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
In amendments dated 9/10/25, Applicant amended claims 1, and 3-14, canceled claim 2, and added no new claims. Claims 1 and 3-15 are presented for examination.
Claim Construction
In claim 1, the third limitation recites the Control Center module is configured to “manage service discovery, workload allocation, resource coordination across a networked plurality of client nodes;” and the last limitation recites “wherein the Control Center module further comprises a scheduler, the scheduler configured to dynamically allocate workloads to the agent modules based on current resource availability and processing capability, thereby minimizing human intervention and optimizing system throughput.” Examiner notes the lack of clarity in the claim reciting the same function (workload allocation) performed by both the Control Center module and a scheduler within the Control Center module, and Examiner construes that a scheduler software module within the Control Center module dynamically allocates workloads in the manner recited.
Claim 7 recites “wherein the agent module can announce their availability to the Control Center module for authentication and units of work.” Applicant’s amendments remedied the antecedent basis issue cited in Examiner’s 6/12/25 office action but the language “the agent module can announce their availability” remains. Examiner notes this recites the agent module recites the ability of an agent module to announce its availability without actually announcing its availability, thus the language recited in this claim is not limiting the invention to said announcing function.
In Claim 11, the fifth limitation recites “wherein the client Agents are agent is configured to execute a plurality of tasks assigned by the Control Center server, wherein the tasks further comprises executing extraction and enrichment services on retrieved data using one or more enrichment tools including Add Hash, Add Full Text, ROT detection, and classification.” The earlier version of this claim dated 7/11/24 recited “wherein the client Agents are configured to execute the tasks assigned by the Control Center server.” Examiner notes the instant amendment to this limitation was the addition of “, wherein the tasks further comprises executing extraction and enrichment services on retrieved data using one or more enrichment tools including Add Hash, Add Full Text, ROT detection, and classification” but “, wherein the tasks further comprises” was not underlined as required per 37 C.F.R. 1.121(c)(2) (“The text of any added subject matter must be shown by underlining the added text.”).
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are:
a Control Center module configured for distributed computing service administration and management, the Control Center module further configured to:
manage service discovery, workload allocation, and resource coordination across a networked plurality of client nodes;
receive, validate, and authenticate agent module registration requests from remote client nodes; and
broadcast authorized agent module presence to all nodes;
a plurality of agent modules deployed on distinct client nodes, each agent module configured to:
receive workload instructions from the Control Center module;
request and receive metadata from at least one content server;
execute extraction and enrichment services on retrieved data using one or more enrichment tools including Add Hash, Add Full Text, ROT detection, and classification; and
return processed data to a target destination;
a discovery and search enrichment module configured for managing connections;
a data analytics and search module configured for searches;
an external connections module configured for managing external connections; and
an external integration and export module configured for managing external integration services;
in claim 1; and
wherein the Control Center is further configured for licence & product management, source management, agent management, extraction service management. in claim 3.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Examiner notes the recited processor does not comprise the recited modules or explicitly perform any of the actions of the recited modules. Also, Examiner found support in specification paragraph 0079 (“A ‘module’ can be considered as a processor executing computer-readable code.”) providing the structure that performs the recited actions.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Objections
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: in paragraph 0048 discussing figure 3, component 326 Additional Extraction Service Module is inadvertently referenced as component 362.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected because of the following informality: this claim depends on claim 1 and recites “the services for external integration export module” which lacks antecedent basis as claim 1 recites “an external integration and export module. [emphasis added]”
Claim 7 is objected to because of the following informalities: this claim recites “wherein the Agents can announce their availability to the Control Center” which is grammatically unclear, also this claim depends on claim 1 and the antecedent basis of “the agent module” is unclear since claim 1 recites “a plurality of agent modules.”
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: this claim depends on claims 1 and 7 and recites “the agent module,” which has unclear antecedent basis since claim 1 recites “a plurality of agent modules.”
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: this claim depends on claim 1 and recites “the agent modules” which has unclear antecedent basis since claim 1 recites “a plurality of agent modules.”
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: this claim recites “tools to be implemented and executed on a host file share or virtual machine (VM) that minimizes the requirement for human intervention or minimized impact to network performance for end users” and “or minimized impact to network performance for end users” is grammatically unclear.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: the last limitation recites “wherein the Control Center module further comprises a scheduler, the scheduler configured to dynamically allocate workloads to the agent modules” and “the control center module” and “the agent module” each lacks antecedent basis, also the fifth limitation recites “wherein the client Agents are agent is configured to execute” which is grammatically unclear.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: the second limitation recites “receiving instructions from the Control Center server for identifying the work units and sends the work units to client agent;” and “and sends the work units to client agent;” is grammatically unclear, also the last limitation recites “wherein the Control Center module further comprises a scheduler, the scheduler configured to dynamically allocate workloads to the agent modules” and “the control center module” and “the agent module” each lacks antecedent basis.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The fifth limitation recites “broadcast authorized agent module presence to all nodes.” Examiner found support in specification paragraphs 0066 and 0075 for an agent broadcasting its presence to the Control Center but Examiner did not find support for the Control Center module broadcasting authorized agent module’s presence to all other nodes. Therefore this limitation lacks written description support in the specification.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 and 3-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to mental processes without significantly more. Independent claim 1 recites a Control Center module configured for distributed computing service administration and management, the Control Center module further configured to: manage service discovery, workload allocation, and resource coordination across a networked plurality of client nodes; validate and authenticate agent module registration requests from remote client nodes; and broadcast authorized agent module presence to all nodes; a plurality of agent modules deployed on distinct client nodes, each agent module configured to: request metadata from at least one content server; execute extraction and enrichment services on retrieved data using one or more enrichment tools including Add Hash, Add Full Text, ROT detection, and classification; and a discovery and search enrichment module configured for managing connections; a data analytics and search module configured for searches; an external connections module configured for managing external connections; and an external integration and export module configured for managing external integration services; wherein the Control Center module further comprises a scheduler, the scheduler configured to dynamically allocate workloads to the agent modules based on current resource availability and processing capability, thereby minimizing human intervention and optimizing system throughput. Managing service discovery, workload allocation, and resource coordination, validating and authenticating registration requests, requesting metadata, extraction and enrichment services are each recited broadly and are mental processes accomplishable in the human mind or on paper. Managing connections, searching, managing external connections, managing external integration services, managing other modules to execute and process tasks, and dynamically allocating workloads are each recited broadly and are mental processes accomplishable in the human mind or on paper. This claim recites additional elements of receiving agent module registration requests from remote client nodes, receiving workload instructions from the Control Center module, receiving metadata from at least one content server, which are each input/data gathering steps and insignificant extra-solution activity; and broadcasting authorized agent module presence to all nodes, and returning processed data to a target destination, which are each output steps and also insignificant extra-solution activity. Claim 1 recites a computer processor and various computer software modules which are generic components of a computer. Examiner notes specification paragraph 0005 discussing how enterprise content management systems would not scale effectively without introduction of automation. Paragraph 0006 describes how processes related to these systems require intensive computing resources and may be time-consuming and paragraph 0007 discusses how searchable indexes must be updated regularly which also consumes resources. Paragraph 0009 discusses the need to provide automation for these systems to minimize or eliminate adverse impacts to systems or network performance. The claim recites dynamically allocating workloads based on resource availability and processing capability thereby minimizing human intervention and optimizing system throughput but does not recite specific steps of how the invention allocates workloads to minimize human intervention and optimize system throughput. The claim does not recite any details that addresses any other of the needs described above or recites an improvement in a technology or a function of a computer. Therefore the recited mental processes are not integrated into a practical application. Taking the claim as a whole, the input/data gathering steps and the output steps are each recited broadly and amount to receiving and sending data across a network per specification paragraphs 0046 and 0057 and figures 1 and 3, which is routine and conventional activity per the list of such activities in MPEP 2106.05(d) part II. The computer processor and software modules are still generic components of a computer. Therefore the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited mental processes.
Independent claim 11 recites authenticating the client agent with the Control Center server; after authentication, recognizing the client agent as a trusted resource; and wherein the client Agents are agent is configured to execute a plurality of tasks assigned by the Control Center server, wherein the tasks further comprises executing extraction and enrichment services on retrieved data using one or more enrichment tools including Add Hash, Add Full Text, ROT detection, and classification; wherein the Control Center module further comprises a scheduler, the scheduler configured to dynamically allocate workloads to the agent modules based on current resource availability and processing capability, thereby minimizing human intervention and optimizing system throughput. Authenticating a client agent, executing tasks like extraction and enrichment services, and dynamically allocating workloads are each recited broadly and are mental processes accomplishable in the human mind or on paper, and recognizing the client agent as a trusted resource is evaluating and a mental process. This claim recites an additional element of broadcasting the presence of the client agent to the Control Center serve which is incidental to the process of adding a client agent to a Control Center server per the preamble and insignificant extra-solution activity. Examiner notes the discussion above about problems described in specification paragraphs 0005-0007 and 0009, and also notes how the limitation reciting dynamically allocating workloads based on resource availability and processing capability thereby minimizing human intervention and optimizing system throughput but does not recite specific steps of how the invention allocates workloads to minimize human intervention and optimize system throughput. Claim 11 also does not recite any details that addresses any other of the needs described above or recites an improvement in a technology or a function of a computer. Therefore the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited mental processes. Taking the claims as a whole, broadcasting the presence of a client agent to a server is recited broadly and amounts to sending data across a network per specification paragraphs 0046 and 0057 and figures 1 and 3, which is routine and conventional activity per the list of such activities in MPEP 2106.05(d) part II. These steps also appear to be conventional steps to follow for recognizing and adding a client to a server. Therefore the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited mental processes.
Independent claim 13 recites executing the extraction or the enrichment service on retrieved data using one or more enrichment tools including Add Hash, Add Full Text, ROT detection, and classification; and wherein the Control Center module further comprises a scheduler, the scheduler configured to dynamically allocate workloads to the agent modules based on current resource availability and processing capability, thereby minimizing human intervention and optimizing system throughput. Extracting or enriching data and dynamically allocating workloads are recited broadly and are mental processes accomplishable in the human mind or on paper. The claim recites additional elements of receiving instructions from the client agent for requesting work units from a Control Center server; receiving instructions from the Control Center server for identifying the work units and sends the work units to client agent; and downloading an extraction service or an enrichment service to complete the work unit at the client agent, which are each input steps and insignificant extra-solution activity. Examiner notes the discussion above about problems described in specification paragraphs 0005-0007 and 0009, and also notes how the limitation reciting dynamically allocating workloads based on resource availability and processing capability thereby minimizing human intervention and optimizing system throughput but does not recite specific steps of how the invention allocates workloads to minimize human intervention and optimize system throughput. Claim 13 also does not recite any details that addresses any other of the needs described above or recites an improvement in a technology or a function of a computer. Therefore the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited mental processes. Taking the claims as a whole, the data gathering steps are recited broadly and amount to receiving data across a network per specification paragraphs 0046 and 0057 and figures 1 and 3, which is routine and conventional activity per the list of such activities in MPEP 2106.05(d) part II. These steps also appear to be conventional steps to follow for completing work or executing a task by a client agent. Therefore the claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the recited mental processes.
Claim 3 recites wherein the Control Center is further configured for licence & product management, source management, agent management, extraction service management, and said management activities are recited broadly and are mental processes accomplishable in the human mind or on paper. Claim 4 recites wherein the extraction service manages connections including one or more enterprise content management system supported connections and 3rd party connections, and managing connections is recited broadly and are mental processes accomplishable in the human mind or on paper. Claim 5 recites wherein the external connections include cloud infrastructure, a data store, a file system, an in-place database and a content management system (CMS), and managing connections is recited broadly and are mental processes accomplishable in the human mind or on paper. Claim 6 recites wherein the services for external integration export module includes user interface dashboards and ODBC connections, and services are recited broadly and are mental processes accomplishable in the human mind or on paper. Claim 7 recites wherein the agent module can announce their availability to the Control Center module for authentication and units of work, and announcing availability is recited broadly and is a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper.
Claim 8 recites wherein for additional load balancing, the agent module will send extra work to the Control Center module to distribute to other agent modules, and an agent sending work to a control center is sending data across a network per specification paragraph 0057, which is routine and conventional activity per the list of such activities in MPEP 2106.05(d) part II. Claim 9 recites wherein the Control Center module coordinates and distributes work to authenticated the agent modules, including the software to perform the work, and coordinating and distributing work is recited broadly and is a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper. Claim 10 recites tools to be implemented and executed on a host file share or virtual machine (VM) that minimizes the requirement for human intervention or minimized impact to network performance for end users, and tools to execute are recited broadly and are mental processes accomplishable in the human mind or on paper. Claim 12 recites administering trust with the Control Center server, and administering trusts is recited broadly and is a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper. Claim 14 recites wherein the work units are assigned based on the number of parallel processes the client agent is configured to perform or process, and assigning work units is recited broadly and is a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper. Claim 15 recites wherein the work units include instructions to execute a toolkit or an extraction service, and executing a toolkit is recited broadly and is a mental process accomplishable in the human mind or on paper.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) anticipated by Blakey et al (US 20220345371), hereafter Blakey.
With respect to claim 11, Blakey teaches:
broadcasting the presence of the client agent to the Control Center server (paragraph 0171 figure 6 steps 510, 512 agent client is created and server generates a key pair for the client device so client device’s presence is made known to the server);
authenticating the client agent with the Control Center server (paragraph 0171 figure 6 steps 510, 512 agent client is created and server generates a key pair for the client device so client device is authenticated with the server);
after authentication, recognizing the client agent as a trusted resource (paragraph 0171 figure 6 step 514 agent client interface for agent client device is downloaded to the client so client device recognized as trusted resource); and
sending configuration information to the client agent from the Control Center server (paragraph 0171 figure 6 step 514 agent client interface for agent client device is downloaded to the client from the server, also step 516 server sends docker container to client, which is configuration information per paragraph 0008);
wherein the client Agents are agent is configured to execute a plurality of tasks assigned by the Control Center server, wherein the tasks further comprises executing extraction and enrichment services on retrieved data using one or more enrichment tools including Add Hash, Add Full Text, ROT detection, and classification (paragraph 0160 figure 3 instructions for jobs issued to client devices through server, paragraph 0064 instructions to client deice include reading, writing commands for downloaded data packet (extraction service), timestamping the data and encrypting the data packet (Add Hash) (enrichment service));
wherein the Control Center module further comprises a scheduler, the scheduler configured to dynamically allocate workloads to the agent modules based on current resource availability and processing capability, thereby minimizing human intervention and optimizing system throughput (paragraphs 0196-0197 schedule jobs, allocate storage for requests, paragraph 0173 server issues ipconfig command for configuration information for load balancing of traffic).
With respect to claim 13, Blakey teaches:
receiving instructions from the client agent for requesting work units from a Control Center server (paragraph 0167 client requests instructions from server);
receiving instructions from the Control Center server for identifying the work units and sends the work units to client agent (paragraph 0167 server identifies instructions and sends them to client); and
downloading an extraction service or an enrichment service to complete the work unit at the client agent (paragraphs 0167-0168 client completes work assigned by server); and
executing the extraction or the enrichment service on retrieved data using one or more enrichment tools including Add Hash, Add Full Text, ROT detection, and classification (paragraph 0064 instructions to client deice include reading, writing commands for downloaded data packet (extraction service), timestamping the data and encrypting the data packet (Add Hash));
wherein the Control Center module further comprises a scheduler, the scheduler configured to dynamically allocate workloads to the agent modules based on current resource availability and processing capability, thereby minimizing human intervention and optimizing system throughput (paragraphs 0196-0197 schedule jobs, allocate storage for requests, paragraph 0173 server issues ipconfig command for configuration information for load balancing of traffic).
With respect to claim 12, Blakey teaches administering trust with the Control Center server (server listens for connections to client interfaces, paragraph 0173 commands issued to clients after authentication show trust).
With respect to claim 14, Blakey teaches wherein the work units are assigned based on the number of parallel processes the client agent is configured to perform or process (paragraph 0147 server ussies instructions in parallel when possible, also see paragraphs 0155, 0170).
With respect to claim 15, Blakey teaches wherein the work units include instructions to execute a toolkit or an extraction service (paragraph 0160 clients execute jobs, paragraph 0166 example of obtaining application exceptions).
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 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, 5, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vanleeuwen et al (US 20210191956), hereafter Vanleeuwen in view of Blakey et al (US 20220345371), hereafter Blakey and further in view of Newton (US 20250227144).
With respect to claim 1, Vanleeuwen teaches:
a Control Center module configured for distributed computing service administration and management (paragraphs 0005, 0017 content web server using SOAP protocol to distribute computing services and management), the Control Center module further configured to:
receive, validate, and authenticate agent module registration requests from remote client nodes (paragraph 0019 server communications with client node modules include authentication requests for said client nodes);
a plurality of agent modules deployed on distinct client nodes (paragraph 0015 client modules (Agents per specification 0010)), each agent module configured to:
receive workload instructions from the Control Center module (paragraph 0020 receive download instructions for data transfer);
request and receive metadata from at least one content server (paragraph 0017 request and receive (fetch) metadata from a Content Web Server);
execute extraction and enrichment services on retrieved data using one or more enrichment tools including Add Hash, Add Full Text, ROT detection, and classification (paragraph 0005 extract (fetch) files from server for indexing (Add Full Text) related to appropriate metadata, paragraph 0018 hashing the indexed data (Add Hash)); and
return processed data to a target destination (paragraph 0023 extracting metadata from a content server, archiving it as a zipfile (processed data) on a content management system, or archived data is sent to a remote client node);
a discovery and search enrichment module configured for managing connections (paragraph 0024 managing connections between modules);
a data analytics and search module configured for searches (paragraph 0019 content server search feature);
an external connections module configured for managing external connections (paragraph 0024 managing external connections between modules); and
an external integration and export module configured for managing external integration services (paragraph 0026 control server managing client modules, connections between server and clients, external connections).
Vanleeuwen does not teach:
a Control Center module configured to manage service discovery, workload allocation, and resource coordination across a networked plurality of client nodes;
a Control Center module configured to broadcast authorized agent module presence to all nodes; and
wherein the Control Center module further comprises a scheduler, the scheduler configured to dynamically allocate workloads to the agent modules based on current resource availability and processing capability, thereby minimizing human intervention and optimizing system throughput.
Blakey teaches:
a Control Center module configured to manage service discovery, workload allocation, and resource coordination across a networked plurality of client nodes (paragraph 0173 server managing discovery of services and resource coordination via issuing commands among client nodes, using ipconfig information to balance traffic loads (workloads)); and
wherein the Control Center module further comprises a scheduler, the scheduler configured to dynamically allocate workloads to the agent modules based on current resource availability and processing capability, thereby minimizing human intervention and optimizing system throughput throughput (paragraphs 0196-0197 schedule jobs, allocate storage for requests, paragraph 0173 server issues ipconfig command for configuration information for load balancing of traffic). It would have been obvious to have combined this function of managing service discovery, resource coordination, and dynamically allocating workloads in Blakey with the techniques for creating an index in a client-server architecture in Vanleeuwen (paragraph 0005) to manage and coordinate the plurality of client nodes receiving data to create an index more efficiently.
The combination of Vanleeuwen and Blakey does not teach a Control Center module configured to broadcast authorized agent module presence to all nodes. Newton teaches this in sending a message with information about a first client t other clients (paragraphs 0006-0007, also paragraph 0043 example of a CDN server sending to a plurality of clients information about another client 110a in a geographic proximity for a team game). It would have been obvious to have combined the function of broadcasting client identifying information (module presence) in Newton with the techniques for creating an index in Vanleeuwen and Blakey to keep other nodes within the network informed of status events, thus making the combination more user-friendly.
With respect to claim 5, all the limitations in claim 1 are addressed by Vanleeuwen, Blakey, and Newton above. Vanleeuwen also teaches wherein the external connections include a data store (paragraph 0023 managing connections of synchronization to a data store), a file system (paragraph 0010 exposing a filesystem for a remote content management system), an in-place database (paragraph 0012 database connected to a content server) and a content management system (CMS) (paragraph 0012 content server). Blakey teaches a cloud infrastructure (paragraph 0120 cloud server communicating with a central server to connect with client endpoint devices). It would have been obvious to have combined the cloud server in Blakey with the client-server architecture in Vanleeuwen to provide a remote dimension to the architecture for managing said connections to client devices.
With respect to claim 10, all the limitations in claim 1 are addressed by Vanleeuwen, Blakey, and Newton above. Vanleeuwen also teaches tools to be implemented and executed on a host file share or virtual machine (VM) that minimizes the requirement for human intervention and minimizing impact to system or network performance for end users (paragraph 0010 files shared on local/shared drive).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vanleeuwen, Blakey, and Newton and further in view of Mazzaferri et al (US 20070174429), hereafter Mazzaferri.
With respect to claim 3, all the limitations in claim 1 are addressed by Vanleeuwen, Blakey, and Newton above. The combination of Vanleeuwen, Blakey, and Newton does not teach wherein the Control Center is further configured for licence & product management, source management, agent management, extraction service management. Mazzaferri teaches this with a server that provides license management and client management with heartbeats back to the server (paragraph 0696 and -0698 figure 18, also paragraph 0141 describing a machine 30 as a server and a machine 10 is a client). It would have been obvious to have combined this functionality of license management on a server in Mazzaferri with the content management techniques in the combination of Vanleeuwen, Blakey, and Newton as consolidating services on a server makes the services more efficient.
Responses to Applicant’s Remarks
With respect to claims 1 and 3 invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f) per Examiner’s Claim Interpretation statement in his 6/12/25 remarks, Applicant did not address this in his Remarks and the amended claims 1 and 3 still invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f), so Examiner maintained this Claim Interpretation statement above for the amended claims. Regarding objections to claim 1 for “the plurality of Agents” and “the Agents” lacking antecedent basis, in view of Applicant amendments for each, these objections are withdrawn. Regarding objection to claim 6 for “external integration and export module” lacking antecedent basis, Applicant replaced the term “External Integration Export” with “external integration export module” which still lacks antecedent basis as shown above. Regarding objections to claim 7 for “the Agents” and “the Control Center” each lacking antecedent basis as well for as the indefinite language “can announce,” Applicant’s amendments have remedied the antecedent basis issues but the indefinite language remains and Examiner made a Claim Construction statement about the “can announce” language above so these rejections are withdrawn. Regarding objections to claim 8 for “the Agents” and “the Control Center” each lacking antecedent basis, Applicant’s amendments remedied the antecedent basis for “the Control Center module” and this objection is withdrawn but the antecedent basis of “the agent module” is still unclear as claim 1 recites a plurality of agent modules. Regarding objection to claim 9 for “the Control Center” lacking antecedent basis, Applicant’s amendment remedied the antecedent basis and this objection is withdrawn but the antecedent basis of “the agent modules” is unclear per an objection above as claim 1 recites a plurality of agent modules.
Regarding objections to claim 10 for grammatically unclear language “minimizing impact to system or network performance for end users,” Applicant’s amendments “or minimized impact to network performance for end users” is still unclear so this objection is maintained above. Regarding objection to claim 12 for unclear language “the step of administering trusts and claims client Agent from the Control Center server,” in view of Applicant’s amendment this objection is withdrawn. Regarding objection to claim 13 for unclear language “receiving instructions from the client Agent requests work units from a Control Center server;” and “receiving instructions from the Control Center server identifies the work units and sends to client Agent,” Applicant amended both limitations but “receiving instructions from the Control Center server for identifying the work units and sends the work units to client agent” is still grammatically unclear and the last amended limitation has antecedent basis issues as shown above. Regarding objection to claim 14 for “the Agent” lacking antecedent basis, in view of Applicant’s amendments this objection is withdrawn.
Regarding rejections of claims 4 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for reciting the names of trademarked products or goods per MPEP 2173.05(u), in view of amendments these rejections are withdrawn. Regarding rejections of claims 1-15 under 35 U.S.C. 101 for reciting mental processes without significantly more, Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are not persuasive. On page 6 of his Remarks Applicant asserts the amended claims 1, 11, and 13 are not directed to an abstract idea but to a technological improvement in distributed systems architecture. Examiner disagrees and identified the mental processes in the rejections maintained above. On page 7 of his Remarks Applicant asserts the elements reflect more than routine and conventional steps. Examiner disagrees and notes the additional elements in each claim recite routine and conventional input or output steps and the identified mental processes do not recite inventive details that reflect said improvement in distributed systems architecture. For example, the last limitation in each claim recites “wherein the Control Center module further comprises a scheduler, the scheduler configured to dynamically allocate workloads to the agent modules based on current resource availability and processing capability, thereby minimizing human intervention and optimizing system throughput.” This limitation recites dynamically allocating workloads is based on current resource availability and processing capability but does not recite specific details on how the schedule dynamically allocates workloads, and Examiner does not see how the invention minimizes human intervention and optimizes system throughput.
Regarding rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 of claims 1, 5, and 10 by Vanleeuwen and claims 11-15 by Blakey and rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 of claim 2 by Vanleeuwen in view of Lai and claim 3 by Vanleeuwen in view of Mazzaferri, Applicant’s amendments overcome Vanleeuwen’s teachings. Om page 8 of his Remarks Applicant asserts Blakey does not teach metadata enrichment but Examiner notes claims 11 and 13 each recites an enrichment service, not metadata enrichment, and claim 13 recites an enrichment service as an option along with an extraction service. Examiner believes Blakey teaches these services in paragraphs 0064 as shown in the rejections maintained above. Examiner conducted another search of the prior art and found Newton, which he believes teaches subject matter in claims 1, 3, 5, and 10 along with Vanleeuwen, Blakey, Lai, and Mazzaferri in the rejections for these claims above.
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.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRUCE M MOSER whose telephone number is (571)270-1718. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5p.
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, Boris Gorney can be reached at 571 270-5626. 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.
/BRUCE M MOSER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2154 12/3/25
Prosecution Insights