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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant has canceled claims 1-18 and added new claims 19-34 in the amendment filed on 1/30/2026. Claims 19-34 are currently pending in the present application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 1/30/2026 with respect to the claims 19-34 have been considered but they are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 19-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
As per claims 19 and 27, the claims recite “providing an evaluated result based on the transformation request” which the under lined feature renders the claims indefinite. The claims provide no guidance as to how/when “an evaluated result” is being recognized and/or identified in order to be utilized in the providing step. Clarification or correction is respectfully required.
Note, the dependent claims are also rejected because they depend on and/or do not remedy the deficiencies inherited by their parent claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19-34 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection as set forth in this Office action.
Reasons for Allowance
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
After further consideration of the prior arts of record and conducting new searches in PE2E - SEARCH, Similarity Search, Google Scholar, and ACM Digital Library, it appears that the prior arts of record such as Shah et al. (US 2018/0150528 A1) and Zhang (US 11,182,691 B1) do not disclose, teach or fairly suggest the limitations as a whole in the independent claims 19 and 27. The dependent claims, bring definite, further limiting, and fully enabled by the specification are also allowed.
The closest prior art, Shah et al. (US 2018/0150528 A1) involves in data transformation workflows may be generated to transform data objects. A source data schema for a data object and a target data format or target data schema for a data object may be identified. A comparison of the source data schema and the target data format or schema may be made to determine what transformations can be performed to transform the data object into the target data format or schema. Code to execute the transformation operations may then be generated. The code may be stored for subsequent modification or execution.
Another close prior art, Zhang (US 11,182,691 B1) involves in a determination is made at a machine learning service that a training data set comprising a majority category of observation records and one or more minority categories of observation records meets a criterion for automated sampling. A sampling ratio to be used for a particular category of the majority category and the one or more minority categories is identified. A selected sampling methodology is applied to the particular category to obtain a sample in accordance with the sampling ratio. A particular machine learning model is trained using a result of applying at least the selected sampling methodology on the particular category.
Another cited prior art, Gerges et al. (US 20200371647 A1) involves in semi-automate data transformation processing so that content can be transformed, from one type of electronic document, for presentation in another type of electronic document. For instance, data transformation suggestions, for transforming content from a first form into a presentation form (second form), may be generated and presented to a user through an improved user interface of an application/service that is used to display the first form of the content. The improved user interface provides a new user interface menu to manage the data transformation suggestions and/or export/import processing of data from one type of electronic document to another. Based on user selection of the confirming data transformation suggestions through the user interface menu, a presentation document is automatically generated on behalf of the user, for example, in a different application/service.
However, none of the prior arts, singular and any order combination, discloses the claimed limitations: “generating, in a local memory of a processing node, an ordered execution sequence representing a transformation request, wherein the ordered execution sequence is in a cryptographically secured state associated with a jurisdiction signature: executing a technological prerequisite operation comprising a cryptographic verification process configured to resolve the cryptographically secured state; executing the transformation request only upon successful resolution of the cryptographically secured state by the cryptographic verification process, wherein a successful resolution is determined based on a single validation step comprising: confirming a cryptographic match between the jurisdiction signature and a stored electronic jurisdiction identifier of the processing node, or confirming the jurisdiction signature satisfies one or more jurisdictional constraints validated by the cryptographic verification process; and providing an evaluated result based on the transformation request”, as recited in the independent claims 19 and 27.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
CN 1960553 A by Qiao teaches preventing theft of software and hardware with communication condition/function in telecommunication field. There is an ID number in the mobile terminal, and the management centre server stores the basic information and register information of the mobile terminal corresponding to each ID number; the terminal hardware sends register information to the management centre server under appointed condition, and it can't work before obtaining the confirmation command. The two parties identify the effectiveness of the opposing party information according to history information pooled by the two parties. The system can provide the function for inquiring the anti-fake information, sending lock command to the mobile terminal, tracking telephone number, preventing theft, and function for finding the smuggle, therefore in favour of the surveillance of anti-fake, anti-theft, anti-smuggle and sale of software and hardware with communication condition/function.
CN 1361960 A by Wu et al. teaches an electronic document can make the validity is protected with a corresponding printed document, and for protecting electronic and the validity of a printed document, a device, a computer program product and a system. the content of the electronic document comprises electronic format original document, original document content to the electronic format the content summary, for identifying electronic print original document of the electronic format or β-seal, the e-seal comprises a management mechanism of the visible seal and embedding the visible stamp in the content summary, an additional to the photosensitive or photosensitive component of the identification document to a printing program for printing. the photosensitive or photosensitive component contains the message, for indicating copying or modifying of the print document in the copy or modified version of a printed document.
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 Bai D. Vu whose telephone number is (571) 270-1751. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 5:30.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tony Mahmoudi can be reached at (571) 272-4078. 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.
/BAI D VU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2163 3/17/2026