sent to the VM to be executed. Following the method of FIG. 2A, the backup agent generates a VM snapshot (312) of the source VM after the selection of applications are quiesced” ), and wherein the data protection script specifies at least one action comprising one of a list consisting of: suspending virtual machine operation before the backup, re-activating the virtual machine operation after completion of the backup, re-activating the virtual machine operation after completion of the recovery, mounting a file system for the application data, unmounting the file system, pausing operation of a database in one of the set of applications, and obtaining transaction logs of the application data(Ashokkumar, para 0021 discloses script is specified to perform suspending/quiesce and re-activating/unquiescing virtual machine operation “The application discovery analysis includes identifying applications that are active on the source VM (110) and generating scripts to both quiesce the applications executing on the VM (110) prior to generating a snapshot (e.g., 112) and unquiescing the applications on the VM (110) after the snapshot (112) has been generated. In one embodiment of the invention, quiescing the application results in the application being temporarily paused or suspended such that a snapshot can be obtained for the VM on which the application is executing”); applying a portion of the application information corresponding to the application to a script processing engine to obtain a script recommendation(Ashokkumar, para 0021 further discloses a script recommendation is being generated by identified application information using application discovery analysis “The application discovery analysis includes identifying applications that are active on the source VM (110) and generating scripts to both quiesce the applications executing on the VM (110) prior to generating a snapshot” ),
obtaining a second request for executing a second data protection script by a second application of the set of applications; applying a portion of the application information corresponding to the application to the script processing engine to obtain a second script recommendation(Ashokkumar, Fig. 3 and para 0054-0055 disclose application is getting selected based on obtain information from discovery analysis and application backup request or protection script (which can be for first, second or any applications ) and obtaining script listing or recommendation “The backup agent (322) may generate a selection of applications based on the obtained information and the criteria included in the backup storage request.….The backup agent (322), using the selection of applications and a pre-snapshot template, generates pre-snapshot scripts (322A)……. After the snapshot is generated, the backup agent (322) may generate post-snapshot scripts (322B)” ), wherein applying the portion of the application information comprises converting the application information to a format readable to the script processing engine to obtain a formatted input(Ashokkumar, para 0045 and 0047 discloses obtaining application information such as name, path and state of applications using application discovery “ application information of the application is obtained. In one or more embodiments of the invention, the information obtained may include a name of the application, a logical path to access the application in a file system, a state of the application”; para 0055 further discloses obtained information or input is getting utilized by scripting process thus, which suggests conversion of input form initial application information to task specific script generation “The backup agent (322), using the selection of applications and a pre-snapshot template, generates pre-snapshot scripts (322A). Each of the pre-snapshot scripts (322A) may specify an application (314, 318) to quiesce” ),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of applying script for software application management of Ashokkumar into obtained registered applications information of Sexton to produce an expected result of applying script to applications running on host for protection management. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to improve application backup process by maintaining application consistency using scripts(Ashokkumar, para 0062).
But Sexton and Ashokkumar don’t explicitly teach wherein the script recommendation indicates not allowing the data protection script from executing on the production environment; and implementing the script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the script recommendation comprises enforcing the disablement of the data protection script from executing on the production environment; and applying the formatted input to a machine learning algorithm of the script processing engine to generate the second script recommendation, and wherein the second script recommendation indicates allowing the second data protection script to be executed in the production environment; and implementing the second script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the second script recommendation comprises notifying the application that the data protection script is allowed.
However, in the same area of endeavor of installed software management Bennah teaches wherein the script recommendation indicates not allowing the data protection script from executing on the production environment; and implementing the script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the script recommendation comprises enforcing the disablement of the data protection script from executing on the production environment (Bennah, claim 37-38 discloses listing or recommending software applications which are to prevented from being executed or installed (which can similarly be applied for any environment such as production) “computer usable program code for providing the list to at least one other computer system…….in response to receiving the list, to avoid installation of any of the software applications on the list”; para 0025 and claim 23 further disclose disabling by removing software application “…the method may further comprise removing the identified software application, presumably if the identified software application was responsible for an increase in instability….”),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of recommending software which are not to be installed of Bennah into obtained registered applications information of Sexton and Ashokkumar to produce an expected result of proving a list of software which should be prevented being executed. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to fix system problem impacted by software updates by using management tool which collects data related to system performance impact (Bennah, para 005).
But Sexton, Ashokkumar and Bennah don’t explicitly teach and applying the formatted input to a machine learning algorithm of the script processing engine to generate the second script recommendation, and wherein the second script recommendation indicates allowing the second data protection script to be executed in the production environment; and implementing the second script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the second script recommendation comprises notifying the application that the data protection script is allowed.
However, in the same area of endeavor of installed software management Seck teaches and applying the formatted input to a machine learning algorithm of the script processing engine to generate the second script recommendation, and wherein the second script recommendation indicates allowing the second data protection script to be executed in the production environment(Seck, para 0034 discloses machine learning model to generate recommended remediation/patch or software updates scripts which are to applied/executed “the remediation engine may apply the machine learning model in order to generate an automated script representing the recommended remediation procedure. For example, the compliance server may generate the script in response to the recommended remediation procedure. The automated script may instruct the cloud provider to perform an action for a cloud-based application associated with the selected compliance activity. For example, the automated script may trigger a patch and/or other software update to a cloud-based application or trigger a refresh”; where prior art Ashokkumar in para 0055 discloses input for script generation); and implementing the second script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the second script recommendation (Seck, para 0034 further teaches implementation of the generated scripts(patch or software updates) to software application hosting environment “the automated script may trigger a patch and/or other software update to a cloud-based application or trigger a refresh (also referred to as a “reboot” or a “rehydration”) for a cloud-based storage supporting the cloud-based application”) comprises notifying the application that the data protection script is allowed(Seck, para 0004 further teaches notifying or providing indications that generated scripts for protecting against security vulnerability and thus, allowed for protection “The set of instructions, when executed by one or more processors of the device, may cause the device to receive an indication of a set of planned remediation steps associated with the set of security vulnerabilities…..”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of recommending software patches/updates which are to be applied of Seck into obtained registered applications information of Sexton, Ashokkumar and Bennah to produce an expected result of proving a list of software which should executed or applied for protecting software application against security vulnerability. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to implement script generation to protect hosted software applications form security vulnerability (Seck, para 0004).
Regarding claim 9(Original), Sexton, Ashokkumar and Bennah teach all the limitations of claim 8 and Ashokkumar further teaches wherein the data protection script is one of: a pre-backup script, a post-backup script, a pre-recovery script, and a post-recovery script (Ashokkumar, 0055 discloses pre-backup or pre-snapshot script generation “Each of the pre-snapshot scripts (322A) may specify an application (314, 318) to quiesce. The pre-snapshot scripts (322A) may be sent to the VM to be executed. Following the method of FIG. 2A, the backup agent generates a VM snapshot (312) of the source VM after the selection of applications are quiesced”).
Regarding claim 12 (Original), Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck teach all the limitations of claim 8 and Seck further teaches wherein applying the portion of the application information to the script processing engine comprises inputting the portion of the application information to a machine learning algorithm of the script processing engine, wherein the machine learning algorithm outputs the script recommendation(Seck, para 0034 discloses generating a list/recommendation of scripts need for installation “the remediation engine may apply the machine learning model in order to generate an automated script representing the recommended remediation procedure. …… the automated script may trigger a patch and/or other software update to a cloud-based application or trigger a refresh (also referred to as a “reboot” or a “rehydration”) for a cloud-based storage supporting the cloud-based application, among other examples”).
Regarding Claim 15 (Currently Amended), Sexton teaches A system, comprising: a processor; and memory including instructions, which when executed by the processor, perform a method comprising: obtaining, by a backup server, registration information associated with a set of applications operating on a production environment (Sexton, para 0112 discloses computing system and storages and “the server 700 includes a processor 701 coupled to volatile memory 702 and a large capacity nonvolatile memory”), which when executed by a computer processor enables the computer processor to perform a method for managing data protection scripts the method comprising(Sexton, para 0053 discloses a protection method for software applications “the process 300 of FIG. 3 may be implemented via a security auditing application that is executed on the security auditing component. In some designs, the security auditing application is implemented as a library that updates a plugin database as plugins are executed (e.g., during a security audit scan of an enterprise network”): performing application discovery on the production environment using the registration information to obtain application information (Sexton, para 0128 discloses discovering or obtaining application registration information (which can be performed on any environment) “the system scanner, plugin, or library may call the function add_finding( ). The function then determines at 1002 if the product is registered with the system; if not, the product is registered at 1003 before continuing. After determining the product or application is registered, the details (e.g. version) of the application are returned to the function at 1004”); after performing the application discovery, obtaining a request for executing a data protection script by an application of the set of applications (Sexton, para 0126 discloses listing of patch/scripts and 0068 discloses applying/installing patches/scrips to reduce security issues “In some designs, integrating a patching application may allow solutions related to missing patches or updates to be applied automatically. In some designs, determining a reduced or minimum set of solutions using the first, second and third embodiments may allow the patching application to apply patches more efficiently by only installing a reduced or minimum number of patches to resolve the security issues discovered”);
But Sexton does not explicitly teach wherein the data protection script is associated with a data protection workload, and wherein the data protection workload is one of: a backup of one of the set of applications and a recovery of the backup to the production environment, and wherein the data protection script specifies at least one action comprising one of a list consisting of: suspending virtual machine operation before the backup, re-activating the virtual machine operation after completion of the backup, re-activating the virtual machine operation after completion of the recovery, mounting a file system for the application data, unmounting the file system, pausing operation of a database in one of the set of applications, and obtaining transaction logs of the application data; applying a portion of the application information corresponding to the application to a script processing engine to obtain a script recommendation, wherein the script recommendation indicates not allowing the data protection script from executing on the production environment; and implementing the script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the script recommendation comprises enforcing the disablement of the data protection script from executing on the production environments; obtaining a second request for executing a second data protection script by a second application of the set of applications; applying a portion of the application information corresponding to the application to the script processing engine to obtain a second script recommendation, wherein applying the portion of the application information comprises converting the application information to a format readable to the script processing engine to obtain a formatted input, and applying the formatted input to a machine learning algorithm of the script processing engine to generate the second script recommendation, and wherein the second script recommendation indicates allowing the second data protection script to be executed in the production environment; and implementing the second script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the second script recommendation comprises notifying the application that the data protection script is allowed.
However, in the same area of endeavor of data protection management Ashokkumar teaches wherein the data protection script is associated with a data protection workload, and wherein the data protection workload is one of: a backup of one of the set of applications and a recovery of the backup to the production environment(Ashokkumar, 0055 discloses script is associated with protection such as backing up host “Each of the pre-snapshot scripts (322A) may specify an application (314, 318) to quiesce. The pre-snapshot scripts (322A) may be sent to the VM to be executed. Following the method of FIG. 2A, the backup agent generates a VM snapshot (312) of the source VM after the selection of applications are quiesced” ), and wherein the data protection script specifies at least one action comprising one of a list consisting of: suspending virtual machine operation before the backup, re-activating the virtual machine operation after completion of the backup, re-activating the virtual machine operation after completion of the recovery, mounting a file system for the application data, unmounting the file system, pausing operation of a database in one of the set of applications, and obtaining transaction logs of the application data(Ashokkumar, para 0021 discloses script is specified to perform suspending/quiesce and re-activating/unquiescing virtual machine operation “The application discovery analysis includes identifying applications that are active on the source VM (110) and generating scripts to both quiesce the applications executing on the VM (110) prior to generating a snapshot (e.g., 112) and unquiescing the applications on the VM (110) after the snapshot (112) has been generated. In one embodiment of the invention, quiescing the application results in the application being temporarily paused or suspended such that a snapshot can be obtained for the VM on which the application is executing”); applying a portion of the application information corresponding to the application to a script processing engine to obtain a script recommendation(Ashokkumar, para 0021 further discloses a script recommendation is being generated by identified application information using application discovery analysis “The application discovery analysis includes identifying applications that are active on the source VM (110) and generating scripts to both quiesce the applications executing on the VM (110) prior to generating a snapshot” ), obtaining a second request for executing a second data protection script by a second application of the set of applications; applying a portion of the application information corresponding to the application to the script processing engine to obtain a second script recommendation(Ashokkumar, Fig. 3 and para 0054-0055 disclose application is getting selected based on obtain information from discovery analysis and application backup request or protection script (which can be for first, second or any applications ) and obtaining script listing or recommendation “The backup agent (322) may generate a selection of applications based on the obtained information and the criteria included in the backup storage request.….The backup agent (322), using the selection of applications and a pre-snapshot template, generates pre-snapshot scripts (322A)……. After the snapshot is generated, the backup agent (322) may generate post-snapshot scripts (322B)” ), wherein applying the portion of the application information comprises converting the application information to a format readable to the script processing engine to obtain a formatted input(Ashokkumar, para 0045 and 0047 discloses obtaining application information such as name, path and state of applications using application discovery “ application information of the application is obtained. In one or more embodiments of the invention, the information obtained may include a name of the application, a logical path to access the application in a file system, a state of the application”; para 0055 further discloses obtained information or input is getting utilized by scripting process thus, which suggests conversion of input form initial application information to task specific script generation “The backup agent (322), using the selection of applications and a pre-snapshot template, generates pre-snapshot scripts (322A). Each of the pre-snapshot scripts (322A) may specify an application (314, 318) to quiesce” ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of applying script for software application management of Ashokkumar into obtained registered applications information of Sexton to produce an expected result of applying script to applications running on host for protection management. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to improve application backup process by maintaining application consistency using scripts(Ashokkumar, para 0062).
But Sexton and Ashokkumar don’t explicitly teach wherein the script recommendation indicates not allowing the data protection script from executing on the production environment; and implementing the script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the script recommendation comprises enforcing the disablement of the data protection script from executing on the production environments; and applying the formatted input to a machine learning algorithm of the script processing engine to generate the second script recommendation, and wherein the second script recommendation indicates allowing the second data protection script to be executed in the production environment; and implementing the second script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the second script recommendation comprises notifying the application that the data protection script is allowed.
However, in the same area of endeavor of installed software management Bennah teaches wherein the script recommendation indicates not allowing the data protection script from executing on the production environment; and implementing the script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the script recommendation comprises enforcing the disablement of the data protection script from executing on the production environments(Bennah, claim 37-38 discloses listing or recommending software applications which are to prevented from being executed or installed (which can similarly be applied for any environment such as production) “computer usable program code for providing the list to at least one other computer system…….in response to receiving the list, to avoid installation of any of the software applications on the list”; para 0025 and claim 23 further disclose disabling by removing software application “…the method may further comprise removing the identified software application, presumably if the identified software application was responsible for an increase in instability….”),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of recommending software which are not to be installed of Bennah into obtained registered applications information of Sexton and Ashokkumar to produce an expected result of proving a list of software which should be prevented being executed. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to fix system problem impacted by software updates by using management tool which collects data related to system performance impact (Bennah, para 0005).
But Sexton, Ashokkumar and Bennah don’t explicitly teach and applying the formatted input to a machine learning algorithm of the script processing engine to generate the second script recommendation, and wherein the second script recommendation indicates allowing the second data protection script to be executed in the production environment; and implementing the second script recommendation on the production environment, wherein implementing the second script recommendation comprises notifying the application that the data protection script is allowed.
However, in the same area of endeavor of installed software management Seck teaches and applying the formatted input to a machine learning algorithm of the script processing engine to generate the second script recommendation, and wherein the second script recommendation indicates allowing the second data protection script to be executed in the production environment(Seck, para 0034 discloses machine learning model to generate recommended remediation/patch or software updates scripts which are to applied/executed “the remediation engine may apply the machine learning model in order to generate an automated script representing the recommended remediation procedure. For example, the compliance server may generate the script in response to the recommended remediation procedure. The automated script may instruct the cloud provider to perform an action for a cloud-based application associated with the selected compliance activity. For example, the automated script may trigger a patch and/or other software update to a cloud-based application or trigger a refresh”; where prior art Ashokkumar in para 0055 discloses input for script generation); and implementing the second script recommendation on the production environment(Seck, para 0034 further teaches implementation of the generated scripts(patch or software updates) to software application hosting environment “the automated script may trigger a patch and/or other software update to a cloud-based application or trigger a refresh (also referred to as a “reboot” or a “rehydration”) for a cloud-based storage supporting the cloud-based application”), wherein implementing the second script recommendation comprises notifying the application that the data protection script is allowed(Seck, para 0004 further teaches notifying or providing indications that generated scripts for protecting against security vulnerability and thus, allowed for protection “The set of instructions, when executed by one or more processors of the device, may cause the device to receive an indication of a set of planned remediation steps associated with the set of security vulnerabilities…..”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of recommending software patches/updates which are to be applied of Seck into obtained registered applications information of Sexton, Ashokkumar and Bennah to produce an expected result of proving a list of software which should executed or applied for protecting software application against security vulnerability. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to implement script generation to protect hosted software applications form security vulnerability (Seck, para 0004).
Regarding claim 16 (Original), Sexton, Ashokkumar and Bennah teach all the limitations of claim 15 and Ashokkumar further teaches wherein the data protection script is one of: a pre-backup script, a post-backup script, a pre-recovery script, and a post-recovery script(Ashokkumar , 0055 discloses pre-backup or pre-snapshot script generation “Each of the pre-snapshot scripts (322A) may specify an application (314, 318) to quiesce. The pre-snapshot scripts (322A) may be sent to the VM to be executed. Following the method of FIG. 2A, the backup agent generates a VM snapshot (312) of the source VM after the selection of applications are quiesced”).
Regarding claim 19 (Original), Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck teach all the limitations of claim 15 and Seck further teaches wherein applying the portion of the application information to the script processing engine comprises inputting the portion of the application information to a machine learning algorithm of the script processing engine, wherein the machine learning algorithm outputs the script recommendation(Seck, para 0034 discloses generating a list/recommendation of scripts need for installation “the remediation engine may apply the machine learning model in order to generate an automated script representing the recommended remediation procedure. …… the automated script may trigger a patch and/or other software update to a cloud-based application or trigger a refresh (also referred to as a “reboot” or a “rehydration”) for a cloud-based storage supporting the cloud-based application, among other examples”).
Claim 3, 10 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sexton, Alice et al (PGPUB Document No. 20200366706), hereafter referred as to “Sexton”, in view of Ashokkumar, Kumar et al (PGPUB Document No. 20200233750), hereafter, referred to as “Ashokkumar”, in further view of Bennah, Albert et al (PGPUB Document No. 20140157037), hereafter, referred to as “Bennah”, in further view of Seck, Mohamed et al (PGPUB Document No. 20250036758 ), hereafter, referred to as “Seck”.
Regarding claim 3 (Original), Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck teach all the limitations of claim 1 and Sexton further teaches wherein the registration information comprises (Sexton, para 0128 discloses obtaining application registration information (which can be performed on any environment) “the system scanner, plugin, or library may call the function add_finding( ). The function then determines at 1002 if the product is registered with the system; if not, the product is registered at 1003 before continuing. After determining the product or application is registered, the details (e.g. version) of the application are returned to the function at 1004”);
But Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck don’t explicitly information about the set of applications registered to the production environment, a date of registration, and information about an owner of each of the set of applications.
However, in the same area of endeavor of registered software management Towles teaches information about the set of applications registered to the production environment, a date of registration, and information about an owner of each of the set of applications (Towles, para 0010 discloses generating a list/recommendation of scripts need for installation “In one embodiment of the system the software program is provided to the registered user by a download process through the registered user's Internet connection. Also, in one embodiment the critical properties comprise at least software program title and version, owner ID……..date and time. Also, in one embodiment the critical properties further comprise an end-of-life (EOL) date and time for the software program”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of having various information regarding registered software of Towles into obtained registered applications information of Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck to produce an expected result of providing various information regarding installed software. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to take advantages of service provided for register software users (Towles, para 002).
Regarding claim 10 (Original), Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck teach all the limitations of claim 8 and Sexton further teaches wherein the registration information comprises (Sexton, para 0128 discloses obtaining application registration information (which can be performed on any environment) “the system scanner, plugin, or library may call the function add_finding( ). The function then determines at 1002 if the product is registered with the system; if not, the product is registered at 1003 before continuing. After determining the product or application is registered, the details (e.g. version) of the application are returned to the function at 1004”);
But Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck don’t explicitly information about the set of applications registered to the production environment, a date of registration, and information about an owner of each of the set of applications.
However, in the same area of endeavor of registered software management Towles teaches information about the set of applications registered to the production environment, a date of registration, and information about an owner of each of the set of applications (Towles, para 0010 discloses generating a list/recommendation of scripts need for installation “In one embodiment of the system the software program is provided to the registered user by a download process through the registered user's Internet connection. Also, in one embodiment the critical properties comprise at least software program title and version, owner ID……..date and time. Also, in one embodiment the critical properties further comprise an end-of-life (EOL) date and time for the software program”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of having various information regarding registered software of Towles into obtained registered applications information of Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck to produce an expected result of providing various information regarding installed software. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to take advantages of service provided for register software users (Towles, para 002).
Regarding claim 17 (Original), Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck teach all the limitations of claim 15 and Sexton further teaches wherein the registration information comprises (Sexton, para 0128 discloses obtaining application registration information (which can be performed on any environment) “the system scanner, plugin, or library may call the function add_finding( ). The function then determines at 1002 if the product is registered with the system; if not, the product is registered at 1003 before continuing. After determining the product or application is registered, the details (e.g. version) of the application are returned to the function at 1004”);
But Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck don’t explicitly information about the set of applications registered to the production environment, a date of registration, and information about an owner of each of the set of applications.
However, in the same area of endeavor of registered software management Towles teaches information about the set of applications registered to the production environment, a date of registration, and information about an owner of each of the set of applications (Towles, para 0010 discloses generating a list/recommendation of scripts need for installation “In one embodiment of the system the software program is provided to the registered user by a download process through the registered user's Internet connection. Also, in one embodiment the critical properties comprise at least software program title and version, owner ID……..date and time. Also, in one embodiment the critical properties further comprise an end-of-life (EOL) date and time for the software program”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of having various information regarding registered software of Towles into obtained registered applications information of Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck to produce an expected result of providing various information regarding installed software. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to take advantages of service provided for register software users (Towles, para 002).
Claim 4, 11 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sexton, Alice et al (PGPUB Document No. 20200366706), hereafter referred as to “Sexton”, in view of Ashokkumar, Kumar et al (PGPUB Document No. 20200233750), hereafter, referred to as “Ashokkumar”, in further view of Bennah, Albert et al (PGPUB Document No. 20140157037), hereafter, referred to as “Bennah”, in further view of Seck, Mohamed et al (PGPUB Document No. 20250036758 ), hereafter, referred to as “Seck”, in view of Yembari, Chaithanya et al (US Patent No. 12184657), hereafter, referred to as “Yembari”, in further view of Cooper, Neil et al (PGPUB Document No. 20250004786), hereafter, referred to as “Cooper”.
Regarding claim 4 (Original), Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck teach all the limitations of claim 1 but don’t explicitly wherein the application information comprises a type of each of the set of applications, a number of users operating on each of the set of applications, and a rate of data protection by each of the set of applications.
However, in the same area of endeavor of registered software management Yembari teaches wherein the application information comprises a type of each of the set of applications, a number of users operating on each of the set of applications(Yembari, col 8:40-45 discloses number of operating users for each application “the one or more insights on application usage could be the number of users actively using each application, type of licenses used by the users”; col 5:46-48 further discloses application type “this integration also provides insights on different applications used such as usage pattern of these applications, type of application”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of integrating various information related to application of Yembari into obtained registered applications information of Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck to produce an expected result of providing various information regarding installed software. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to provide easier all together access for needed applications(Yembari, Abstract).
But Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah, Seck and Yembari don’t explicitly teach and a rate of data protection by each of the set of applications.
Using the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification (paragraph 0037) as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art, examiner is interpreting the limitation “rate of data protection” to mean number of application recovery event.
However, in the same area of endeavor of registered software management Cooper teaches and a rate of data protection by each of the set of applications (Cooper, para 0039 discloses number of operating users for each application “these characteristics are a number of launches of the application, a number of crashes of the application, a number of timeout detection and recovery (TDR) events of the application”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of having information about recovery event for application of Cooper into obtained registered applications information of Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah, Seck and Yembari to produce an expected result of providing various information regarding installed software. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to efficiently provide stability when update occurs using historical data regarding application execution (Cooper, Abstract).
Regarding claim 11(Original), Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck teach all the limitations of claim 8 but don’t explicitly wherein the application information comprises a type of each of the set of applications, a number of users operating on each of the set of applications, and a rate of data protection by each of the set of applications.
However, in the same area of endeavor of registered software management Yembari teaches wherein the application information comprises a type of each of the set of applications, a number of users operating on each of the set of applications (Yembari, col 8:40-45 discloses number of operating users for each application “the one or more insights on application usage could be the number of users actively using each application, type of licenses used by the users”; col 5:46-48 further discloses application type “this integration also provides insights on different applications used such as usage pattern of these applications, type of application”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of integrating various information related to application of Yembari into obtained registered applications information of Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck to produce an expected result of providing various information regarding installed software. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to provide easier all together access for need applications(Yembari, Abstract).
But Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck and Yembari don’t explicitly teach and a rate of data protection by each of the set of applications.
Using the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification (paragraph 0037) as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art, examiner is interpreting the limitation “rate of data protection” to mean number of application recovery event.
However, in the same area of endeavor of registered software management Cooper teaches and a rate of data protection by each of the set of applications (Cooper, para 0039 discloses number of operating users for each application “these characteristics are a number of launches of the application, a number of crashes of the application, a number of timeout detection and recovery (TDR) events of the application”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of having information about recovery event for application of Cooper into obtained registered applications information of Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah, Seck and Yembari to produce an expected result of providing various information regarding installed software. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to efficiently provide stability when update occurs using historical data regarding application execution (Cooper, Abstract).
Regarding claim 18(Original), Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck teach all the limitations of claim 15 but don’t explicitly wherein the application information comprises a type of each of the set of applications, a number of users operating on each of the set of applications, and a rate of data protection by each of the set of applications.
However, in the same area of endeavor of registered software management Yembari teaches wherein the application information comprises a type of each of the set of applications, a number of users operating on each of the set of applications (Yembari, col 8:40-45 discloses number of operating users for each application “the one or more insights on application usage could be the number of users actively using each application, type of licenses used by the users”; col 5:46-48 further discloses application type “this integration also provides insights on different applications used such as usage pattern of these applications, type of application”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of integrating various information related to application of Yembari into obtained registered applications information of Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah and Seck to produce an expected result of providing various information regarding installed software. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to provide easier all together access for need applications(Yembari, Abstract).
But Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah, Seck and Yembari don’t explicitly teach and a rate of data protection by each of the set of applications.
Using the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification (paragraph 0037) as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art, examiner is interpreting the limitation “rate of data protection” to mean number of application recovery event.
However, in the same area of endeavor of registered software management Cooper teaches and a rate of data protection by each of the set of applications (Cooper, para 0039 discloses number of operating users for each application “these characteristics are a number of launches of the application, a number of crashes of the application, a number of timeout detection and recovery (TDR) events of the application”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of having information about recovery event for application of Cooper into obtained registered applications information of Sexton, Ashokkumar, Bennah, Seck and Yembari to produce an expected result of providing various information regarding installed software. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to efficiently provide stability when update occurs using historical data regarding application execution(Cooper, Abstract).
Claim 20, Cancelled.
Response to Arguments
I. 35 U.S.C §103
Applicant’s arguments filed on 12/19/2025 have been fully considered but are
moot because the independent claim 1, 8 and 15 have been amended with newly added
features which applicant’s arguments are directed towards. Since claims have been amended with new features, a new ground of rejection is presented.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDULLAH A DAUD whose telephone number is (469)295-9283. The examiner can normally be reached M~F: 9:30 am~6:30 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, Amy Ng can be reached at 571-270-1698. 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.
/ABDULLAH A DAUD/Examiner, Art Unit 2164
/AMY NG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2164