Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Applicant has amended claims 1, 4, 11, and 14 in the filed amendment on 11/6/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending in this office action.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot in the new ground of rejection.
For 101 rejection:
For claims 1, 11, Applicant’s argued that human mind cannot
obtaining data related to energy used in a factory at a factory energy management system (FEMS);
obtaining information about a node related to an attribute of the data and information about an edge between nodes from a metadata model predefined for the data;
generating metadata for managing the data using the information about the node and the information about the edge, wherein generating the metadata comprises determining statistical information,
wherein data storage circuitry determines from which one of the data storage circuitry or a data catalog circuitry the statistical information is determined and set an update cycle of the statistical information; and
visualizing and outputting the metadata as a data catalog at visualization circuitry, wherein the virtualization circuitry provides information about available equipment and visualizing equipment used in a same process for a same product.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Claims 1, 11 similarly recite abstract limitations of
(obtain data related to energy used in a factory;
obtain information about a node related to an attribute of the data and information about an edge between nodes from a metadata model predefined for the data;
generate metadata for managing the data using the information about the node and the information about the edge, wherein generating the metadata comprises determining statistical information) as drafted, is a process or system or medium that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. The human mind can perform step of obtaining, obtaining, generating and determining. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
step 2A Prong Two
Claims do not recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because additional limitations of an electronic device, at a factory energy management system (FEMS), data storage circuitry (in claim 1) and a processor, at a factory energy management system (FEMS), data storage circuitry (in claim 11) that are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component.
The additional limitations ( visualize and output the metadata as a data catalog at visualization circuitry, wherein the virtualization circuitry provides information about available equipment and visualizing equipment used in a same process for a same product) that represent well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See MPEP 2106.05(g) or 2106.05(d) for Presenting offers and gathering statistics, OIP Techs and Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g. see Intellectual Ventures v. Symantec; Storing and retrieving information in memory: Versata; Analyzing data: Genetic Techs; Determining: OIP Techs; Electronic recordkeeping: Alice Corp).
The additional limitation of (wherein data storage circuitry determines from which one of the data storage circuitry or a data catalog circuity the statistical information is determined and set an update cycle of the statistical information) that just indicates information determined from the circuitry is determined
Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claims are not patent eligible.
step 2B:
Claims do not recite any additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial because additional limitations of an electronic device, at a factory energy management system (FEMS), data storage circuitry (in claim 1) and a processor, at a factory energy management system (FEMS), data storage circuitry (in claim 11) that are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component.
The additional limitations ( visualize and output the metadata as a data catalog at visualization circuitry, wherein the virtualization circuitry provides information about available equipment and visualizing equipment used in a same process for a same product) that represent well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See MPEP 2106.05(g) or 2106.05(d) for Presenting offers and gathering statistics, OIP Techs and Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g. see Intellectual Ventures v. Symantec; Storing and retrieving information in memory: Versata; Analyzing data: Genetic Techs; Determining: OIP Techs; Electronic recordkeeping: Alice Corp).
The additional limitation of (wherein data storage circuitry determines from which one of the data storage circuitry or a data catalog circuity the statistical information is determined and set an update cycle of the statistical information) that just indicates information determined from the circuitry is determined
Accordingly, these additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are not patent eligible.
As discussed above claims are abstract idea.
For 103 rejection: Applicant argued that prior arts of the record do not teach amended claims.
In response to Applicant’s argument, claims are rejected under the new ground.
In addition, Hale teaches
“obtaining data related to ……at……” as building as obtaining a snapshot as data (paragraph 87) related to a project at a system (paragraphs 4, 57);
“obtaining information about a node related to an attribute of the data and information about an edge between nodes from a metadata model predefined for the data” as obtaining dependency relationship(s) and/or hierarchical relationships as information about software element node (figs. 1A-1B, 3, paragraphs 96-99) e.g., an int f( ) node 122b is a child element of the f.c node 120b (paragraphs 60-62) related to metadata or ID(s) as attribute of each software element of the snapshot as the data (paragraphs 96-97) and the dependency relationship(s) and/or hierarchical relationships as information about a link as edge between nodes from (paragraphs 96-97, 102) a hierarchy graph created for the snapshot (figs. 1A-1B, paragraphs 59-62, 101-102). The hierarchy graph that has function names e.g., int f(z), int b() as metadata is represented as a metadata model;
“generating metadata for managing the data using the information about the node and the information about the edge” as generating data at step 340 (fig. 3) e.g., representation such as a layout 620 (fig. 6A-6L) for representing as managing software elements in the snapshot using the dependency relationships and the hierarchical relationships as the information (figs. 3, 6A-6L, paragraph 102-104, 131) about software element node and link as edge between nodes (paragraphs 96-97, 102). The data e.g., representation such as a layout 620 that contains node names e.g. main.c, event.c (figs. 3, 6A) is represented as metadata,
“wherein generating the metadata comprises determining……” as generating data at step 340 (fig. 3) e.g., representation such as a layout 620 (fig. 6A-6L) includes selecting as determining the directory node 612(fig. 6B, paragraphs 146-148);
“wherein data storage ……determines from which one of the data storage ……or ……is determined and set an update cycle of……” as a data storage system e.g.., 200 (abstract, fig. 2, paragraph 77) determines from the aggregated dependency graph the link is determined and determines as set a cycle of link for removing or adding as an update cycle (fig. 4, paragraphs 120-124);
“visualizing and outputting the metadata as a data catalog at……” as providing and displaying, on a user interface, the data e.g., representation such as a layout 620 as a data catalog that contain node names e.g. main.c, event.c (figs. 3, 6A) is represented as the metadata to a user for selection at a interface (figs. 2 & 6A-6B, paragraphs 104, 131, 141-143).
In particularly, the system provides the data representing the aggregated dependency graph in response to the request (350). For example, the system can generate a presentation that illustrates the aggregated dependency graph. The system can also generate any appropriate representation of the graph for consumption by another software tool (paragraph 104).
Li teaches limitation
“energy used in a factory” as energy applied within a factory (paragraphs 79, 170);
“a factory energy management system (FEMS)” as a computing environment e.g., 114 that retain processed information (paragraphs 62, 64, fig. 1) and includes energy grid of energy storage factory is represented as a factory energy management system (FEMS) (paragraph 79);
statistical information; the statistical information; the statistical information as error rates as statistical information about hierarchy as the data (figs. 20-21, paragraphs 221-222) or statistics about the communications grid (paragraph 112).
Li further teaches limitation
“an edge between nodes from a metadata model predefined for the data” as edge between nodes (fig. 13, paragraphs 171) from a hierarchy structure that is created for cluster time series data using the selected attributes is represented as a metadata model (fig. 14, paragraphs 229-230).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1 recites a method of operating an electronic device, the method comprising:
obtaining data related to energy used in a factory at a factory energy management system (FEMS);
obtaining information about a node related to an attribute of the data and information about an edge between nodes from a metadata model predefined for the data;
generating metadata for managing the data using the information about the node and the information about the edge, wherein generating the metadata comprises determining statistical information,
wherein data storage circuitry determines from which one of the data storage circuitry or a data catalog circuitry the statistical information is determined and set an update cycle of the statistical information; and
visualizing and outputting the metadata as a data catalog at visualization circuitry, wherein the virtualization circuitry provides information about available equipment and visualizing equipment used in a same process for a same product.
Claim 11 recites an electronic device comprising:
a processor configured to:
obtain data related to energy used in a factory at a factory energy management system (FEMS);
obtain information about a node related to an attribute of the data and information about an edge between nodes from a metadata model predefined for the data;
generate metadata for managing the data using the information about the node and the information about the edge, wherein generating the metadata comprises determining statistical information,
wherein data storage circuitry determines from which one of the data storage circuitry or a data catalog circuity the statistical information is determined and set an update cycle of the statistical information; and
visualize and output the metadata as a data catalog at visualization circuitry, wherein the virtualization circuitry provides information about available equipment and visualizing equipment used in a same process for a same product.
a) In analyzing under step 2A Prong One, Does the claim recite an abstract idea law of nature or natural phenomenon? Yes.
Claims 1, 11 similarly recite abstract limitations of
(obtain data related to energy used in a factory;
obtain information about a node related to an attribute of the data and information about an edge between nodes from a metadata model predefined for the data;
generate metadata for managing the data using the information about the node and the information about the edge, wherein generating the metadata comprises determining statistical information) as drafted, is a process or system or medium that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. The human mind can perform step of obtaining, obtaining, generating and determining. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
b) In analyzing under step 2A Prong Two, Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application? NO.
Claims do not recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because additional limitations of an electronic device, at a factory energy management system (FEMS), data storage circuitry (in claim 1) and a processor, at a factory energy management system (FEMS), data storage circuitry (in claim 11) that are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component.
The additional limitations ( visualize and output the metadata as a data catalog at visualization circuitry, wherein the virtualization circuitry provides information about available equipment and visualizing equipment used in a same process for a same product) that represent well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See MPEP 2106.05(g) or 2106.05(d) for Presenting offers and gathering statistics, OIP Techs and Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g. see Intellectual Ventures v. Symantec; Storing and retrieving information in memory: Versata; Analyzing data: Genetic Techs; Determining: OIP Techs; Electronic recordkeeping: Alice Corp) and that just indicates using the virtualization circuitry as tool to provide information.
The additional limitation of (wherein data storage circuitry determines from which one of the data storage circuitry or a data catalog circuity the statistical information is determined and set an update cycle of the statistical information) that just indicates information determined from the circuitry is determined
Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The claims are not patent eligible.
c) In analyzing under step 2B, does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? NO
Claims do not recite any additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial because additional limitations of an electronic device, at a factory energy management system (FEMS), data storage circuitry (in claim 1) and a processor, at a factory energy management system (FEMS), data storage circuitry (in claim 11) that are recited at a high-level of generality such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component.
The additional limitations ( visualize and output the metadata as a data catalog at visualization circuitry, wherein the virtualization circuitry provides information about available equipment and visualizing equipment used in a same process for a same product) that represent well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See MPEP 2106.05(g) or 2106.05(d) for Presenting offers and gathering statistics, OIP Techs and Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g. see Intellectual Ventures v. Symantec; Storing and retrieving information in memory: Versata; Analyzing data: Genetic Techs; Determining: OIP Techs; Electronic recordkeeping: Alice Corp) and that just indicates using the virtualization circuitry as tool to provide information.
The additional limitation of (wherein data storage circuitry determines from which one of the data storage circuitry or a data catalog circuity the statistical information is determined and set an update cycle of the statistical information) that just indicates information determined from the circuitry is determined
Accordingly, these additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2-10, 12-20 include all the limitations of claims 1, 11. Therefore, claims 2-10, 12-20 recite the same abstract idea practically being performed in the mind, and the analysis must therefore proceed to Step 2A Prong Two.
In particularly:
Claims 2, 12 similarly recite limitation (wherein the generating of the metadata comprises: determining the node and the edge based on the attribute of the data; and generating the metadata using the node and the edge) as drafted, is a process or system or medium that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. The human mind can perform step of generating, determining and generating. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Claims 3, 13 similarly recite limitation (wherein the generating of the metadata comprises: determining the node based on the attribute of the data using the information about the node; and determining the edge between related nodes, based on a relationship between the information about the edge and the attribute of the data between the nodes) as drafted, is a process or system or medium that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. The human mind can perform step of generating, determining and determining. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Claims 4, 14 similarly recite limitation (herein the generating of the metadata comprises: determining the statistical information about the data; and generating the metadata including the statistical information) as drafted, is a process or system or medium that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. The human mind can perform step of generating, determining and generating. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Claims 5, 15, similarly recite limitation (wherein the generating of the metadata comprises: determining energy efficiency of the factory from the data; and generating the metadata including the energy efficiency) as drafted, is a process or system or medium that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. The human mind can perform step of generating, determining and generating. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Claims 6, 16 similarly recite limitation (wherein the generating of the metadata comprises generating the metadata by classifying the metadata into dynamic metadata in which a value changes over time or static metadata using the data) as drafted, is a process or system or medium that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitations in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. The human mind can perform step of generating and generating. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea.
Claims 7, 17 similarly recite limitation (wherein the visualizing and outputting of the metadata comprises outputting information about the energy by equipment of the factory using the metadata) that represent well-understood, routine, conventional activity (See MPEP 2106.05(g) or 2106.05(d) for Presenting offers and gathering statistics, OIP Techs and Receiving or transmitting data over a network, e.g. see Intellectual Ventures v. Symantec; Storing and retrieving information in memory: Versata; Analyzing data: Genetic Techs; Determining: OIP Techs; Electronic recordkeeping: Alice Corp).
Claims 8, 18 similarly recite limitation (wherein the data comprises information about an observation point on equipment of the factory and energy obtained from the observation point) that just indicates definition of data having information and energy.
Claims 9, 19 similarly recite limitation (wherein the data comprises information about at least one of equipment of the factory, an observation point on the equipment, or an item obtained from the observation point) that just indicates definition of data.
Claims 10, 20 similarly recite limitation (wherein the data comprises information with a standardized structure based on an observation point on equipment of the factory) that just indicates definition of data.
Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application and do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims are not patent eligible.
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.
Claims 1-5, 7, 9, 11-15, 17, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hale et al (or hereinafter “Hale”) (US 20170090889) in view of Li et al (or hereinafter “Li”) (US 20190317952) and Kidder et al (US 20040031030)
As to claim 1, Hale teaches method of operating an electronic device, the method comprising:
“obtaining data related to ……at……” as building as obtaining a snapshot as data (paragraph 87) related to a project at a system (paragraphs 4, 57);
“obtaining information about a node related to an attribute of the data and information about an edge between nodes from a metadata model predefined for the data” as obtaining dependency relationship(s) and/or hierarchical relationships as information about software element node (figs. 1A-1B, 3, paragraphs 96-99) e.g., an int f( ) node 122b is a child element of the f.c node 120b (paragraphs 60-62) related to metadata or ID(s) as attribute of each software element of the snapshot as the data (paragraphs 96-97) and the dependency relationship(s) and/or hierarchical relationships as information about a link as edge between nodes from (paragraphs 96-97, 102) a hierarchy graph created for the snapshot (figs. 1A-1B, paragraphs 59-62, 101-102). The hierarchy graph that has function names e.g., int f(z), int b() as metadata is represented as a metadata model;
“generating metadata for managing the data using the information about the node and the information about the edge” as generating data at step 340 (fig. 3) e.g., representation such as a layout 620 (fig. 6A-6L) for representing as managing software elements in the snapshot using the dependency relationships and the hierarchical relationships as the information (figs. 3, 6A-6L, paragraph 102-104, 131) about software element node and link as edge between nodes (paragraphs 96-97, 102). The data e.g., representation such as a layout 620 that contains node names e.g. main.c, event.c (figs. 3, 6A) is represented as metadata,
“wherein generating the metadata comprises determining……” as generating data at step 340 (fig. 3) e.g., representation such as a layout 620 (fig. 6A-6L) includes selecting as determining the directory node 612(fig. 6B, paragraphs 146-148);
“wherein data storage ……determines from which one of the data storage ……or ……is determined and set an update cycle of……” as a data storage system e.g.., 200 (abstract, fig. 2, paragraph 77) determines from the aggregated dependency graph the link is determined and determines as set a cycle of link for removing or adding as an update cycle (fig. 4, paragraphs 120-124);
“visualizing and outputting the metadata as a data catalog at……” as providing and displaying, on a user interface, the data e.g., representation such as a layout 620 as a data catalog that contain node names e.g. main.c, event.c (figs. 3, 6A) is represented as the metadata to a user for selection at a interface (figs. 2 & 6A-6B, paragraphs 104, 131, 141-143).
In particularly, the system provides the data representing the aggregated dependency graph in response to the request (350). For example, the system can generate a presentation that illustrates the aggregated dependency graph. The system can also generate any appropriate representation of the graph for consumption by another software tool (paragraph 104).
Hale does not explicitly teach limitation
energy used in a factory; a factory energy management system (FEMS);
statistical information; the statistical information; the statistical information;
circuitry; circuitry or a data catalog circuitry;
visualization circuitry,
wherein the virtualization circuitry provides information about available equipment and visualizing equipment used in a same process for a same product.
Li teaches limitation
“energy used in a factory” as energy applied within a factory (paragraphs 79, 170);
“a factory energy management system (FEMS)” as a computing environment e.g., 114 that retain processed information (paragraphs 62, 64, fig. 1) and includes energy grid of energy storage factory is represented as a factory energy management system (FEMS) (paragraph 79);
statistical information; the statistical information; the statistical information as error rates as statistical information about hierarchy as the data (figs. 20-21, paragraphs 221-222) or statistics about the communications grid (paragraph 112).
Li further teaches limitation
“an edge between nodes from a metadata model predefined for the data” as edge between nodes (fig. 13, paragraphs 171) from a hierarchy structure that is created for cluster time series data using the selected attributes is represented as a metadata model (fig. 14, paragraphs 229-230).
Hale and Li disclose a method of creating and displaying a structure including nodes and edges. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Li’s teaching to Hale’s system in order to reduce number of processing iterations, time, memory, electrical power, or any combination of these consumed by a computing device for generating hierarchical structure using data and attributes, to reduce waste of an organization in consuming energy and further to generate more accurate predictions of component failures to prompt repair or replacement of such components before a failure occurs.
Kidder teaches limitations
“statistical information” as statistics data (paragraph 280);
data storage circuitry; the data storage circuitry or a data catalog circuitry as data management chip for storing data is represented as data storage circuitry (paragraph 666);
“a visualization circuitry” as Soft Permanent Virtual Circuit (PVC) 960a as visualization circuitry (paragraph 238, fig. 7J);
“wherein the virtualization circuitry provides information about available equipment and visualizing equipment used in a same process for a same product” as Permanent Virtual Circuit (PVC) 960a as the virtualization circuitry (FIG. 7j) provides one or more visual indications as information to indicate one or more card(s) or one or more module(s) as equipment(s) is present as available in each slot (figs. 4f-4Y, 7j, paragraphs 158, 160, 238) and visualizing card or module as equipment displayed as used for a same method as same process e.g., using scroll bar 926a and/or image scale button 926b to view lower portions (FIGS. 4j and 4k) for a same network device as a same product (FIG. 41, paragraph 160).
In particularly:
[0158] Device mimic 896a may also provide one or more visual indications as to whether a card is present in each slot or whether a slot is empty. For example, in one embodiment, the forwarding cards (e.g., 546a and 548e) in the upper portion of the network device are displayed in a dark color to indicate the cards are present while the lower slots (e.g., 928a and 929e) are shown in a lighter color to indicate that the slots are empty. Other visual indications may also be used. For example, a graphical representation of the actual card faceplate may be added to device mimic 896a when a card is present and a blank faceplate may be added when the slot is empty. Moreover, this may be done for any of the cards that may or may not be present in a working network device. For example, the upper cross-connection cards may be displayed in a dark color to indicate they are present while the lower cross-connection card slots may be displayed in a lighter color to indicate the slots are empty.
Kidder and Hale disclose a method of creating and displaying a structure including nodes and edges. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Kidder’s teaching to Hale’s system in order to provide an accurate assurance that either the software component has changed or has not, to provide a quick, easy way to accurately determine the upgrade status of each software component and further to reduce amount of statistical management data being transferred to a network manager.
As to claim 2, Hale and Li teach limitation
“wherein the generating of the metadata comprises: determining the node and the edge based on the attribute of the data” as the generating of the data at step 340 (Hale: fig. 3) e.g., representation such as a layout 620 that contain node names e.g. main.c, event.c (Hale: fig. 6A) is represented as metadata (Hale: paragraphs 102-104, 141-144) includes identifying as determining one or more selected nodes and generating as determining a link as edge based on software element(s) of the snapshot (Hale: fig. 2, paragraphs 83-84, 102) that includes name of a file as attribute (Hale: paragraph 233-234) or attribute of the timestamped data (Li: paragraph 277-287);
“generating the metadata using the node and the edge” as the generating of the data e.g., representation such as a layout 620 that contain node names e.g. main.c, event.c (Hale: fig. 6A) is represented as metadata (Hale: paragraphs 102-104, 141-144) using node and link as edge (Hale: paragraph 102) or node and edge (Li: paragraph 130).
As to claim 3, Hale and Li teach limitation
“wherein the generating of the metadata comprises: determining the node based on the attribute of the data using the information about the node” as the generating of the data e.g., representation such as a layout 620 that contain node names e.g. main.c, event.c (Hale: fig. 6A) is represented as metadata (Hale: paragraphs 102-104, 141-144) includes identifying as determining one or more selected nodes based on name of a file as attribute of software element of the snapshot as the data (Hale: paragraph 233-234) or attribute of the timestamped data (Li: paragraph 277-287) using dependency relationship(s) and/or hierarchical relationships as information about (Hale: figs. 1A-1B, 3, paragraphs 96-97) software element node e.g., an int f( ) node 122b is a child element of the f.c node 120b (Hale: paragraphs 60-62);
“determining the edge between related nodes, based on a relationship between the information about the edge and the attribute of the data between the nodes” as generating link as edge between nodes based on a request as relationship between the dependency relationship(s) and/or hierarchical relationships as the information about a link as edge and the ID of the snapshot as the data (Hale: fig. 3, paragraphs 94, 96-97, 102) between nodes (Li: paragraph 101)
As to claim 4, Hale, Li and Kidder teach limitation
“wherein the generating of the metadata comprises: determining the statistical information about the data” as the generating of the data e.g., representation such as a layout 620 that contain node names e.g. main.c, event.c is represented as metadata includes (Hale: figs.3, 6A-6D, paragraphs 102, 131-133, 141-144) comparing as determining error rates as statistical information about hierarchy as the data (Li: figs. 20-21, paragraphs 221-222) or statistics data (Kidder: paragraph 280);
“generating the metadata including the statistical information” as the generating the data e.g., representation such as a layout 620 that contain node names e.g. main.c, event.c (Hale: figs.3, 6A-6D, paragraphs 102, 131-133, 141-144) is represented as metadata includes error rates as statistical information about hierarchy as the data (Li: figs. 20-21, paragraphs 221-222).
As to claim 5, Hale and Li teach limitations
“wherein the generating of the metadata comprises: determining energy efficiency of the factory from the data” as the generating of the data e.g., representation such as a layout 620 that contains node names e.g. main.c, event.c is represented as metadata includes (Hale: figs.3, 6A-6D, paragraphs 102, 131-133, 141-144) identifying (Hale: fig. 3, paragraphs 93-96, 102) energy efficient of the factory (Li: paragraph 79); and
“generating the metadata including the energy efficiency” as the generating the data e.g., representation such as a layout 620 that contain node names e.g. main.c, event.c (Hale: figs.3, 6A-6D, paragraphs 102, 131-133, 141-144) is represented as metadata includes energy efficient of the factory (Li: paragraph 79).
As to claim 7, Hale and Li teach limitation
“wherein the visualizing and outputting of the metadata comprises outputting information about the energy by equipment of the factory using the metadata” as the visualizing and displaying of the data e.g., representation such as layout 620 as the metadata (Hale: figs. 2 & 6A-6B, paragraphs 104, 131, 141-143) includes displaying details as information about (Hale: figs. 6E-6F, paragraphs 152-153) energy by device of the factory (Li: paragraphs 79, 198-199) using the layout 620 as the metadata e.g. in response user’s selection of a particular dependency 622 in the layout 620, the system displays more details about the corresponding dependencies in a dependency pane 630 (Hale: fig. 6F, paragraph 152).
As to claims 9, 19, Hale and Li teach limitation
“ wherein the data comprises information about at least one of equipment of the factory, an observation point on the equipment, or an item obtained from the observation point” as the snapshot as the data includes source code of files as information about (Hale: paragraph: 42-46) machine of the factory as equipment of the factory (Li: paragraph 17, 187, fig. 16).
Claim 11 has the same claimed limitation subject matter as discussed in claim 1; thus claim 11 is rejected under the same reason as discussed in claim 1. In addition, Hale teaches an electronic device comprising: “a processor configured to” as a processor configured to (paragraph 344).
Claim 12 has the same claimed limitation subject matter as discussed in claim 2; thus claim 12 is rejected under the same reason as discussed in claim 2. In addition, Hale teaches limitation “the processor is further configured to” as a processor configured to (paragraph 344).
Claim 13 has the same claimed limitation subject matter as discussed in claim 3; thus claim 13 is rejected under the same reason as discussed in claim 3. In addition, Hale teaches a “the processor is further configured to” as a processor configured to (paragraph 344).
Claim 14 has the same claimed limitation subject matter as discussed in claim 4; thus claim 14 is rejected under the same reason as discussed in claim 4. In addition, Hale teaches a “the processor is further configured to” as a processor configured to (paragraph 344).
Claim 15 has the same claimed limitation subject matter as discussed in claim 5; thus claim 15 is rejected under the same reason as discussed in claim 5. In addition, Hale teaches limitation “the processor is further configured to” as a processor configured to (paragraph 344).
Claim 17 has the same claimed limitation subject matter as discussed in claim 7; thus claim 17 is rejected under the same reason as discussed in claim 7. In addition, Hale teaches a “the processor is further configured to” as a processor configured to (paragraph 344).
Claims 6, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hale in view of Li and Kidder and further in view Sar Shalom et al (or hereinafter “Sar”) (US 20210081454).
As to claim 6, Hale and Li teach limitation
“wherein the generating of the metadata comprises generating the metadata by ……in which a value changes over time or static metadata using the data” as the generating of the data e.g., representation such as a layout 620 that contain node names e.g. main.c, event.c (Hale: figs.3, 6A-6D, paragraphs 102, 131-133, 141-144) is represented as metadata includes generating data e.g., aggregated dependency graph by (Hale: figs. 3, 6A-6D, paragraphs 93-96, 131-133) obtaining dependency relationship(s) and/or hierarchical relationships as information which includes (Hale: figs. 1A-1B, 3, paragraphs 96-99) data changes in an environment over time or in real-time (Li: paragraph 68).
Hale and Li do not explicitly teach limitation
classifying the metadata into dynamic metadata.
Sar teaches limitation “classifying the metadata into dynamic metadata” as transforming as classifying the general graph as the metadata into a hierarchical graph (paragraph 36), the hierarchical graph that can be continuously updated is represented as dynamic metadata (paragraphs 18, 77).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Sar’s teaching to Hale’s system in order to improve quality and relevance of search results generated by a computerized search engine and by performing unsupervised, automatic taxonomy hierarchical graph construction using past search queries and past returned results.
Claim 16 has the same claimed limitation subject matter as discussed in claim 6; thus claim 16 is rejected under the same reason as discussed in claim 6. In addition, Hale teaches a “the processor is further configured to” as a processor configured to (paragraph 344).
Claims 8, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hale in view of Li and Kidder and further in view of Siebel et al (US 20210263945).
As to claims 8, 18, Hale and Li teach limitation
“wherein the data comprises information about an observation point on equipment of the factory and ……from the observation point” as the snapshot as the data includes elements as information about (Hale: paragraph 4) timestamped data or observation data as observation point on machine of the factory (Li: paragraph 17, 187, fig. 16) and critical features extracted from the timestamped data as the observation point (Li: paragraph 192, fig. 16).
Hale and Li do not explicitly teach limitation energy obtained
Siebel teaches limitation “energy obtained” as energy is generated (paragraph 608) (paragraph 608).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Siebel’s teaching to Hale’s system in order to reduce the amount of code or knowledge required by a developer to develop powerful applications and further to ensure that this type of data is stored efficiently and can be accessed quickly.
Claims 10, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hale in view of Li and Kidder and further in view of Guo et al (US 20190258722).
As to claims 10, 20, Hale and Li teach limitation
“wherein the data comprises information with …… based on an observation point on equipment of the factory” as the snapshot as the data includes source code of files with (Hale: paragraph: 42-46) cluster results based on timestamp data as observations (Li: paragraphs 226, 19) on machine of the factory (Li: paragraph 17, 187, fig. 16).
Hale and Li do not explicitly teach limitation
a standardized structure.
Guo teaches limitation
“a standardized structure” as standardized entity taxonomy 304 as a standardized structure (fig. 3, paragraph 39).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Guo’s teaching to Hale’s system in order to improve search speed and reduce storage space and processing time and further to facilitate the identification and retrieval of information in response to received queries for 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAM-Y T TRUONG whose telephone number is (571)272-4042. The examiner can normally be reached (571) 272 4042.
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, SHERIEF BADAWI can be reached at (571) 272-9782. 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.
/CAM Y T TRUONG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2169