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 .
This Office action is issued in response to application, 19/062,184, filed on 2/25/2025.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are pending.
Priority
Acknowledgement is made of applicant’s claim for priority to provisional application, 63/640,684, filed on 4/30/2024.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS), submitted on 5/27/2025 and 12/23/2025, is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1 recites “A computing system …” and, therefore, is a machine. Claim 14 recites “A method …”; the claim recites a series of steps and, therefore, is a process. Claim 20 recites “Non-transitory computer-readable media …”; and, therefore, is a manufacture.
Claim(s) 1, 14 and 20 recite(s) the limitation(s) of:
“generate, with an artificial intelligence (Al) agent applying a machine learning model, based on a query associated with a user, an execution plan for a task to satisfy the query, wherein the execution plan includes actions to be performed with respect to a first data source system and a second data source system, and wherein the user has permission for each of the actions;” (mental process)
The limitation(s), as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, see above. That is, nothing in the claim precludes the step(s) from practically being performed in the mind. The mere nominal recitation of: “an artificial intelligence agent” and “a machine learning model” in claim(s) 1, 14 and 20, “one or more storage devices” and a “processing circuitry” in claim(s) 1 and 20, “a computing system” in claims 1 and 14 and “one or more processing systems” and a “non-transitory computer-readable media” in claim(s) 20 do(es) not take the claim limitation(s) out of the mental processes grouping. Thus, the claim(s) recite(s) a mental process. The claim(s) is/are directed to an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim recites the additional element(s):
“invoke, by the Al agent, a first tool to perform a first action of the actions with respect to the first data source system, wherein the Al agent is trained to use the first tool;” (i.e., post insignificant extra-solution activity)
“invoke, by the Al agent, a second tool to perform a second action of the actions with respect to the second data source system, wherein the Al agent is trained to use the second tool;” (i.e., post insignificant extra-solution activity)
The invoking steps are recited at a high level of generality and amounts to mere post insignificant extra-solution activity.
The combination of these additional elements is no more than insignificant extra solution activity with mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim(s) is/are directed to an abstract idea.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, as explained below, the recitation of the computing system, the one or more storage devices, the processing circuitry, the artificial intelligence agent, the machine learning model and the non-transitory computer-readable media amount(s) to nothing more than applying the exception with a generic, off-the-shelf display component. The invoking steps were considered to be post insignificant extra-solution activity. The background does not provide any indication that the components are anything other than a generic, off-the-shelf display component. Accordingly, a conclusion that the receiving, transmitting and executing steps are a well-understood, routine and conventional activity is supported.
Note: Applicant can overcome this rejection by adding step(s) to make a practical application where the steps must be implemented in a machine and cannot be performed, using the broadest reasonable interpretation, in the human mind and that the implementation is not merely implementing an abstract idea in a computer.
Regarding claim(s) 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16 and 17, the claim(s) recite(s) the limitation(s) of “obtain configuration information for the first tool, wherein the configuration information specifies a scope of calls to the first data source system;” (i.e., data gathering - pre insignificant extra-solution activity) and “invoke, by the Al agent, the first tool based on the configuration information;” (i.e., post insignificant extra-solution activity) in claims 2 and 15, “obtain configuration information for the first tool, wherein the configuration information specifies a manner in which the first tool is to access data from the first data source system;” (i.e., data gathering - pre insignificant extra-solution activity) and “invoke, by the Al agent, the first tool based on the configuration information;” (i.e., post insignificant extra-solution activity) in claims 3 and 16, “obtain configuration information for the first tool, wherein the configuration information comprises a specification that describes an action the first tool is capable of performing with respect to the first data source system;” (i.e., data gathering - pre insignificant extra-solution activity) and “invoke, by the Al agent, the first tool based on the configuration information;” (i.e., post insignificant extra-solution activity) in claims 4 and 17, “wherein the first action comprises obtaining dynamic data from the first data source system;” (i.e., data gathering - pre insignificant extra-solution activity) in claim 8, “authenticate, by a data access proxy layer, the first tool to the first data source system to enable the first tool to perform the first action;” (i.e., post insignificant extra-solution activity) in claim 9, “wherein to authenticate the first tool to the first data source system, the processing circuitry is configured to authenticate, based on credentials for the user, the first tool to the first data source system;” (i.e., post insignificant extra-solution activity) in claim 10, “wherein the first action comprises sending an application programming interface (API) call to an API implemented by the first data source system;” (i.e., transmitting data - pre insignificant extra-solution activity) in claim 11, and “wherein the first data source system and the second data source system are diverse;” in claim 13. The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the recitation(s) do(es) nothing more than apply the exception with generic, off-the-shelf computer component(s).
Regarding claim(s) 5, 6, 7, 12, 18 and 19, the claim(s) recite(s) the limitation(s) of “process the specification to obtain the action the first tool is capable of performing with respect to the first data source system;” (mental process) and “generate, based on the action the first tool is capable of performing with respect to the first data source system and the query, the execution plan to include the invoking of the first tool to perform the first action;” (mental process) in claims 5 and 18, “wherein the task comprises optimizing, on the second data source system, backups of data associated with the user and stored on the first data source system;” (mental process) in claims 6 and 19, “wherein the task comprises modifying, on the second data source system, security data associated with the user and stored on the first data source system or the second data source system;” (mental process) in claim 7, and “selecting, by the AI agent, based on a determination the user has permission to perform a particular action the first tool is capable of performing with respect to the first data source system, the actions of the execution plan to include the particular action;” (mental process) in claim 12, the limitation(s), as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. The claim(s) do(es) not include any further additional elements, and merely adding a further abstract idea to an already ineligible parent claim directed to an abstract idea without significantly more, cannot confer eligibility to the claim(s).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bedadala et al., US 2018/0329993 A1 (hereinafter “Bed”).
Claims 1, 14 and 20
Bed discloses a computing system comprising:
one or more storage devices (Bed, [0067], see computer memory); and
processing circuitry having access to the one or more storage devices (Bed, [0067], see one or more processors) and configured to:
generate, with an artificial intelligence (AI) agent applying a machine learning model, based on a query associated with a user, an execution plan for a task to satisfy the query, wherein the execution plan includes actions to be performed with respect to a first data source system and a second data source system (Bed, [0302], see the user/database technician can update or modify the rule database [i.e., “query associated with a user”] by using the voice recognition interface, a chatbot or administrative assistant. For example, she or he can instruct the chatbot to “from now on, when I say backup, please perform a snapshot and an archive operation.” Based on that request, the Translator and Action Database Agent 308 [i.e., “artificial intelligence agent”] can modify the rule database accordingly; Bed, Table 1, see “Backup: If a user asks to “perform a backup of file b on my computer,” [i.e., “query associated with a user”] the system will generate a copy of file B in secondary storage [i.e., “second data source system”] based on the primary copy [i.e., “first data source system”] and provide the user with audio or visual confirmation of this operation.”; Bed, [0303], see the rules in the rule database can also be automatically updated by the Translator and Action Database Agent 308 [i.e., “artificial intelligence agent”] using known machine learning methods. As the user makes queries over time, the Translator and Action Database Agent 308 can learn new actions and parameters and update the database accordingly. For example, Translator and Action Database Agent 308, over time, can learn what are the most common parameters used in performing a snapshot. Translator and Action Database Agent 308 can also train on historical data of tasks and jobs performed within the information management system or the database management system. Translator and Action Database Agent 308 can train using any of the known machine learning methods. Types of machine learning methods include supervised machine learning, unsupervised machine learning, and semi-supervised machine learning; Bed, [0328]-[0331] and Bed, Fig. 5: in analogy to Bed, Fig. 4, the query is translated to a domain language query which corresponds to the execution plan. According to Bed, Table 1, the domain language query has to include both data source systems), and wherein the user has permission for each of the actions (Bed, [0298], see checks permissions for different actions, permissions are stored as metadata);
invoke, by the AI agent, a first tool to perform a first action of the actions with respect to the first data source system, wherein the Al agent is trained to use the first tool (See below); and
invoke, by the AI agent, a second tool to perform a second action of the actions with respect to the second data source system, wherein the Al agent is trained to use the second tool (Bed, [0293] in combination with Bed, [0132]-[0134], see “The environment 301 also enables a user to [...] use an administrative assistant component to communicate with the database management system. … The database management system manages data operations for networked computer devices and media agents.”, where data agents and media agents of the primary and secondary storage systems are used to access data there, see also Bed, Fig. 1C).
Claim(s) 14 and 20 recite(s) similar limitations to claim 1 and is/are rejected under the same rationale.
With respect to claim 20, Bed discloses non-transitory computer-readable media comprising instructions (Bed, [0067], see computer memory).
Claims 2 and 15
With respect to claims 2 and 15, Bed discloses wherein the processing circuitry is configured to:
obtain configuration information for the first tool, wherein the configuration information specifies a scope of calls to the first data source system (Bed, Fig. 5, steps 510-520 described in Bed, [0329]); and
invoke, by the Al agent, the first tool based on the configuration information (Bed, [030], see the rules in the rule database can also be automatically updated by the Translator and Action Database Agent 308 [i.e., “AI agent”] using known machine learning methods. As the user makes queries over time, the Translator and Action Database Agent 308 can learn new actions and parameters and update the database accordingly).
Claims 3 and 16
With respect to claims 3 and 16, Bed discloses wherein the processing circuitry is configured to:
obtain configuration information for the first tool, wherein the configuration information specifies a manner in which the first tool is to access data from the first data source system (Bed, Fig. 5, steps 510-520 described in Bed, [0329]); and
invoke, by the Al agent, the first tool based on the configuration information (Bed, [030], see the rules in the rule database can also be automatically updated by the Translator and Action Database Agent 308 [i.e., “AI agent”] using known machine learning methods. As the user makes queries over time, the Translator and Action Database Agent 308 can learn new actions and parameters and update the database accordingly).
Claims 4 and 17
With respect to claims 4 and 17, Bed discloses wherein the processing circuitry is configured to:
obtain configuration information for the first tool, wherein the configuration information comprises a specification that describes an action the first tool is capable of performing with respect to the first data source system (Bed, Fig. 5, steps 510-520 described in Bed, [0329]; and Bed, [0152], see deduplication [i.e., “action the first tool is capable of performing with respect to the first data source system”] in backups is an optimization); and
invoke, by the Al agent, the first tool based on the configuration information (Bed, [030], see the rules in the rule database can also be automatically updated by the Translator and Action Database Agent 308 [i.e., “AI agent”] using known machine learning methods. As the user makes queries over time, the Translator and Action Database Agent 308 can learn new actions and parameters and update the database accordingly).
Claims 5 and 18
With respect to claims 5 and 18, Bed discloses wherein the processing circuitry is configured to:
process the specification to obtain the action the first tool is capable of performing with respect to the first data source system (Bed, Fig. 5, steps 510-520 described in Bed, [0329]); and
generate, based on the action the first tool is capable of performing with respect to the first data source system and the query, the execution plan to include the invoking of the first tool to perform the first action (Bed, [030], see the rules in the rule database can also be automatically updated by the Translator and Action Database Agent 308 [i.e., “AI agent”] using known machine learning methods. As the user makes queries over time, the Translator and Action Database Agent 308 can learn new actions and parameters and update the database accordingly; Bed, [0267]-[0275], see the steps described for synchronization/replication which correspond to the execution plan; and Bed, Fig. 2A, see the steps in synchronization/replication which correspond to the execution plan).
Claims 6 and 19
With respect to claims 6 and 19, Bed discloses wherein the task comprises optimizing, on the second data source system, backups of data associated with the user and stored on the first data source system (Bed, [0035], see there is therefore a need for efficient, powerful, and user-friendly solutions for protecting and managing data and for smart and efficient management of data storage; Bed, Table 1, see “Backup: If a user asks to “perform a backup of file b on my computer,” [i.e., “backups of data associated with the user”] the system will generate a copy of file B in secondary storage [i.e., “second data source system”] based on the primary copy [i.e., “first data source system”] and provide the user with audio or visual confirmation of this operation.”; and Bed, [0198], see system may indicate that data from a primary copy 112 should be migrated to a secondary storage device 108 to free up space on primary storage device 104 [i.e., data is currently stored on the primary storage device/”first storage system”]).
Claim 7
With respect to claim 7, Bed discloses wherein the task comprises modifying, on the second data source system, security data associated with the user and stored on the first data source system or the second data source system (Bed, Table 1, see “A user can ask, “modify my files to include password protection” [i.e., “credentials for the user”]; then, the system can prompt the user for a password to add to the files.”).
Claim 8
With respect to claim 8, Bed discloses wherein the first action comprises obtaining dynamic data from the first data source system (Bed, [0205], see data associated with a storage policy can be logically organized into subclients, which may represent primary data 112 and/or secondary copies 116. A subclient may represent static or dynamic associations of portions of a data volume).
Claim 9
With respect to claim 9, Bed discloses wherein the processing circuitry is configured to:
authenticate, by a data access proxy layer, the first tool to the first data source system to enable the first tool to perform the first action (Bed, [0210], see an audit policy may further specify rules for handling sensitive objects. As an example, an audit policy may require that a reviewer approve the transfer of any sensitive objects to a cloud storage site, and that if approval is denied for a particular sensitive object, the sensitive object should be transferred to a local primary storage device 104 instead. To facilitate this approval, the audit policy may further specify how a secondary storage computing device 106 or other system component should notify a reviewer that a sensitive object is slated for transfer).
Claim 10
With respect to claim 10, Bed discloses wherein to authenticate the first tool to the first data source system, the processing circuitry is configured to authenticate, based on credentials for the user, the first tool to the first data source system (Bed, Table 1, see “A user can ask, “modify my files to include password protection” [i.e., “credentials for the user”]; then, the system can prompt the user for a password to add to the files.”).
Claim 11
With respect to claim 11, Bed discloses wherein the first action comprises sending an application programming interface (API) call to an API implemented by the first data source system (Bed, [0124], see management agent 154 can provide storage manager 140 with the ability to communicate with other components within system 100 and/or with other information management cells via network protocols and application programming interfaces (APIs) including, e.g., HTTP, HTTPS, FTP, REST, virtualization software APIs, cloud service provider APIs, and hosted service provider APIs, without limitation).
Claim 12
With respect to claim 12, Bed discloses wherein to generate the execution plan, the processing circuitry is configured to:
selecting, by the AI agent, based on a determination the user has permission to perform a particular action the first tool is capable of performing with respect to the first data source system, the actions of the execution plan to include the particular action (Bed, [0298], see checks permissions for different actions, permissions are stored as metadata; and Bed, [0293] in combination with Bed, [0132]-[0134], see “The environment 301 also enables a user to [...] use an administrative assistant component to communicate with the database management system. … The database management system manages data operations for networked computer devices and media agents.”, where data agents and media agents of the primary and secondary storage systems are used to access data there, see also Bed, Fig. 1C).
Claim 13
With respect to claim 13, Bed discloses wherein the first data source system and the second data source system are diverse (Bed, [0069], see information management system 100 can also include electronic data storage devices, generally used for mass storage of data, including, e.g., primary storage devices 104 and secondary storage devices 108. Storage devices can generally be of any suitable type including, without limitation, disk drives, storage arrays (e.g., storage-area network (SAN) and/or network-attached storage (NAS) technology), semiconductor memory (e.g., solid state storage devices), network attached storage (NAS) devices, tape libraries, or other magnetic, non-tape storage devices, optical media storage devices, DNA/RNA-based memory technology, combinations of the same, etc. In some embodiments, storage devices form part of a distributed file system. In some cases, storage devices are provided in a cloud storage environment (e.g., a private cloud or one operated by a third-party vendor), whether for primary data or secondary copies or both [i.e., disclosing all of the different storage devices that the “first data source system” and the “second data source system” may be]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
– Wang et al., 2024/0419484 for processing information;
– Russell et al., 12001418 for onboarding a data source for access via a virtual assistant;
– Sainani et al., 2017/0243132 for machine-learning data analysis tool; and
– Ewen et al., 7610264 for providing a learning optimizer for federated database systems.
Point of Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUBERT G CHEUNG whose telephone number is (571) 270-1396. The examiner can normally be reached M-R 8:00A-5:00P EST; alt. F 8:00A-4:00P EST.
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, Neveen Abel-Jalil can be reached at (571) 270-0474. 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.
HUBERT G. CHEUNG
Assistant Examiner
Art Unit 2152
Examiner: Hubert Cheung
/Hubert Cheung/Assistant Examiner, Art Unit 2152Date: March 16, 2026
/NEVEEN ABEL JALIL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2152