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 .
Status of Claims
In response to communications filed on 16 December 2025, claims 1-20 are presently pending in the application, of which, claims 1, 11, and 18 are presented in independent form. The Examiner acknowledges amended claims 1, 11, and 18. No claims were cancelled or newly added.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
All objections and/or rejections issued in the previous Office Action, mailed 16 September 2025, have been withdrawn, unless otherwise noted in this Office Action.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 is 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.
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 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Bhar, Arindam, et al (U.S. 2025/0124009 and known hereinafter as Bhar) in view of McAlister, Grant, et al (U.S. 10,963,435, issued March 30th, 2021, filed July 19th, 2017, and known hereinafter as McAlister)(newly presented).
As per claim 1, Bhar teaches a computing system:
at least one processor operably connected to at least one memory and a non-transitory computer readable medium (e.g. Bhar, see Figure 4 which discloses a processor coupled to memory and storage device.);
a configurable validation system including instructions stored in the non- transitory computer readable medium that are executable by the at least one processor (e.g. Bhar, see Figure 4 which discloses a processor coupled to memory and storage device.), wherein the configurable validation system is configured to scan and validate a source dataset (e.g. Bhar, see Figure 4 which discloses a processor coupled to memory and storage device.);
wherein the configurable validation system is configured with scanning variables and validation variables (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.);
a graphical user interface configured to display options for selecting the source dataset for validation and for selecting a specification configuration associated with the source dataset (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.);
wherein the configurable validation system is configured to receive the specification configuration associated with the selected source dataset, wherein the specification configuration provides at least scanning parameters and formatting rules that are input to the scanning variables and the validation variables to configure the configurable validation system to validate the selected source dataset (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses receiving the ERP master data which based on specific configuration rules is extracted, validated and then mapped to target specific datasets, where the mapping process may involve converting the ERP master data into a format that is compatible with the target system.); and
wherein the configurable validation system is reconfigurable to scan and validate a different source dataset in response to receiving a different specification configuration without reprogramming the configurable validation system (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0045-0055], which discloses a configuration validation system that extracts ERP master data, where once mapping operation involves the creation of a correspondence is used to guide the conversion of the ERP master data to business partner specific data, where such mapping is stored and allows for a rapid and accurate conversion in the future.).
Bhar does not explicitly disclose wherein the configurable validation system is configured to be neutral to expected structures of files and data formats until adapted to the source dataset based on a specification configuration.
McAlister teaches wherein the configurable validation system is configured to be neutral to expected structures of files and data formats until adapted to the source dataset based on a specification configuration (e.g. The Examiner notes that the specification is silent with respect to the specification neutral, therefore the Examiner interprets neutral using the broadest reasonable interpretation in that specification neutral evaluations rules before performing the rules and therefore McAlister, see column 5, line 1 to column 6, line 65, which discloses the data migration service (DMS) connects to the source database, reads the source data set, and formats the source data set as target data set to be stored in the target database. Additionally, the system includes a data validation tool (DVT) that validates data being migrated from the source database to the target database, where DVT validates data being migrated from the source database, and can determine validation metrics (e.g. neutral) and store the validation metrics as validation results in a local data store.).
Bhar is directed to efficient data migration in enterprise resource planning systems. McAlister is directed to data validation of data migrated from a source database to a target database. Both are directed to data validation and therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Bhar with the teachings of McAlister to include the claimed features with the motivation to improve efficiency of data configuration for data validation.
As per claim 2, the modified teachings of Bhar and McAlister teaches the computing system of wherein in response to, via the graphical user interface, a first source dataset being selected having a first specification configuration, the configurable validation system is configured to scan and validate data from the first source dataset based on the first specification configuration (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.); and
wherein in response to, via the graphical user interface, a second source dataset being selected having a second specification configuration, the configurable validation system is configured to scan and validate data from the second source dataset based on the second specification configuration without reprogramming the configurable validation system (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.).
As per claim 3, the modified teachings of Bhar and McAlister teaches the computing system of claim 1, wherein the specification configuration of the selected source dataset includes:
a specifications module configured with customizable instructions that define at least a formatting of the selected source dataset that includes at least file structures of files and data structures of data that are expected to be found in the selected source dataset (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.); and
a specification rules module configured with customizable rules that define at least data format rules for data records and data fields in the selected source dataset that the data records and data fields are expected to comply with to be valid (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses receiving the ERP master data which based on specific configuration rules is extracted, validated and then mapped to target specific datasets, where the mapping process may involve converting the ERP master data into a format that is compatible with the target system.);
wherein the specifications module and the specification rules module are customizable for a different source dataset to dynamically control the configurable validation system to scan the different source dataset based on different format rules (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.).
As per claim 5, the modified teachings of Bhar and McAlister teaches the computing system of claim 4, wherein the configurable validation system further comprises:
a reporting module configured to generate an insights report from the scanning and validation of the selected source dataset and configured to display the insights report on the graphical user interface (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.); and
wherein the reporting module is configured to generate the insights report to include:
a file level summary based on the file level scan (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.);
a record level summary based on the record level scan (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses receiving the ERP master data which based on specific configuration rules is extracted, validated and then mapped to target specific datasets, where the mapping process may involve converting the ERP master data into a format that is compatible with the target system.); and
a field level summary based on the field level scan (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses receiving the ERP master data which based on specific configuration rules is extracted, validated and then mapped to target specific datasets, where the mapping process may involve converting the ERP master data into a format that is compatible with the target system.); and
wherein the insights report is generated to include actionable items to be performed for corrupt data prior to migrating the source dataset to a destination system (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.).
As per claim 6, the modified teachings of Bhar and McAlister teaches the computing system of claim 1, wherein the configurable validation system is further configured to identify how many files from the selected source dataset comply with the formatting rules and how many files did not comply with the formatting rules (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.).
As per claim 7, the modified teachings of Bhar and McAlister teaches the computing system of claim 1, wherein the configurable validation system is further configured to identify how many data records from the selected source dataset complied with the specification configuration and how many data records did not comply with the specification configuration (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.).
As per claim 8, the modified teachings of Bhar and McAlister teaches the computing system of claim 1, wherein the configurable validation system is further configured to:
generate a valid dataset that includes files and data records from the selected source dataset that comply with the specification configuration (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.); and
generate a corrupt dataset that includes files and data records from the selected source dataset that do not comply with the specification configuration (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.).
As per claim 9, the modified teachings of Bhar and McAlister teaches the computing system of claim 1, further comprising a second graphical user interface configured to provide options for generating and customizing new specification configurations to create different rules for scanning and validating different source datasets (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.).
As per claim 10, the modified teachings of Bhar and McAlister teaches the computing system of claim 1, further comprising:
a plurality of specification configurations, wherein each specification configuration is assigned to a particular source dataset from a plurality of source datasets that defines scanning rules and validating rules for the particular source dataset (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.); and
wherein the configurable validation system is configured to receive as input a selected specification configuration for scanning and validating an assigned source dataset (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.).
As per claim 11, Bhar teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium that includes stored thereon computer-executable instructions that implement a configurable validation system that when executed by at least a processor of a computer cause the computer to:
select a source dataset that is identified for migration to a destination system (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.);
generate and configure a specification configuration that defines at least file formats for files and data format rules for data records and data fields in the source dataset that the data records and data fields are to comply with to be valid (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.);
retrieve and input, into the configurable validation system, the specification configuration to provide the file formats and data format rules for scanning parameters and validation rules for scanning and validating the selected source dataset (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses receiving the ERP master data which based on specific configuration rules is extracted, validated and then mapped to target specific datasets, where the mapping process may involve converting the ERP master data into a format that is compatible with the target system.);
scan, by the configurable validation system, the selected source dataset based on the specification configuration to identify valid files and valid data records that comply with the specification configuration and to identify corrupt files and corrupt data records that do not comply with the specification configuration (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.); and
generate, based on the scan, an insights report that identifies at least the corrupt files and the corrupt data records, and generate actionable items to be performed to correct the corrupt files and the corrupt data records prior to migrating the selected source dataset to the destination system (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses receiving the ERP master data which based on specific configuration rules is extracted, validated and then mapped to target specific datasets, where the mapping process may involve converting the ERP master data into a format that is compatible with the target system.).
Bhar does not explicitly disclose wherein the configurable validation system is configured to be neutral to expected structures of files and data formats until adapted to the source dataset based on a specification configuration.
McAlister teaches wherein the configurable validation system is configured to be neutral to expected structures of files and data formats until adapted to the source dataset based on a specification configuration (e.g. The Examiner notes that the specification is silent with respect to the specification neutral, therefore the Examiner interprets neutral using the broadest reasonable interpretation in that specification neutral evaluations rules before performing the rules and therefore McAlister, see column 5, line 1 to column 6, line 65, which discloses the data migration service (DMS) connects to the source database, reads the source data set, and formats the source data set as target data set to be stored in the target database. Additionally, the system includes a data validation tool (DVT) that validates data being migrated from the source database to the target database, where DVT validates data being migrated from the source database, and can determine validation metrics (e.g. neutral) and store the validation metrics as validation results in a local data store.).
Bhar is directed to efficient data migration in enterprise resource planning systems. McAlister is directed to data validation of data migrated from a source database to a target database. Both are directed to data validation and therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Bhar with the teachings of McAlister to include the claimed features with the motivation to improve efficiency of data configuration for data validation.
As per claim 12, the modified teachings of Bhar and McAlister teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 11, further comprising instructions that when executed by at least the processor cause the processor to:
generate a valid dataset by storing the valid files and the valid data records from the selected source dataset that comply with the configurable specification configuration into the valid dataset (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.); and
generate a corrupt dataset by storing the corrupt files and the corrupt data records from the selected source dataset that do not comply with the configurable specification configuration into the corrupt dataset (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.).
As per claim 13, the modified teachings of Bhar and McAlister teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 11, wherein the configurable validation system includes an analytics module configured to scan the selected source dataset at multiple levels (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0045-0055], which discloses a configuration validation system that extracts ERP master data, where once mapping operation involves the creation of a correspondence is used to guide the conversion of the ERP master data to business partner specific data, where such mapping is stored and allows for a rapid and accurate conversion in the future.) comprising:
a file level scan based on at least file extensions to identify files and identify corrupt files based on whether the files comply with file rules from the specification configuration that define valid file types (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.);
a record level scan that scans and classifies data records in each file into record classifications including valid records, warning records, and error records based on the data record complying with data record rules from the specification configuration (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.); and
a field level scan that scans and classifies each data field in the data records for validating each data field into field classifications including valid fields, warning fields, and error fields based on the data field complying with data field rules from the specification configuration (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.).
As per claim 14, the modified teachings of Bhar and McAlister teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 13, wherein the configurable validation system further comprises:
a reporting module configured to generate an insights report from the scanning and validation of the selected source dataset and configured to display the insights report on a graphical user interface (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.);
wherein the reporting module is configured to generate the insights report to include:
a file level summary based on the file level scan; a record level summary based on the record level scan (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses receiving the ERP master data which based on specific configuration rules is extracted, validated and then mapped to target specific datasets, where the mapping process may involve converting the ERP master data into a format that is compatible with the target system.); and
a field level summary based on the field level scan (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses receiving the ERP master data which based on specific configuration rules is extracted, validated and then mapped to target specific datasets, where the mapping process may involve converting the ERP master data into a format that is compatible with the target system.); and
wherein the insights report is generated to include actionable items to be performed for corrupt data prior to migrating the source dataset to the destination system (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.).
As per claim 15, the modified teachings of Bhar and McAlister teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 11, wherein the specification configuration includes:
a specifications module configured with customizable instructions that define at least a formatting of the selected source dataset that includes at least file structures of files and data structures of data that are expected to be found in the selected source dataset (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.); and
a specification rules module configured with customizable instructions that define at least data format rules for data records and data fields in the selected source dataset that the data records and data fields are expected to comply with to be valid (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.).
As per claim 16, the modified teachings of Bhar and McAlister teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 11, wherein specification configuration is customizable for a different source dataset to dynamically control the configurable validation system to scan the different source dataset based on different format rules (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.).
As per claim 17, the modified teachings of Bhar and McAlister teaches the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 11, further comprising instructions that when executed by at least the processor cause the processor to:
provide a graphical user interface configured to provide options for customizing the specification configuration to create different rules for scanning and validating different source datasets (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses receiving the ERP master data which based on specific configuration rules is extracted, validated and then mapped to target specific datasets, where the mapping process may involve converting the ERP master data into a format that is compatible with the target system.).
As per claim 18, Bhar teaches a computer-implemented method, the method comprising:
selecting, via a graphical user interface, a source dataset (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses receiving the ERP master data which based on specific configuration rules is extracted, validated and then mapped to target specific datasets, where the mapping process may involve converting the ERP master data into a format that is compatible with the target system.);
selecting, via the graphical user interface, a specification configuration that defines at least file formats for files and data format rules for data records and data fields in the source dataset that the data records and data fields are to comply with to be valid (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.);
retrieve and input, into a configurable validation system, the specification configuration to provide the file formats and data format rules for scanning parameters and validation rules for scanning and validating the source dataset (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.);
executing, by at least a processor, the configurable validation system wherein the configurable validation system performs the scanning and validating based on the specification configuration (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses receiving the ERP master data which based on specific configuration rules is extracted, validated and then mapped to target specific datasets, where the mapping process may involve converting the ERP master data into a format that is compatible with the target system.);
scanning and validating, by the configurable validation system, the selected source dataset based on the specification configuration (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0045-0055], which discloses a configuration validation system that extracts ERP master data, where once mapping operation involves the creation of a correspondence is used to guide the conversion of the ERP master data to business partner specific data, where such mapping is stored and allows for a rapid and accurate conversion in the future.);
wherein the scanning and validating includes identifying valid files and valid data records that comply with the specification configuration and identifying invalid files and invalid data records that do not comply with the specification configuration (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.);
generating a valid dataset that includes the valid files and the valid data records from the selected source dataset that are found to comply with the specification configuration during the scanning; and
generating an invalid dataset that includes the invalid files and the invalid data records from the selected source dataset that are found to not comply with the specification configuration during the scanning (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses receiving the ERP master data which based on specific configuration rules is extracted, validated and then mapped to target specific datasets, where the mapping process may involve converting the ERP master data into a format that is compatible with the target system.).
Bhar does not explicitly disclose wherein the configurable validation system is configured to be neutral to expected structures of files and data formats until adapted to the source dataset based on a specification configuration.
McAlister teaches wherein the configurable validation system is configured to be neutral to expected structures of files and data formats until adapted to the source dataset based on a specification configuration (e.g. The Examiner notes that the specification is silent with respect to the specification neutral, therefore the Examiner interprets neutral using the broadest reasonable interpretation in that specification neutral evaluations rules before performing the rules and therefore McAlister, see column 5, line 1 to column 6, line 65, which discloses the data migration service (DMS) connects to the source database, reads the source data set, and formats the source data set as target data set to be stored in the target database. Additionally, the system includes a data validation tool (DVT) that validates data being migrated from the source database to the target database, where DVT validates data being migrated from the source database, and can determine validation metrics (e.g. neutral) and store the validation metrics as validation results in a local data store.).
Bhar is directed to efficient data migration in enterprise resource planning systems. McAlister is directed to data validation of data migrated from a source database to a target database. Both are directed to data validation and therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Bhar with the teachings of McAlister to include the claimed features with the motivation to improve efficiency of data configuration for data validation.
As per claim 19, the modified teachings of Bhar and McAlister teaches the method of claim 18, further comprising:
generating and displaying a graphical user interface configured with selectable options and input fields for configuring the specification configuration (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.);
wherein the specification configuration includes:
a first set of customizable instructions that define at least a formatting of the source dataset that includes at least file structures of files and data structures of data that are used for scanning the source dataset (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses receiving the ERP master data which based on specific configuration rules is extracted, validated and then mapped to target specific datasets, where the mapping process may involve converting the ERP master data into a format that is compatible with the target system.); and
a second set of customizable instructions that define at least data format rules for data records and data fields in the source dataset that the data records and data fields are expected to comply with to be valid (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs [0042-0048], which discloses a system that includes a display where source and target databases are used, where the operation starts with the extraction of ERP master data from the source data and then once extracted, the data is validated at the database layer.).
As per claim 20, the modified teachings of Bhar and McAlister teaches the method of claim 18, wherein the configurable validation system is data format agnostic and is dynamically changeable to scan a different source dataset by inputting a different specification configuration into the configurable validation system to control data validation (e.g. Bhar, see paragraphs 0042-0045], which discloses a data migration process that includes customer defined master tables, systems delivered master data tables, and/or customized tables in relevance to master data tables, where such tables comprises of variables used to validate data.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. See attached PTO-892 that includes additional prior art of record describing the general state of the art in which the invention is directed to.
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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARHAN M SYED whose telephone number is (571)272-7191. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30AM-5:30PM.
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, Apu Mofiz can be reached at 571-272-4080. 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.
/FARHAN M SYED/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2161 March 2, 2026