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 .
Application # 18/924,416 was filed on 10/23/2024.
Claims 1-20 are subject to examination.
An IDS filed on 1/27/2025 has been fully considered and entered 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 § 2146 et seq. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 respectively are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 respectively of U.S. Patent No. 12,483,471 (hereinafter ‘471).
In this case, the instant application and the ‘471 patent claims are not patentably distinct from each other but they recite similar subject matter as shown below.
Application # 18/924,416 (instant application)
U.S. Patent # 12,483,471
Claim 1. A system for automatically updating validation rules used to detect and remediate network operation validation anomalies in conglomerate-application-based ecosystems, the system comprising: at least one hardware processor; and at least one non-transitory memory, storing instructions, which, when executed by the at least one hardware processor, cause the system to: dynamically monitor, via a network interface, a set of policy repositories, wherein each policy repositories of the set of policy repositories includes a first set of textual information of policies of a set of software applications and second set of textual information indicating requirements for generating validation reports of the set of software applications;
in response to dynamically monitoring the set of policy repositories, detect, by the network interface, a set of updates in the first set of textual information of one or more policy repositories in the set of policy repositories, wherein one or more updates in the set of updates includes a textual representation of a policy update;
in response to detecting the set of updates in the first set of textual information of the one or more policy repositories, for each particular update in the set of updates, update a communication map by: retrieving the communication map defining a set of parent-child relationships between a set of validation rules of the set of software applications, and providing the particular update and the communication map to a rule evaluation model to generate an updated communication map using the particular update; detect a transmission of a first network operation to a particular software application of the set of software applications, wherein the first network operation is configured to operate as input into the particular software application, and wherein the particular software application is configured to generate a second network operation as output, using the first network operation; provide the first network operation, the second network operation, and the updated communication map to a validation model configured to generate a validation status indicating a validity of the second network operation; provide the validation status, the updated communication map, the second set of textual information, the first network operation, and the second network operation to a large-language model to generate a validation report consistent with the requirements of the second set of textual information; and in response to generating the validation report, transmit the validation report to a server of the one or more policy repositories.
Claim 1. A system for automatically updating validation rules used to detect and remediate network operation validation anomalies in conglomerate-application-based ecosystems, the system comprising: at least one hardware processor; and at least one non-transitory memory, storing instructions, which, when executed by the at least one hardware processor, cause the system to: dynamically monitor, via a network interface, a set of policy repositories, wherein each policy repository of the set of policy repositories includes a first set of textual information of policies of a set of software applications and second set of textual information indicating requirements for generating validation reports of the set of software applications, wherein the requirements for generating validation reports specify required sections comprising at least one of: compliance information, detected anomaly information, or recommended corrective actions; in response to dynamically monitoring the set of policy repositories, detect, by the network interface, a set of updates in the first set of textual information of one or more policy repositories in the set of policy repositories, wherein one or more updates in the set of updates includes a textual representation of a policy update;
in response to detecting the set of updates in the first set of textual information of the one or more policy repositories, for each particular update in the set of updates, update a communication map by: retrieving the communication map defining a set of parent-child relationships between a set of validation rules of the set of software applications, and providing the particular update and the communication map to a rule evaluation model to generate an updated communication map using the particular update; detect a transmission of a first network operation to a particular software application of the set of software applications, wherein the first network operation is configured to operate as input into the particular software application, and wherein the particular software application is configured to generate a second network operation as output, using the first network operation; provide the first network operation, the second network operation, and the updated communication map to a validation model configured to generate a validation status indicating a validity of the second network operation; provide the validation status, the updated communication map, the second set of textual information, the first network operation, and the second network operation to a large-language model to generate a validation report consistent with the requirements of the second set of textual information, wherein the validation report includes the specified required sections of the requirements of the second set of textual information; and in response to generating the validation report, transmit the validation report to a server of the one or more policy repositories.
Claim 2. The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions for detecting the set of updates cause the system to: retrieve historical textual information of the one or more policy repositories; compare the historical textual information with the first set of textual information; in response to comparing the historical textual information with the first set of textual information, identify a text representative of a policy change of the one or more policy repositories; and store the text representative of the policy change as the set of updates.
Claim 3. The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions for generating the updated communication map cause the system to: determine, using the set of updates, a new validation rule of the one or more policy repositories; and generate the updated communication map to include the new validation rule.
Claim 4. The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions for generating the validation report cause the system to: extract from a validation report database, a set of historical validation reports of the one or more policy repositories; and provide the set of historical validation reports to the large-language model to generate the validation report using the set of historical validation reports.
Claim 5. The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions cause the system to: extract, from the one or more policy repositories, the second set of textual information; and provide the second set of textual information to a validation schema generation model to generate indications of one or more of: (1) a format, (2) a textual style, or (3) required validation information for inclusion in one or more validation reports of the one or more policy repositories.
Claim 6. The system of The system of wherein the instructions for generating the validation report cause the system to provide the indications of the format, the textual style, and the required validation information to the large-language model to generate the validation report, and wherein the validation report is consistent with the format and the textual style and includes the required validation information.
Claim 7. The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions further cause the system to: generate, at a user interface of a user device, a graphical representation of the updated communication map, wherein the graphical representation comprises graphical indications of the set of validation rules of the particular software application of the set of software applications; receive, from the user interface of the user device, a rule modification request comprising (i) a selection of a graphical indication of a first validation rule of the graphical representation of the communication map and (ii) an indication of a rule modification; and in response to receiving the rule modification request, modify the first validation rule of the updated communication map according to the rule modification.
Claim 8. non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions thereon, wherein the instructions when executed by at least one data processor of a system, cause the system to: dynamically monitor, via a network interface, a set of document repositories,wherein each document repositories of the set of document repositories includes a first set of textual information of guidelines of a set of software applications and second set of textual information indicating a set of criteria for generating validation reports of the set of software applications;in response to dynamically monitoring the set of document repositories, detect, by the network interface, a set of updates in the first set of textual information of one or more document repositories in the set of document repositories; in response to detecting the set of updates in the first set of textual information of the one or more document repositories, update a communication map by: retrieve the communication map defining a set of parent-child relationships between a set of validation rules of the set of software applications, and provide the set of updates and the communication map to a rule evaluation model to generate an updated communication map using the detected set of updates; detect a transmission of a first network operation to a particular software application of the set of software applications, wherein the first network operation is configured to operate as input into the particular software application, and wherein the particular software application is configured to generate a second network operation as output, using the first network operation; provide the first network operation, the second network operation, and the updated communication map to a validation model configured to generate a validation status indicating a validity of the second network operation; provide the validation status, the updated communication map, the second set of textual information, the first network operation, and the second network operation to a large-language model to generate a validation report satisfying the set of criteria of the second set of textual information; and in response to generating the validation report, transmit the validation report to a server of the one or more document repositories.
Claim 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, respectively, recite same subject as claims 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 respectively.
Claim 15. A method for automatically updating validation rules used to detect and remediate network operation validation anomalies in conglomerate-application-based ecosystems, the method comprising: dynamically monitoring, via a network interface, a set of document repositories,wherein each document repository of the set of document repositories includes a first set of textual information of guidelines of a set of software applications and second set of textual information indicating a set of criteria for generating validation reports of the set of software applications; in response to dynamically monitoring the set of document repositories, detecting, by the network interface, a set of updates in the first set of textual information of one or more document repositories in the set of document repositories; in response to detecting the set of updates in the first set of textual information of the one or more document repositories, for one or more updates in the set of updates, update a communication map by: retrieving the communication map defining a set of parent-child relationships between a set of validation rules of the set of software applications, and providing the one or more updates and the communication map to a rule evaluation model to generate an updated communication map using the set of updates; detecting a transmission of a first network operation to a particular software application of the set of software applications, wherein the first network operation is configured to operate as input into the particular software application, and wherein the particular software application is configured to generate a second network operation as output, using the first network operation; and providing the first network operation, the second network operation, and the updated communication map to an artificial intelligence model to generate a validation report satisfying the set of criteria of the second set of textual information.
Claim 16,17,18,19,20, respectively, recite same subject as claims 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 respectively.
Claim 2. The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions for detecting the set of updates cause the system to: retrieve historical textual information of the one or more policy repositories; compare the historical textual information with the first set of textual information; in response to comparing the historical textual information with the first set of textual information, identify a text representative of a policy change of the one or more policy repositories; and store the text representative of the policy change as the set of updates.
Claim 3. The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions for generating the updated communication map cause the system to: determine, using the set of updates, a new validation rule of the one or more policy repositories; and generate the updated communication map to include the new validation rule.
Claim 4. The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions for generating the validation report cause the system to: extract from a validation report database, a set of historical validation reports of the one or more policy repositories; and provide the set of historical validation reports to the large-language model to generate the validation report using the set of historical validation reports.
Claims 5. The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions cause the system to: extract, from the one or more policy repositories, the second set of textual information; and provide the second set of textual information to a validation schema generation model to generate indications of one or more of: (1) a format, (2) a textual style, or (3) required validation information for inclusion in one or more validation reports of the one or more policy repositories.
Claim 6. The system of claim 5, wherein the instructions for generating the validation report cause the system to provide the indications of the format, the textual style, and the required validation information to the large-language model to generate the validation report, and wherein the validation report is consistent with the format and the textual style and includes the required validation information.
Claim 7. The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions further cause the system to: generate, at a user interface of a user device, a graphical representation of the updated communication map, wherein the graphical representation comprises graphical indications of the set of validation rules of the particular software application of the set of software applications; receive, from the user interface of the user device, a rule modification request comprising (i) a selection of a graphical indication of a first validation rule of the graphical representation of the communication map and (ii) an indication of a rule modification; and in response to receiving the rule modification request, modify the first validation rule of the updated communication map according to the rule modification.
Claim 8. A non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions thereon, wherein the instructions when executed by at least one data processor of a system, cause the system to: dynamically monitor, via a network interface, a set of document repositories, wherein each document repository of the set of document repositories includes a first set of textual information of guidelines of a set of software applications and second set of textual information indicating a set of criteria for generating validation reports of the set of software applications, and wherein the set of criteria for generating validation reports specifies required sections comprising at least one of: compliance information, detected anomaly information, or recommended corrective actions; in response to dynamically monitoring the set of document repositories, detect, by the network interface, a set of updates in the first set of textual information of one or more document repositories in the set of document repositories; in response to detecting the set of updates in the first set of textual information of the one or more document repositories, update a communication map by: retrieve the communication map defining a set of parent-child relationships between a set of validation rules of the set of software applications, and provide the set of updates and the communication map to a rule evaluation model to generate an updated communication map using the detected set of updates; detect a transmission of a first network operation to a particular software application of the set of software applications, wherein the first network operation is configured to operate as input into the particular software application, and wherein the particular software application is configured to generate a second network operation as output, using the first network operation; provide the first network operation, the second network operation, and the updated communication map to a validation model configured to generate a validation status indicating a validity of the second network operation; provide the validation status, the updated communication map, the second set of textual information, the first network operation, and the second network operation to a large-language model to generate a validation report satisfying the set of criteria of the second set of textual information, wherein the validation report includes the specified required sections of the set of criteria of the second set of textual information; and in response to generating the validation report, transmit the validation report to a server of the one or more document repositories.Claim 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, respectively, recite same subject as claims 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 respectively.
Claim 15: A method for automatically updating validation rules used to detect and remediate network operation validation anomalies in conglomerate-application-based ecosystems, the method comprising: dynamically monitoring, via a network interface, a set of document repositories, wherein each document repository of the set of document repositories includes a first set of textual information of guidelines of a set of software applications and second set of textual information indicating a set of criteria for generating validation reports of the set of software applications, wherein the set of criteria for generating validation reports specify required sections comprising at least one of: compliance information, detected anomaly information, or recommended corrective actions; in response to dynamically monitoring the set of document repositories, detecting, by the network interface, a set of updates in the first set of textual information of one or more document repositories in the set of document repositories; in response to detecting the set of updates in the first set of textual information of the one or more document repositories, for one or more updates in the set of updates, update a communication map by: retrieving the communication map defining a set of parent-child relationships between a set of validation rules of the set of software applications, and providing the one or more updates and the communication map to a rule evaluation model to generate an updated communication map using the set of updates; detecting a transmission of a first network operation to a particular software application of the set of software applications, wherein the first network operation is configured to operate as input into the particular software application, and wherein the particular software application is configured to generate a second network operation as output, using the first network operation; and providing the first network operation, the second network operation, and the updated communication map to an artificial intelligence model to generate a validation report satisfying the set of criteria of the second set of textual information, wherein the validation report includes the specified required sections of the set of criteria of the second set of textual information.
Claim 16,17,18,19,20, respectively, recite same subject as claims 2, 3, 4, 5, 7 respectively.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1,3-8,10-15, 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Collins et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2018/0089249 (hereinafter Collins) in view of McCarthy et al. U.S. Patent # 11,765,207 (hereinafter McCarthy)
With respect to claim 1, Collins teaches a system for automatically updating validation rules used to detect and remediate network operation validation anomalies in conglomerate-application-based ecosystems, the system comprising:
-at least one hardware processor (Paragraph 80); and at least one non-transitory memory (Paragraph 80), storing instructions, which, when executed by the at least one hardware processor (Paragraph 80), cause the system to:
-dynamically monitor, via a network interface, a set of policy repositories, wherein each policy repositories of the set of policy repositories includes a first set of textual information of policies of a set of software applications and second set of textual information indicating requirements for generating validation reports of the set of software applications (i.e. validating policies including evaluating policies for syntactic errors and semantic errors, and policy store may persistently maintain policy types by persistently maintaining the policy schemas and corresponding metadata for the policy schemas. Policy store maybe implemented in a database or searchable/query-able storage system) (Paragraph 22, 37-38, 59, 72, 82);
-in response to dynamically monitoring the set of policy repositories, detect, by the network interface, a set of updates in the first set of textual information of one or more policy repositories in the set of policy repositories, wherein one or more updates in the set of updates includes a textual representation of a policy update (i.e. in turn resource management service may identify the appropriate updates to organization data to be made or to be read and send organization data updates/reads to hierarchical data storage) (Paragraph 51, 59, 72);
-in response to detecting the set of updates in the first set of textual information of the one or more policy repositories, for each particular update in the set of updates, update a communication map by: retrieving the communication map defining a set of parent-child relationships between a set of validation rules of the set of software applications (Paragraph 55-56, 60-62), and providing the particular update and the communication map to a rule evaluation model to generate an updated communication map using the particular update (i.e. policies can also be inherited in a chain from the organization down to a group, group of groups or individual resource data object. If a policy is applied to a parent node in the hierarchy, then the child node may inherit the policy of the parent node) (Paragraph 35, 47, 51, 59, 61, 70, 72);
detect a transmission of a first network operation to a particular software application of the set of software applications, wherein the first network operation is configured to operate as input into the particular software application (Paragraph 21-23), and wherein the particular software application is configured to generate a second network operation as output, using the first network operation (i.e. the code the tasks or other operations may be automatically run in response to various events…automatic scaling, provisioning, configuring and other operations to perform the code, tasks or operations. Also, deployment service may include resources to instantiate, deploy and scale other resources)(Paragraph 32, 38, 51, 59, 72)
provide the first network operation, the second network operation, and the updated communication map to a validation model configured to generate a validation status indicating a validity of the second network operation (i.e. for a policy that specific asynchronous validation, the client may not wait for the validation result to continue operating. In cases where asynchronous validation is performed, policy validation handling may track the state of validation for a policy)(Paragraph 63)
provide the validation status, the updated communication map, the second set of textual information, the first network operation, and the second network operation (Paragraph 32, 38, 51, 59, 63, 72) to a large-language model to generate a validation report consistent with the requirements of the second set of textual information; and in response to generating the validation report, transmit the validation report to a server of the one or more policy repositories (Paragraph 65)
Collins does not disclose a large-language model to generate a validation report. However, McCarthy disclose a large-language model to generate a validation report (column 18 lines 45-55). It would have been obvious skill in the art to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement McCarthy’s teaching in Collin’s teaching to come up with disclosing a large-language model to generate a validation report. The motivation for doing so would be to generate textual description of the validation report based on the identified update as specified in the tenant application (column 18 lines 45-55)(column 23 lines 38-44)
With respect to claim 3, Collins and McCarthy teaches the system of claim 1, but Collins further teaches wherein the instructions for generating the updated communication map cause the system to: determine, using the set of updates, a new validation rule of the one or more policy repositories (Paragraph 65, 22, 24, 47); and generate the updated communication map to include the new validation rule (Paragraph 38, 32, 51, 59, 63, 72)
With respect to claim 4, Collins and McCarthy teaches the system of claim 1, but Collins further teaches wherein the instructions for generating the validation report cause the system to: extract from a validation report database, a set of historical validation reports of the one or more policy repositories (Paragraph 32, 38, 51, 59); and provide the set of historical validation reports to the large-language model to generate the validation report using the set of historical validation reports (Paragraph 22, 24, 47, 49). Collins does not disclose a large-language model to generate a validation report. However, McCarthy disclose a large-language model to generate a validation report (column 18 lines 45-55). It would have been obvious skill in the art to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement McCarthy’s teaching in Collin’s teaching to come up with disclosing a large-language model to generate a validation report. The motivation for doing so would be to generate textual description of the validation report based on the identified update as specified in the tenant application (column 18 lines 45-55)(column 23 lines 38-44)
With respect to claim 5, Collins and McCarthy teaches the system of claim 1, but Collins further teaches wherein the instructions cause the system to: extract, from the one or more policy repositories, the second set of textual information (Paragraph 22, 32,38, 51); and provide the second set of textual information to a validation schema generation model to generate indications of one or more of: (1) a format, (2) a textual style, or (3) required validation information for inclusion in one or more validation reports of the one or more policy repositories (Paragraph 22, 32, 38)
With respect to claim 6, Collins and McCarthy teaches the system of claim 5, but Collins further teaches wherein the instructions for generating the validation report cause the system to provide the indications of the format, the textual style, and the required validation information to the large-language model to generate the validation report, and wherein the validation report is consistent with the format and the textual style and includes the required validation information (Paragraph 22, 24, 32, 38, 51, 59). Collins does not disclose a large-language model to generate a validation report. However, McCarthy disclose a large-language model to generate a validation report (column 18 lines 45-55). It would have been obvious skill in the art to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement McCarthy’s teaching in Collin’s teaching to come up with disclosing a large-language model to generate a validation report. The motivation for doing so would be to generate textual description of the validation report based on the identified update as specified in the tenant application (column 18 lines 45-55)(column 23 lines 38-44)
With respect to claim 7, Collins and McCarthy teaches the system of claim 1, but Collins further teaches wherein the instructions further cause the system to: generate, at a user interface of a user device, a graphical representation of the updated communication map, wherein the graphical representation comprises graphical indications of the set of validation rules of the particular software application of the set of software applications (i.e. interface may provide an API for requests from client which may be formatted and sent accordingly to the API via a command line interface or GUI) (Paragraph 64); receive, from the user interface of the user device, a rule modification request comprising (i) a selection of a graphical indication of a first validation rule of the graphical representation of the communication map (I.e. policy validation handling may direct validation upon policy application)(Paragraph 32, 38, 51, 59, 62-64, 71-72) and (ii) an indication of a rule modification; and in response to receiving the rule modification request, modify the first validation rule of the updated communication map according to the rule modification (Paragraph 32, 38, 51, 59, 62-64, 71-72)
With respect to claim 8, Collins teaches a non-transitory, computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions thereon, wherein the instructions when executed by at least one data processor of a system, cause the system to:
-dynamically monitor, via a network interface, a set of policy repositories, wherein each document depositories of the set of document repositories includes a first set of textual information of policies of a set of software applications and second set of textual information indicating a set of criteria for generating validation reports of the set of software applications (i.e. validating policies including evaluating policies for syntactic errors and semantic errors, and policy store may persistently maintain policy types by persistently maintaining the policy schemas and corresponding metadata for the policy schemas. Policy store maybe implemented in a database or searchable/query-able storage system) (Paragraph 22, 37-38, 59, 72, 82);
-in response to dynamically monitoring the set of document repositories, detect, by the network interface, a set of updates in the first set of textual information of one or more document repositories in the set of document repositories (i.e. in turn resource management service may identify the appropriate updates to organization data to be made or to be read and send organization data updates/reads to hierarchical data storage) (Paragraph 51, 59, 72);
-in response to detecting the set of updates in the first set of textual information of the one or more document repositories, update a communication map by: retrieving the communication map defining a set of parent-child relationships between a set of validation rules of the set of software applications, and provide the set of updates and the communication map to a rule evaluation model to generate an updated communication map using the detected set of updates (i.e. policies can also be inherited in a chain from the organization down to a group, group of groups or individual resource data object. If a policy is applied to a parent node in the hierarchy, then the child node may inherit the policy of the parent node) (Paragraph 35, 47, 51, 59, 61, 70, 72);
detect a transmission of a first network operation to a particular software application of the set of software applications, wherein the first network operation is configured to operate as input into the particular software application, and wherein the particular software application is configured to generate a second network operation as output, using the first network operation (i.e. the code the tasks or other operations may be automatically run in response to various events…automatic scaling, provisioning, configuring and other operations to perform the code, tasks or operations. Also, deployment service may include resources to instantiate, deploy and scale other resources)(Paragraph 32, 38, 51, 59, 72)
provide the first network operation, the second network operation, and the updated communication map to a validation model configured to generate a validation status indicating a validity of the second network operation (i.e. for a policy that specific asynchronous validation, the client may not wait for the validation result to continue operating. In cases where asynchronous validation is performed, policy validation handling may track the state of validation for a policy)(Paragraph 63)
provide the validation status, the updated communication map, the second set of textual information, the first network operation, and the second network operation (Paragraph 32, 38, 51, 59, 63, 72) to generate a report satisfying the set of criteria of the second set of textual information; and in response to generating the validation report, transmit the validation report to a server of the one or more document repositories (Paragraph 65)
Collins does not disclose a large-language model to generate a validation report. However, McCarthy disclose a large-language model to generate a validation report (column 18 lines 45-55). It would have been obvious skill in the art to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement McCarthy’s teaching in Collin’s teaching to come up with disclosing a large-language model to generate a validation report. The motivation for doing so would be to generate textual description of the validation report based on the identified update as specified in the tenant application (column 18 lines 45-55)(column 23 lines 38-44)
With respect to claims 10-14 respectively, teach same limitations as claims 3-7 respectively, therefore rejected under same basis.
With respect to claim 15, Collins teaches a method for automatically updating validation rules used to detect and remediate network operation validation anomalies in conglomerate-application-based ecosystems, the method comprising:
-dynamically monitor, via a network interface, a set of policy repositories, wherein each document depositories of the set of document repositories includes a first set of textual information of policies of a set of software applications and second set of textual information indicating a set of criteria for generating validation reports of the set of software applications (i.e. validating policies including evaluating policies for syntactic errors and semantic errors, and policy store may persistently maintain policy types by persistently maintaining the policy schemas and corresponding metadata for the policy schemas. Policy store maybe implemented in a database or searchable/query-able storage system) (Paragraph 22, 37-38, 59, 72, 82);
-in response to dynamically monitoring the set of document repositories, detect, by the network interface, a set of updates in the first set of textual information of one or more document repositories in the set of document repositories (i.e. in turn resource management service may identify the appropriate updates to organization data to be made or to be read and send organization data updates/reads to hierarchical data storage) (Paragraph 51, 59, 72);
-in response to detecting the set of updates in the first set of textual information of the one or more document repositories, update a communication map by: retrieving the communication map defining a set of parent-child relationships between a set of validation rules of the set of software applications, and provide the set of updates and the communication map to a rule evaluation model to generate an updated communication map using the detected set of updates (i.e. policies can also be inherited in a chain from the organization down to a group, group of groups or individual resource data object. If a policy is applied to a parent node in the hierarchy, then the child node may inherit the policy of the parent node) (Paragraph 35, 47, 51, 59, 61, 70, 72);
detect a transmission of a first network operation to a particular software application of the set of software applications, wherein the first network operation is configured to operate as input into the particular software application, and wherein the particular software application is configured to generate a second network operation as output, using the first network operation (i.e. the code the tasks or other operations may be automatically run in response to various events…automatic scaling, provisioning, configuring and other operations to perform the code, tasks or operations. Also, deployment service may include resources to instantiate, deploy and scale other resources)(Paragraph 32, 38, 51, 59, 72)
provide the first network operation, the second network operation, and the updated communication map to an artificial intelligence model to generate a validation report satisfying the set of criteria of the second set of textual information (i.e. for a policy that specific asynchronous validation, the client may not wait for the validation result to continue operating. In cases where asynchronous validation is performed, policy validation handling may track the state of validation for a policy)(Paragraph 63)
Collins does not disclose an artificial intelligence model to generate a validation report. However, McCarthy disclose a artificial intelligence model (i.e. natural language processing or machine learning model) to generate a validation report (column 18 lines 45-55)(column 5 lines 32-38). It would have been obvious skill in the art to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement McCarthy’s teaching in Collin’s teaching to come up with disclosing a machine learning model to generate a validation report. The motivation for doing so would be to generate textual description of the validation report based on the identified update as specified in the tenant application (column 18 lines 45-55)(column 23 lines 38-44)
With respect to claims 17-19, 20 respectively, teach same limitations as claims 3-5, 7 respectively, therefore rejected under same basis.
Claim(s) 2, 9, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Collins et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2018/0089249 (hereinafter Collins) in view of McCarthy et al. U.S. Patent # 11,765,207 (hereinafter McCarthy) further in view of Wyle et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2022/0319143 (hereinafter Wyle)
With respect to claim 2, Collins and McCarthy teaches the system of claim 1, but Collins further teaches wherein the instructions for detecting the set of updates cause the system to: retrieve historical textual information of the one or more policy repositories (Paragraph 49).
Collins and McCarthy does not explicitly compare the historical textual information with the first set of textual information; in response to comparing the historical textual information with the first set of textual information, identify a text representative of a policy change of the one or more policy repositories; and store the text representative of the policy change as the set of updates.
Wyle teaches compare the historical textual information with the first set of textual information (Paragraph 29) in response to comparing the historical textual information with the first set of textual information, identify a text representative of a policy change of the one or more policy repositories (Paragraph 29); and store the text representative of the policy change as the set of updates (Paragraph 29). It would have been obvious skill in the art to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Wyle’s teaching in McCarthy and Collins’s teaching to come up with comparing historical textual information with first set of textual information, identify and store text representative of the policy change. The motivation for doing so would be to check for data integrity against historical data (paragraph 29).
With respect to claim 9, 16, they recite similar subject as claim 2, therefore rejected under same basis.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
A). Rommel et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2019/0212881 which teaches about instantiating user interface components of an application in an application view on a computing device, wherein each of the UI components is represented by an application model; in response to one of the UI components violating one of the validation rules, identify an error in the UI component violating the rule in a popover window using the mapped dependencies to identify the error.
B). Akyol et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2020/0127973 which teaches about validation system can receive or intercept commands issued by asset controllers and command validation system can validate the commands based on the command validation model.
C). Mysore et al. U.S. Patent # 12,111,754 which teaches about dynamically validating AI applications for compliance.
D). Mysore et al. U.S. Patent # 12,184,480 which teaches about detecting and mitigating network operation validation anomalies in conglomerate application based ecosystems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DHAIRYA A PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-5809. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-4:00pm.
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, Kamal B Divecha can be reached at 571-272-5863. 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.
DHAIRYA A. PATEL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2453
/DHAIRYA A PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2453
Prosecution Insights