Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/761,283

MULTI-CLOUD ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK FOR DYNAMIC CLOUD WORKLOADS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 01, 2024
Examiner
CHACKO, JOE
Art Unit
2457
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Corestack Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 2m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
429 granted / 575 resolved
+16.6% vs TC avg
Strong +29% interview lift
Without
With
+29.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
20 currently pending
Career history
595
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
9.7%
-30.3% vs TC avg
§103
56.3%
+16.3% vs TC avg
§102
24.2%
-15.8% vs TC avg
§112
4.0%
-36.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 575 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
9DETAILED ACTION Claims 1-17 are examined and pending. 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 . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dave et al. (U.S. 2015/0341230 A1, hereinafter “Dave”) in view of Parekh et al. (U.S. 2022/0210194 A1, hereinafter “Parekh”) As to claim 1, Dave discloses a computerized method for explicit and implicit cloud-resource data extraction with a multi-cloud governance platform comprising: providing a plurality of cloud resources (para. [0010]; discloses cloud services brokerage platform that manages all aspects of transactions associated with their cloud services); automatically obtaining a cloud resource data for each cloud resource in the plurality of cloud resources (para. [0053]; discloses aggregating cloud services into a service catalog that includes service information of the multiple cloud services); defining a set of Cloud Operations, Security, Cost, Access, and Resource (OSCAR) cloud resources information for a plurality of explicit relationships and a plurality of implicit relationships of each cloud resource of the plurality of cloud resource (para. [0066], [0068], [0069], [0070]; discloses the cloud services brokerage defines cloud services and assets that pertains to governance, security, pricing , provisioning and business needs ); defining a plurality of implicit relationships (asset relationships) that are derived from a plurality of connections of each cloud resource (para. [0066]; discloses the CSB platform discloses relationships with assets); obtaining a billing information of each cloud resource (para. [0050]; discloses providing billing information about the cloud resource); obtaining a third-party data for the cloud resource (para.[0119]; discloses obtaining third-party application data for the cloud applications); obtaining and associating a plurality of relevant standards, policies and regulations for each cloud resource (para. [0083]; discloses platform discloses a set of cloud decision and governance engines of the CSB platform is configured to simulate and optimize trade-offs between cloud service criteria such as, for example, business demand, resource capacity, utilization/performance, and IT sourcing policies. The set of cloud decision and governance engines enable the analysis of impacts to cloud service parameters such as, for example, cost, risk, QoS, SLAB, and application architecture for business services and applications); with the plurality of implicit relationships that are derived from a plurality of connections of each cloud resource, the billing information of each cloud resource, the third-party data for the cloud resource plurality of relevant standards, the policies and regulations for each cloud resource, and the one or more relevant regions and other geographical data relevant to each cloud resource, generating a wholistic view of each cloud resource (Figure 7 and para. [0050]; discloses an cloud services brokerage platform that discloses all the services and their associated cloud services data in one interface for the user). However Dave does not explicitly disclose the method of obtaining one or more relevant regions and other geographical data relevant to each cloud resource. In an analogous art, Parekh discloses the method of obtaining one or more relevant regions and other geographical data relevant to each cloud resource (para. [0113]; discloses trust platform GUI receiving back a location attribute associated with the SSO service provider) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify platform in Dave by incorporating a location attribute that is linked to the location of the service provider as taught by Parekh in order to a user to quickly identify service providers that are closest to the user thereby decreasing response time and any potential delay. As to claim 2, Dave-Parekh discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the step of automatically obtaining the CR data further comprises: obtaining a cost profile list (Parekh, para.[0139]; discloses list of pricing rules), a dependency list (Parekh, para. [0125]; discloses a list of resource groups), and an operational profile (Parekh, para. [0141]; discloses list of changes in cloud resources between the current and immediately discovery instances). As to claim 3, Dave-Parekh discloses the method of claim 2, wherein the CR comprises a particular workload of a client's account (Parekh, para. [0119]; discloses providing a view of the workload of any given entity). As to claim 4, Dave-Parekh discloses the method of claim 3, wherein a dependency is defined for a virtual machine (VM) that is using a specific data store (Dave, para. [0057]; discloses the VM would run in a physical server). As to claim 5, Dave-Parekh discloses the method of claim 4, wherein the OSCAR governance model augments a plurality of cloud-native governance operations (Dave, para. [0011]; discloses the CSB platform provides governance of cloud servers and the platform is cloud based). As to claim 6, Dave-Parekh discloses the method of claim 5, wherein the plurality of cloud-native governance operations comprises a unified visibility and insights rule-based automation to govern the entire cloud landscape (Dave, para. [0069], [0080]; discloses CSB platform providing deployment automation based on requirements and visual user friendly console). As to claim 7, Dave-Parekh discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the plurality of cloud-native governance operations comprises an automated remediation to resolve at least one governance gaps (Parekh, para. [0095]; discloses remediation policies that can change dynamically policies). As to claim 8, Dave-Parekh discloses the method of claim 7, wherein the plurality of cloud-native governance operations comprises a quantify cloud-governance with one or more indexing and benchmarking operations for a cloud platform (Dave, para. [0065]; discloses the CSB platform enables (e.g., via the CSB platform access portal) command and control services that are critical to successful adoption and acceptance of the cloud services model (i.e., dashboard functionality for chargeback, SLAs and resources). A cloud service consumer can gain visibility into current performance, cost and utilization of cloud services and compare against planning benchmarks/milestones to automatically initiate corrective action to continuously optimize cost, resources and SLAs to meet business demand and changes.) As to claim 9, Dave-Parekh discloses the method of claim 8, wherein the plurality of relevant standards, policies and regulations for each cloud resource further are defined by a customer (Parekh, para. [0080]; discloses The trust platform provides functionality for enabling custom-defined (e.g., customer or end-user defined) identity and access management policies, ). As to claim 10, Dave-Parekh discloses the method of claim 9, wherein each cloud resources utilizes a specified network or connects to a specified device through a certain port (Dave, para. [0048]; discloses providing services via one or more outside networks with respect to the CSB platform). As to claim 11, Dave-Parekh discloses the method of claim 10 further comprising: building a FinOps governance model based on the plurality of explicit relationships, the plurality of implicit relationships and the billing information (Dave, para. [0089]; discloses CSB platform employs advanced simulation and optimization mathematical models for IT planning, sourcing and governance). As to claim 12, Dave-Parekh discloses the method of claim 11 further comprising: implementing a discovery for a cloud-resource account (Dave, para. [0130]). As to claim 13, Dave-Parekh discloses the method of claim 12 further comprising: utilizing one or more APIs provided by a cloud provider to obtain a cloud-resource data (Dave, para. [0075]; discloses CSB platform enables implementation of IT systems integration functionalities (via APIs) related to internal IT governance to view order access and complete workflow tasks). As to claim 14, Dave-Parekh discloses the method of claim 13, wherein the step of utilizing one or more APIs provided by a cloud provider to obtain a cloud-resource data comprises a user profile obtained via the one or more APIs and the billing data (Dave, para. [0074]; discloses enterprise billing that provide APIs to retrieve and update data for bills). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 15-17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Bhagat (U.S. 2012/0011077 A1) discloses cloud computing governance, Cyber Security, Risk, and Compliance Business Rules System and Method that enable real-time, on-demand, transparent and complete perspective across the risks, threats and opportunities through an enterprise across many operational domains. Cloud platform ensures "On Demand" risk-based private and public strategic alignment with regulatory and compliance priorities towards organizational governance objectives. A user can put in place tasks and controls for risks, and use the platform's cloud collaboration and workflow engine to track continuous remediation and governance improvements. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOE CHACKO whose telephone number is (571)270-3318. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-5pm. 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, Ario Etienne can be reached at 5712724001. 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. /JOE CHACKO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2457
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 01, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 23, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12598239
ACCELERATING CONNECTIONS TO A HOST SERVER
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12574338
MULTI-TENANT COLLECTIVE COMMUNICATION FABRIC
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12568365
AUTHENTICATION EVENT PROCESSING METHOD, APPARATUS, AND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12566848
AUTOMATED THREAT MODELING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12563043
Universal Conceptual Control Management
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+29.1%)
3y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 575 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month