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 .
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
Priority
The claim for priority from US Provisional 63/637,297 filed on 22 April 2024 is duly noted.
Claim Objections
Claims 6 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 6, line 3: “endpoint device” should read –endpoint devices–;
In claim 14, line 2: “at least function” should read –at least one function–.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flores et al. (US 2023/0142150 A1 and Flores hereinafter).
As to claims 1, 11, and 20, Flores discloses a system and method for adapter orchestration as a service, the system and method having:
receiving a request to generate a data abstraction layer instance, wherein the request includes a set of configuration parameters (0030, lines 1-4; 0031, lines 1-2; 0061, lines 3-6; Figure 1A; Figure 4);
identifying, based on the request, a data abstraction layer among a plurality of data abstraction layers implemented by the data gateway (0052, lines 2-4; 0063, lines 1-3; Figure3; Figure 4);
performing at least one operation to generate the data abstraction layer instance based on the data abstraction layer and using the set of configuration parameters (0031, lines 5-11; Figure 1A); and
causing at least one additional request to be routed to the data abstraction layer instance for processing (0035, lines 1-2; 0065, lines 2-6; Figure 1B; Figure 4).
Flores does not explicitly disclose via a data gateway; however, Flores discloses that the infrastructure comprises a platform (e.g. servers) and may be connected to user systems via networks (0023). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that this would include using a gateway.
As to claims 2 and 15, Flores discloses:
wherein the data abstraction layer instance includes security logic derived from the data abstraction layer, and performing the at least one operation comprises causing the data abstraction layer instance to perform an authentication with at least one datastore associated with the data abstraction layer instance (0025, lines 11-15).
As to claims 3 and 16, Flores discloses:
wherein performing the at least one operation further comprises validating at least one authentication credential included in the request (0025, lines 11-15).
As to claims 4 and 17, Flores discloses:
wherein the data abstraction layer instance includes data operation logic derived from the data abstraction layer (0031, lines 5-10).
As to claims 5 and 18, Flores discloses:
wherein the at least one operation comprises generating an instance of at least one datastore associated with the data operation logic (0031; 0032).
As to claims 6 and 19, Flores discloses:
wherein the request is transmitted by an endpoint device, and further comprising authenticating at least one of the endpoint device or a user associated with the endpoint device prior to performing the at least one operation (0025, lines 11-15).
As to claim 7, Flores discloses:
wherein the data abstraction layer instance is included in a plurality of data abstraction layer instances implemented by the data gateway, and each data abstraction layer instance included in the plurality of data abstraction layer instances is associated with a particular data abstraction layer included in the plurality of data abstraction layers (0031).
As to claim 8, Flores discloses:
wherein first data operations executed by the data abstraction layer instance are isolated from second data operations executed by a different data abstraction layer instance included in the plurality of data abstraction layer instances (0031, lines 1-5).
As to claim 9, Flores discloses:
performing at least one second operation to generate a second data abstraction layer instance based on a second data abstraction layer included in the plurality of data abstraction layers and using a second set of configuration parameters (0031; 0052).
As to claim 10, Flores discloses:
wherein the set of configuration parameters includes at least one of a read operation capacity, a write operation capacity, a latency capacity, a retention scheme, or a service criticality level (0052, lines 16-24).
As to claim 12, Flores discloses:
wherein the data abstraction layer instance implements at least one function that endpoint devices authorized to interface with the data abstraction layer instance call (0063; 0065).
As to claim 13, Flores discloses:
wherein calling the at least one function comprises receiving at least one function parameter associated with the at least one function (0063; 0065).
As to claim 14, Flores discloses:
wherein the at least function comprises at least one of a data read operation, a data modification operation, or a data migration operation (0063; 0065).
Prior Art Made of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
D’Souza et al. (US 2017/0085554 A1) discloses a system and method for cloud key directory for federating data exchanges.
Garcia et al. (US 2014/0201850 A1) discloses a system and method for providing access control to secured data.
Opulskis et al. (US 2026/0143310 A1) discloses a system and method for provisioning multi-provider secure subscriber identification module services.
Ouye et al. (EP 1324565 A1) discloses a system and method for providing access to secured data from non-secured clients.
Pandey et al. (US 2021/0112067 A1) discloses a system and method for secure data access control.
Seewald et al. (WO 2020/106342 A3) discloses a system and method for attribute-based encryption for microservices.
Sood et al. (WO 2023/075828 A1) discloses a system and method for secure key management for service mesh deployments.
Walley et al. (US 2015/0134954 A1) discloses a system and method for sensor management in an IoT network.
Zimmerman et al. (US 2025/0330454 A1) discloses a system and method for techniques for accessing and interacting with data using data abstraction layers implemented by a data gateway.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH SU whose telephone number is (571)270-3835. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30 AM - 3:00 PM.
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, Lynn Feild can be reached at 571-272-2092. 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.
/SARAH SU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2431
Prosecution Insights