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 .
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.
Examiner Notes
(1) In the case of amending the Claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention. This will assist in expediting compact prosecution. MPEP 714.02 recites: “Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP § 2163.06. An amendment which does not comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.121 (b), (c), (d), and (h) may be held not fully responsive. See MPEP § 714.” Amendments not pointing to specific support in the disclosure may be deemed as not complying with provisions of 37 C.F.R. 1.131 (b), (c), (d), and (h) and therefore held not fully responsive. Generic statements such as "Applicants believe no new matter has been introduced" may be deemed insufficient.
(2) Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Remarks
Receipt of Applicant’s Amendment file on 10/14/2025 is acknowledged.
Response to Arguments
Clerical errors regarding 101, 112s have been removed.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, and 11 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection (See new reference of Eksteen).
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 of this title, 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, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson, III et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,460,031 B1, referred as “Wilson”) in view of Eksteen et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,817,891 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Wilson teaches an electronic device configured to generate a structured query language (SQL) code, comprising: a transceiver; and a processor, coupled to the transceiver, wherein the processor is configured to:
provide […] a plurality of first level objects through a graphic user interface (Fig. 5, col. 5, line 29-67, each object contains multiple objects which belong to that objects; these objects are represented by graphical icon; a number of first level graphical icons represent a first set of parameters, or measures are provided to the user), and receive a first user command through the transceiver to select […] a first object from […] the plurality of first level objects comprise the first object (col. 5, line 65-67, the user then selects one of these first level graphical icons).
Wilson does not explicitly disclose: a first drop-down menu comprising a plurality of first level options respectively corresponding to said plurality of first level objects; a first option of said first object from the plurality of first level options.
Eksteen teaches: a first drop-down menu comprising a plurality of first level options respectively corresponding to said plurality of first level objects (col. 4, line 66-67, col. 5, line 1-10, displaying the metadata representation of at least a portion of the first subset of data objects, the first subset of attributes, or the first subset of relationship utilizing the user interface displaying one of a first list or a first dropdown list including at least a portion of the first subset of data objects); a first option of said first object from the plurality of first level options (col. 4, line 66-67, col. 5, line 1-10, displaying the metadata representation of at least a portion of the first subset of data objects, the first subset of attributes, or the first subset of relationship utilizing the user interface displaying one of a first list or a first dropdown list including at least a portion of the first subset of data objects; a selection of a first data object may be received; further, one of the second list or a second dropdown list including the first plurality of attributes of the first subset of attributes that are associated with the first data object may be displayed, in response to receiving the selection of the first data object).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include a first drop-down menu comprising a plurality of first level options respectively corresponding to said plurality of first level objects; a first option of said first object from the plurality of first level options into visual query of Wilson.
Motivation to do so would be to include a first drop-down menu comprising a plurality of first level options respectively corresponding to said plurality of first level objects; a first option of said first object from the plurality of first level options to address issue with user-built queries often result in performance and response issues, due to the propensity to execute non-optimal queries (Eksteen, col. 1, line 27-29).
Wilson as modified by Eksteen further teach:
in response to selecting the first option of the first object, provide a second dropdown menu comprising a plurality of second level options respectively corresponding to a second level objects belong to the first object through the graphic user interface (Eksteen, col. 4, line 66-67, col. 5, line 1-10, displaying the metadata representation of at least a portion of the first subset of data objects, the first subset of attributes, or the first subset of relationship utilizing the user interface displaying one of a first list or a first dropdown list including at least a portion of the first subset of data objects; a selection of a first data object may be received; further, one of the second list or a second dropdown list including the first plurality of attributes of the first subset of attributes that are associated with the first data object may be displayed, in response to receiving the selection of the first data object; while Wilson, col. 5, line 65-67, and col. 6, line 1-6, teaches the user then selects one of these first level graphical icons; based on this selection, a number of second level graphical icons representing a second set of parameters, or dimensions, which narrows the first parameters is provided); receive a second user command through the transceiver to select a second object from the plurality of second level objects (Wilson, col. 5, line 65-67, and col. 6, line 1-6, the user then select one of these second level graphical icons while Eksteen, col. 5, line 11-17, a selection of at least one of the first plurality of attributes may be received; in this case, the search query may be automatically generated based on receiving the selection of the at least one of the first plurality of attributes);
and generate the SQL code according to the first object and the second object (Wilson, col. 6, line 11, the first level graphical icons, the graphical icon represent grammatical connectors, and the second level graphical icons are placed in juxtaposition to each other to create a combined graphic representing the natural language statement; an MDX statement corresponding to these selection is generated and sent to the database storage mechanism; also see col. 4, line 59-61, the query language used is a multidimensional (MDX) query language supported by microsoft’s OLE DB; also see Fig. 7, col. 6, line 58-67 and col. 7, line 1-15, generating the portion of MDX statement which has been assigned to the RetailSector object; then the parameter can be further narrow at the user choice by the user’s selection of an item in the subsequent menu selection, such as the selection of the graphical icon represent the “by state” parameter; the system then generates the portion of MDX which has been assigned to the byState object; when the user completed the drill down to the level of particularity he desires, the SQL portions are assembled into the completed SQL statement, which is then communicate to the database management system);
output the SQL code through the transceiver, wherein the SQL code comprises a first source code corresponding to the first object and a second source code corresponding to the second object (Wilson, Fig. 7, col. 6, line 58-67 and col. 7, line 1-15, selection 702 of the graphical icon representing the parameter through the title bar navigator whose value the user wishes to view, for example, the value of the actual sales is selected; the system generates the portion of MDX statement which has been assigned to the RetailSector object; then the parameter can be further narrow at the user choice by the user’s selection of an item in the subsequent menu selection, such as the selection of the graphical icon represent the “by state” parameter; the system then generates the portion of MDX which has been assigned to the byState object; when the user completed the drill down to the level of particularity he desires, the SQL portions are assembled into the completed SQL statement, which is then communicate to the database management system).
Regarding claim 5, Wilson as modified by Eksteen teach all claimed limitations as set forth in rejection of claim 1, further teach wherein the processor is further configured to: provide a plurality of first level blocks respectively corresponding to the plurality of first level objects and a plurality of second level blocks respectively corresponding to the plurality of second level objects through the graphic user interface (Wilson, Fig. 7, col. 6, line 58-67 and col. 7, line 1-15, selection 702 of the graphical icon representing the parameter through the title bar navigator whose value the user wishes to view, for example, the value of the actual sales is selected; the system generates the portion of MDX statement which has been assigned to the RetailSector object; then the parameter can be further narrow at the user choice by the user’s selection of an item in the subsequent menu selection, such as the selection of the graphical icon represent the “by state” parameter; the system then generates the portion of MDX which has been assigned to the byState object; when the user completed the drill down to the level of particularity he desires, the SQL portions are assembled into the completed SQL statement, which is then communicate to the database management).
Regarding claim 10, Wilson as modified by Eksteen teach all claimed limitations as set forth in rejection of claim 1, further teach wherein the plurality of first level objects correspond to a clause of an SQL (Wilson, Fig. 7, col. 6, line 58-67 and col. 7, line 1-15, selection 702 of the graphical icon representing the parameter through the title bar navigator whose value the user wishes to view, for example, the value of the actual sales is selected; the system generates the portion of MDX statement which has been assigned to the RetailSector object; then the parameter can be further narrow at the user choice by the user’s selection of an item in the subsequent menu selection, such as the selection of the graphical icon represent the “by state” parameter; the system then generates the portion of MDX which has been assigned to the byState object; when the user completed the drill down to the level of particularity he desires, the SQL portions are assembled into the completed SQL statement, which is then communicate to the database management system).
As per claim 11, this claim is rejected on grounds corresponding to the same rationales given above for rejected claim 1 and is similarly rejected.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson, III et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,460,031 B1, referred as “Wilson”) in view of Eksteen et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,817,891 B1), further in view of Mullins (U.S. Patent No. 5,857,197).
Regarding claim 4, Wilson as modified by Eksteen teach all claimed limitations as set forth in rejection of claim 1, but do not explicitly disclose further comprising: a storage medium, coupled to the processor, and configured to store a lookup table, wherein the lookup table comprises a mapping relationship between the first object and the first source code, and the processor is further configured to: in response to the first option being selected, query the lookup table to obtain the first source code corresponding to the first object.
Mullins teaches: a storage medium, coupled to the processor, and configured to store a lookup table, wherein the lookup table comprises a mapping relationship between the first object and the first source code, and the processor is further configured to: in response to the first option being selected, query the lookup table to obtain the first source code corresponding to the first object (col. 5, line 50-61, access code corresponding to the command is centrally crated and managed in a central repository; such central repository architecture allows object schema to be res-used across object and object application; also see col. 7, line 28-35, send a request for an object (possibly including an object data with lookup attributes) to matched located in at least one data store such as object data store 312; also see col. 9, line 19-30, the object schema to build an SQL statement at runtime, when is then executed to get the desired results; because multiple statements are likely to be executed against a given class type once it has been accessed once, the present invention caches the metadata for the class in the memory, within the second adapter and saves pre-compiled versions of the access code which can simple be re-executed without recompile; also see col. 9, line 48-67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include a storage medium, coupled to the processor, and configured to store a lookup table, wherein the lookup table comprises a mapping relationship between the first object and the first source code, and the processor is further configured to: in response to the first option being selected, query the lookup table to obtain the first source code corresponding to the first object into visual query of Wilson.
Motivation to do so would be to include a storage medium, coupled to the processor, and configured to store a lookup table, wherein the lookup table comprises a mapping relationship between the first object and the first source code, and the processor is further configured to: in response to the first option being selected, query the lookup table to obtain the first source code corresponding to the first object to allow object schema to be re-used across objects and object applications (Mullins, col. 5, line 55-57).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson, III et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,460,031 B1, referred as “Wilson”) in view of Eksteen et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,817,891 B1), further in view of Liang (U.S. Pub. No. 2007/0260582 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Wilson as modified by Eksteen teach all claimed limitations as set forth in rejection of claim 5, but do not explicitly disclose: wherein the processor is further configured to: provide an operating area through the graphic user interface; drag a first block of the plurality of first level blocks to the operating area according to the first user command, wherein the first block corresponds to the first object; drag a second block of the plurality of second level blocks to the operating area according to the second user command to combine with the first block and generate a combined block, wherein the second block corresponds to the second object; and generate a SQL code based on the combined block.
Liang teaches: wherein the processor is further configured to: provide an operating area through the graphic user interface; drag a first block of the plurality of first level blocks to the operating area according to the first user command, wherein the first block corresponds to the first object (Liang, paragraph [0032], a user can compose a new queries or change existing queries by dragging a table or a column, an placing it at a position that ‘signals’ the type of relationship to be created for the tables; the tables are manipulatable around a workspace, e.gl., by dragging them to locations within a GUI and how are placed relative to each other automatically determines a default relationship between tables); drag a second block of the plurality of second level blocks to the operating area according to the second user command to combine with the first block and generate a combined block, wherein the second block corresponds to the second object; and generate a SQL code based on the combined block (Liang, paragraph [0032], a user can compose a new queries or change existing queries by dragging a table or a column, an placing it at a position that ‘signals’ the type of relationship to be created for the tables; the tables are manipulatable around a workspace, e.g., by dragging them to locations within a GUI and how are placed relative to each other automatically determines a default relationship between tables; also see Fig. 3, paragraph [0033], the relationship between sub-queries in a composite query are visually encoded by their relative position; a composite query created from the join of two table is displayed a two tables side-by-side, with the join columns connected to show the join relationship; the composite query created from the concatenation of two tables, which could be the union, intersection, or subtractions of the two sub-queries, is displayed as two tables one above the other, with a vertical connector showing the type of relationship).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include wherein the processor is further configured to: provide an operating area through the graphic user interface; drag a first block of the plurality of first level blocks to the operating area according to the first user command, wherein the first block corresponds to the first object; drag a second block of the plurality of second level blocks to the operating area according to the second user command to combine with the first block and generate a combined block, wherein the second block corresponds to the second object; and generate a SQL code based on the combined block into visual query of Wilson.
Motivation to do so would be to include wherein the processor is further configured to: provide an operating area through the graphic user interface; drag a first block of the plurality of first level blocks to the operating area according to the first user command, wherein the first block corresponds to the first object; drag a second block of the plurality of second level blocks to the operating area according to the second user command to combine with the first block and generate a combined block, wherein the second block corresponds to the second object; and generate a SQL code based on the combined block to effectively solve the problem of dealing with the complexities of SQL, it is important to provide a mechanism with the proper balance of ease of use, and at the same time with enough flexibility to meet every day requirements (Liang, paragraph [0014], line 1-4).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson, III et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,460,031 B1, referred as “Wilson”) in view of Eksteen et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,817,891 B1) and Liang (U.S. Pub. No. 2007/0260582 A1), further in view of Mullins (U.S. Patent No. 5,857,197).
Regarding claim 7, Wilson as modified by Eksteen and Liang teach all claimed limitations as set forth in rejection of claim 6, but do not explicitly disclose: a storage medium, coupled to the processor, and configured to store a lookup table, wherein the lookup table comprises a mapping relationship between the first object and the first source code.
Mullins teaches: a storage medium, coupled to the processor, and configured to store a lookup table, wherein the lookup table comprises a mapping relationship between the first object and the first source code (col. 5, line 50-61, access code corresponding to the command is centrally crated and managed in a central repository; such central repository architecture allows object schema to be res-used across object and object application; also see col. 7, line 28-35, send a request for an object (possibly including an object data with lookup attributes) to matched located in at least one data store such as object data store 312; also see col. 9, line 19-30, the object schema to build an SQL statement at runtime, when is then executed to get the desired results; because multiple statements are likely to be executed against a given class type once it has been accessed once, the present invention caches the metadata for the class in the memory, within the second adapter and saves pre-compiled versions of the access code which can simple be re-executed without recompile; also see col. 9, line 48-67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include a storage medium, coupled to the processor, and configured to store a lookup table, wherein the lookup table comprises a mapping relationship between the first object and the first source code into visual query of Wilson.
Motivation to do so would be to include a storage medium, coupled to the processor, and configured to store a lookup table, wherein the lookup table comprises a mapping relationship between the first object and the first source code to allow object schema to be re-used across objects and object applications (Mullins, col. 5, line 55-57).
Wilson as modified Eksteen, Liang and Mullins further teach: and the processor is further configured to: in response to the first block being dragged to the operating area, query the lookup table to obtain the first source code corresponding to the first object (Mullins, col. 5, line 50-61, access code corresponding to the command is centrally crated and managed in a central repository; such central repository architecture allows object schema to be res-used across object and object application; also see col. 7, line 28-35, send a request for an object (possibly including an object data with lookup attributes) to matched located in at least one data store such as object data store 312; also see col. 9, line 19-30, the object schema to build an SQL statement at runtime, when is then executed to get the desired results; because multiple statements are likely to be executed against a given class type once it has been accessed once, the present invention caches the metadata for the class in the memory, within the second adapter and saves pre-compiled versions of the access code which can simple be re-executed without recompile; also see col. 9, line 48-67; in combination with the teaching of dragging object to the workspace taught by Liang (paragraph [0032], a user can compose a new queries or change existing queries by dragging a table or a column, an placing it at a position that ‘signals’ the type of relationship to be created for the tables; the tables are manipulatable around a workspace, e.g., by dragging them to locations within a GUI and how are placed relative to each other automatically determines a default relationship between tables; also see Fig. 3, paragraph [0033], the relationship between sub-queries in a composite query are visually encoded by their relative position; a composite query created from the join of two table is displayed a two tables side-by-side, with the join columns connected to show the join relationship; the composite query created from the concatenation of two tables, which could be the union, intersection, or subtractions of the two sub-queries, is displayed as two tables one above the other, with a vertical connector showing the type of relationship), it teaches as claimed).
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wilson, III et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,460,031 B1, referred as “Wilson”) in view of Eksteen et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,817,891 B1), further in view of Aversano et al. (Patent No. 11,269,889 B1).
Regarding claim 8, Wilson as modified by Eksteen teach all claimed limitations as set forth in rejection of claim 1, but do not explicitly disclose: wherein the processor is further configured to: access a data source according to the SQL code through the transceiver to obtain data (Wilson, Fig. 7, col. 6, line 58-67 and col. 7, line 1-15, selection 702 of the graphical icon representing the parameter through the title bar navigator whose value the user wishes to view, for example, the value of the actual sales is selected; the system generates the portion of MDX statement which has been assigned to the RetailSector object; then the parameter can be further narrow at the user choice by the user’s selection of an item in the subsequent menu selection, such as the selection of the graphical icon represent the “by state” parameter; the system then generates the portion of MDX which has been assigned to the byState object; when the user completed the drill down to the level of particularity he desires, the SQL portions are assembled into the completed SQL statement, which is then communicate to the database management system, then queries the database and retrieves the data from the data storage mechanism and returns it to the user) but does not explicitly disclose: generate a key-value pair according to the data.
Aversano teaches: generate a key-value pair according to the data (Fig. 1A-B and 2A, col. 5, line 61-67 and col. 6, line12-33, upon receives a request for access a data element in the user database through the REST API, the web service automatically generates one or more database queries, based on the data elements requested and additional search criteria; the web service retrieves meta data structures that correspond to the requested data element from a metadata database; one or more fields of one or more application data elements may be specified with the updated data element; the metadata database may be noSQL database,…, key value store…; the metadata database returns metadata structures associated with the updated data element).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include generating a key-value pair according to the data into visual query of Wilson.
Motivation to do so would be to include generating a key-value pair according to the data to address issue with require to hire employees or individuals who are talented and skilled in this highly necessary and valuable technological development process. Such individuals are typically hard to find and demand an extremely high salary, resulting in significant financial losses for a business (Aversano, col. 1, line 31-36).
Regarding claim 9, Wilson as modified by Eksteen and Aversano teach all claimed limitations as set forth in rejection of claim 8, further teach wherein the processor is further configured to: provide a plurality of application appearances for selection through the graphic user interface (Wilson, Fig. 7, col. 6, line 58-67 and col. 7, line 1-15, selection 702 of the graphical icon representing the parameter through the title bar navigator whose value the user wishes to view, for example, the value of the actual sales is selected); in response to a first application appearance of the plurality of application appearances being selected, display a graphic template of the first application appearance, wherein the graphic template comprises an editable object (Aversano, Fig. 1A-B and 2A, col. 5, line 61-67 and col. 6, line12-33, upon receives a request for access a data element in the user database through the REST API, the web service automatically generates one or more database queries, based on the data elements requested and additional search criteria; the web service retrieves meta data structures that correspond to the requested data element from a metadata database; through interaction with a GUI displayed by the browser, the user may update a data element; one or more fields of one or more application data elements may be specified with the updated data element; the metadata database may be noSQL database,…, key value store…; the metadata database returns metadata structures associated with the updated data element); specify the key-value pair for the editable object to update the graphic template (Aversano, Fig. 1A-B and 2A, col. 5, line 61-67 and col. 6, line12-33, upon receives a request for access a data element in the user database through the REST API, the web service automatically generates one or more database queries, based on the data elements requested and additional search criteria; the web service retrieves meta data structures that correspond to the requested data element from a metadata database; through interaction with a GUI displayed by the browser, the user may update a data element; one or more fields of one or more application data elements may be specified with the updated data element; the metadata database may be noSQL database,…, key value store…; the metadata database returns metadata structures associated with the updated data element; also see col. 7, line 35-43, the event includes information about an application data element being updated, such as a name of the application data element, a unique identifier of the application data element, and new field values); and generate an application according to the updated graphic template (Aversano, col. 8, line 66-67 and col. 9, line 1-20, based on the definition of the new field, GUI is updated to show the label, the data type and attribute indicator; in response to the definition of the fields of the application data element through the GUI, the web application updates the metadata description of the application data element with the new field information).
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEN HOANG whose telephone number is (571)272-8401. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-5:00pm.
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, Charles Rones can be reached at (571)272-4085. 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.
/KEN HOANG/ Examiner, Art Unit 2168
/ANHTAI V TRAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2168