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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/21/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 31-38, 40, 42-50 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory Obviousness-Type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-29 of Patent No. 12,158,894. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter claimed in the claims of the instant application is fully disclosed and covered by the Patent No. 12,158,894 (see table below).
“A later patent claim is not patentably distinct from an earlier patent claim if the later claim is obvious over, or anticipated by, the earlier claim. In re Longi, 759 F.2d at 896, 225 USPQ at 651 (affirming a holding of obviousness-type double patenting because the claims at issue were obvious over claims in four prior art patents); In re Berg, 140 F.3d at 1437, 46 USPQ2d at 1233 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (affirming a holding of obviousness-type double patenting where a patent application claim to a genus is anticipated by a patent claim to a species within that genus). “ELI LILLY AND COMPANY v BARR LABORATORIES, INC., United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC (DECIDED: May 30, 2001).
Claim 39 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory Obviousness-Type double patenting as being unpatentable over Patent No. 12,158,894 (hereinafter PAT ’894) in view of BV et al. (US 20230352055, hereinafter BV).
Regarding to claim 39: PAT’894 doesn’t explicitly teach but BV discloses wherein the pre-built template is identified from a plurality of pre-built templates by a large language model (LLM) (BV - [0124]: machine learning model 225 chooses an optimal template from a set of pre-defined templates).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of PAT’894 with BV so that pre-defined template can be chosen using LLM. The modification would have allowed the system to improve efficiency.
Claim 41 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory Obviousness-Type double patenting as being unpatentable over Patent No. 12,158,894 (hereinafter PAT’894) in view of Hunt et al. (US 11861263, hereinafter Hunt).
Regarding to claim 41: PAT’894 doesn’t explicitly teach but Hunt discloses wherein the list of instructions of the LLM are executed to build one or more stages or one or more actions for each of the one or more stages of the cloud application (Hunt - [Col. 3, Line 1-4]: As another example of generating a request embedding, current state data can be separately processed, using a separate machine learning model, to generate a state data embedding).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of PAT’894 with Hunt so that LLM is used to generate state data of application. The modification would have allowed the system to embedding state data.
18/923,491
18/340,510 (12,158,894)
31. A method for providing a data-driven workflow platform, the method comprising:
providing, by the data-driven workflow platform, a first graphical user interface (GUI) for
mapping one or more data fields of selected data objects to one or more elements of the data- driven workflow platform, wherein the selected data objects are stored in a data cloud configuration that is distinct from, and operatively coupled to, the data-driven workflow platform, and wherein the mapping comprises defining a relationship between the selected data objects and the one or more elements of the data-driven workflow platform;
displaying, by the data-driven workflow platform, a second graphical user interface (GUI) for building a cloud application utilizing or managing the selected data objects, wherein the second GUI permits a user to add, remove, or modify one or more components of the cloud application, and wherein the second GUI displays at least one graphical element corresponding to a rule for automating an action triggered by a triggering event of the selected data objects; and
providing or executing the cloud application built to automatically detect the triggering event of the selected data objects in the data cloud configuration and automatically perform the action on at least one of the selected data objects without extracting or loading the selected data objects from the data cloud configuration and without moving the selected data objects to the data-driven workflow platform.
1. A method for providing a data-driven workflow platform, the method comprising:
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the relationship is defined by a user via the GUI.
mapping one or more data fields of selected data objects to one or more elements of a data storage model of the data-driven workflow platform, wherein the selected data objects are stored in a data cloud configuration that is distinct from, and operatively coupled to, the data-driven workflow platform, and wherein the mapping comprises defining a relationship between the selected data objects and the one or more elements of the data storage model;
displaying, on a graphical user interface (GUI) of the data-driven workflow platform, a flow for building a cloud application utilizing or managing the selected data objects, wherein the flow permits a user to add, remove, or modify one or more components of the cloud application, and wherein the flow comprises at least one graphical element corresponding to a rule for automating an action triggered by a triggering event of the selected data objects; and
executing the cloud application built using the flow displayed on the GUI of the data-driven workflow platform to automatically detect the triggering event of the selected data objects in the data cloud configuration and automatically perform the action on at least one of the selected data objects without extracting or loading the selected data objects from the data cloud configuration and without moving the selected data objects to the data-driven workflow platform.
32. The method of claim 31, wherein the data cloud configuration comprises one or more data clouds storing data objects, and wherein the data-driven workflow platform is granted permission to access, process, and edit the data objects stored on the one or more data clouds.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the data cloud configuration comprises one or more data clouds storing data objects, and wherein the data-driven workflow platform is granted permission to access, process, and edit the data objects stored on the one or more data clouds.
33. The method of claim 31, wherein the relationship is defined by a user via the first GUI.
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the relationship is defined by a user via the GUI.
34. The method of claim 31, wherein the relationship is automatically generated by the data-driven workflow platform and displayed on the first GUI as a recommended relationship.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the relationship is automatically generated by the data-driven workflow platform and displayed on the GUI as a recommended relationship.
35. The method of claim 31, wherein mapping the one or more data fields of the selected data objects to the one or more elements of the data-driven workflow platform comprises identifying a missing element and prompting the user to identify another set of data objects for the missing element.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein mapping the selected data objects to the data storage model comprises identifying a missing element from the data storage model and prompting a user to identify another set of data objects for the missing element.
36. The method of claim 31, wherein the second GUI permits the user to add, remove or modify one or more components of the cloud application by dragging and dropping one or more graphical elements to the cloud application.
9. The method of claim 1, wherein the flow permits a user to add, remove or modify one or more components of the cloud application by dragging and dropping one or more graphical elements to the flow.
37. The method of claim 36, wherein the cloud application comprises a pre-built template prompting the user to add, remove or modify the one or more components.
10. The method of claim 9, wherein the flow comprises a pre-built template flow prompting the user to add, remove or modify the one or more components.
38. The method of claim 37, wherein the pre-built template is automatically determined based at least in part on the selected data objects.
11. The method of claim 10, wherein the pre-built template flow is automatically determined based at least in part on the selected data objects and the cloud application.
39. The method of claim 38, wherein the pre-built template is identified from a plurality of pre-built templates by a large language model (LLM).
40. The method of claim 39, wherein an output of the LLM comprises a list of instructions for creating the cloud application.
28. The method of claim 26, wherein an output of the LLM comprises a list of instructions for creating the flow.
41. The method of claim 40, wherein the list of instructions of the LLM are executed to build one or more stages or one or more actions for each of the one or more stages of the cloud application.
42. The method of claim 31, wherein the rule comprises a definition of the triggering event and wherein the triggering event is time-based, or is associated with a change of value or a change of status of at least a subset of the selected data objects.
17. The method of claim 1, wherein the rule comprises a definition of the triggering event and wherein the triggering event is time-based, or is associated with a change of value or a change of status of at least a subset of the selected data objects.
43. The method of claim 42, wherein the rule further comprises a definition of condition for executing the action.
18. The method of claim 17, wherein the rule further comprises a definition of condition for executing the action.
44. The method of claim 42, wherein the rule further comprises a definition of the action.
19. The method of claim 17, wherein the rule further comprises a definition of the action.
45. The method of claim 44, wherein the action is selected from the group consisting of add a watcher, update a field, send a notification, post a comment, assign to a user or a group, and create a record.
20. The method of claim 19, wherein the action is selected from the group consisting of add a watcher, update a field, send a notification, post a comment, assign to a user or a group, and create a record.
46. The method of claim 31, wherein the triggering event of the selected data objects includes a change of the selected data objects stored in the data cloud configuration.
25. The method of claim 1, wherein the triggering event of the selected data objects includes a change of the selected data objects stored in the data cloud configuration.
47. The method of claim 31, further comprising receiving an instruction to perform an operation on at least one of the selected data objects via the data-driven workflow platform and executing the operation on the at least one of the selected data objects in the data cloud configuration without using an extract, transform, load (ETL) or an extract, load, transform (ELT) data integration process.
23. The method of claim 21, further comprising receiving an instruction to perform an operation on at least one of the selected data objects via the GUI and executing the operation on the at least one of the selected data objects in the data cloud configuration without using an extract, transform, load (ETL) or an extract, load, transform (ELT) data integration process.
48. (New) A system for providing a data-driven workflow platform, the system comprising at least one processor and instructions executable to cause the at least one processor to perform operations comprising:
providing a first graphical user interface (GUI) for
mapping one or more data fields of selected data objects to one or more elements of the data-driven workflow platform, wherein the selected data objects are stored in a data cloud configuration that is distinct from, and operatively coupled to, the data-driven workflow platform, and wherein the mapping comprises defining a relationship between the selected data objects and the one or more elements of the data-driven workflow platform;
displaying a second graphical user interface (GUI) for building a cloud application utilizing or managing the selected data objects, wherein the second GUI permits a user to add, remove, or modify one or more components of the cloud application, and wherein the second GUI displays at least one graphical element corresponding to a rule for automating an action triggered by a triggering event of the selected data objects; and
providing or executing the cloud application built to automatically detect the triggering event of the selected data objects in the data cloud configuration and automatically perform the action on at least one of the selected data objects without extracting or loading the selected data objects from the data cloud configuration and without moving the selected data objects to the data-driven workflow platform.
29. A system for providing a data-driven workflow platform, the system comprising at least one processor and instructions executable to cause the at least one processor to perform operations comprising:
operatively coupling the data-driven workflow platform to one or more data clouds distinct from the data-driven workflow platform;
4. The method of claim 1, wherein the relationship is defined by a user via the GUI.
mapping one or more data fields of selected data objects to one or more elements of a data storage model of the data-driven workflow platform, wherein the selected data objects are stored on the one or more data clouds, and wherein the mapping comprises defining a relationship between the selected data objects and the one or more elements of the data storage model;
displaying, on a graphical user interface (GUI) of the data-driven workflow platform, a flow for building a cloud application utilizing or managing the selected data objects, wherein the flow permits a user to add, remove, or modify one or more components of the cloud application, and wherein the flow comprises at least one graphical element corresponding to a rule for automating an action triggered by a triggering event of the selected data objects; and
executing the cloud application built using the flow displayed on the GUI of the data-driven workflow platform to automatically detect the triggering event of the selected data objects in the data cloud configuration and automatically perform the action on at least one of the selected data objects without extracting or loading the selected data objects from the data cloud configuration and without moving the selected data objects to the data-driven workflow platform.
49. (New) The system of claim 48, wherein the data cloud configuration comprises one or more data clouds storing data objects, and wherein the data-driven workflow platform is granted permission to access, process, and edit the data objects stored on the one or more data clouds.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the data cloud configuration comprises one or more data clouds storing data objects, and wherein the data-driven workflow platform is granted permission to access, process, and edit the data objects stored on the one or more data clouds.
50. The system of claim 48, wherein the second GUI permits the user to add, remove or modify one or more components of the cloud application by dragging and dropping one or more graphical elements to the cloud application.
9. The method of claim 1, wherein the flow permits a user to add, remove or modify one or more components of the cloud application by dragging and dropping one or more graphical elements to the flow.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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.
Claims 32-50 are 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(s) 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 inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Specifically, while the claim recites “providing or executing the cloud application built to automatically detect the triggering event of the selected data objects in the data cloud configuration and automatically perform the action on at least one of the selected data objects without extracting or loading the selected data objects from the data cloud configuration and without moving the selected data objects to the data-driven workflow platform”, the specification lacks a detailed description of how the system executing the cloud application without extracting or loading the selected object. As a result, the disclosure does not appear to show possession of the full breadth of the claimed anomaly-determination function, particularly if the claim is read to cover broad or ML-based implementations.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 31-50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 31 and 48 recite that the platform detects triggering events in selected data objects stored in a distinct data cloud configuration and performs actions on those data objects “without extracting or loading” the data objects and “without moving” them to the platform. The specification, however, describes embodiments involving streaming data and/or insights, buffering, and caching intermediary results. See, e.g., paragraphs [0011], [0119] and [0121]. Because the claims do not explain whether temporary reads, buffering, caching, serialization, or streaming constitute “extracting,” “loading,” or “moving,” the metes and bounds of the negative limitation are unclear. At minimum, this language warranted consideration of a § 112(b) rejection. Further, because the specification appears to support a narrower concept—namely, avoiding conventional ETL/ELT, downloading, or persistent relocation of data—rather than an absolute prohibition on any extracting, loading, or moving whatsoever.
Claim 35 recites “identifying a missing element” and prompting the user to identify another set of data objects “for the missing element.” As claimed, that phrase lacks an objective reference point because the claim does not specify what set of elements is being evaluated or from what the element is “missing.”
Dependent claims 32-47 and 49-50 are also rejected for inheriting the deficiencies of the independent claims from which they depend on.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 31-50 would be allowable if the double patent rejection, set forth in this Office action, are overcome.
The present application is a continuation of parent application no. 18/340,510, filed 03/27/2023, now U.S. Patent No. 12,158,894 (hereinafter PAT’894).
Each independent claims 31 and 48, when compared with the PAT’894, are found to be similar in scope than the respective independent claims 1 and 30 of the PAT’894 and the inventive concept of the instant application is still the same as the PAT’894. Specifically, the cited prior art on record does not specifically disclose, teach or suggest as a whole the limitation “wherein the mapping comprises defining a relationship between the selected data objects and the one or more elements of the data-driven workflow platform; displaying, by the data-driven workflow platform, a second graphical user interface (GUI) for building a cloud application utilizing or managing the selected data objects, wherein the second GUI permits a user to add, remove, or modify one or more components of the cloud application, and wherein the second GUI displays at least one graphical element corresponding to a rule for automating an action triggered by a triggering event of the selected data objects; and providing or executing the cloud application built to automatically detect the triggering event of the selected data objects in the data cloud configuration and automatically perform the action on at least one of the selected data objects without extracting or loading the selected data objects from the data cloud configuration and without moving the selected data objects to the data-driven workflow platform” including all the other limitation recited in the independent claims.
The limitations of the independent claims were searched, but did not result in any applicable prior art. After further consideration, each of the independent claims as a whole are allowable.
Dependent claims 32-47 and 49-50 are also allowable for incorporating the allowable feature recited in the independent claims.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MENG LI whose telephone number is (571)272-8729. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:30.
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, Alexander Lagor can be reached on (571) 270-5143. 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.
/MENG LI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2437
Prosecution Insights