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’s Application filed on 04/04/2025 has been reviewed.
Claims 10-19 have been examined.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
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 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.
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 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
The claimed invention as recited in claims 15-19 are addressed to "an information technology system" that can be interpreted as referring to lines of programming within a computer system, rather than referring to the system as a physical object comprising hardware processor and non-transitory memory. The claimed invention is also addressed to plurality of “unit” that can be interpreting as a hardware system or a software system. Therefore, Examiner interprets the claimed system as a software system.
Accordingly, the claim recites no more than software, logic, or a data structure (i.e., an abstraction) and do not fall within any statutory category. In re Warmerdam, 33 F.3d 1354, 1361 (Fed. Cir. 1994). Significantly, "[a]bstract software code is an idea without physical embodiment." Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., 550 U.S. 437, 449 (2007).
As such, the claims are not limited to statutory subject matter and are therefore non-statutory.
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)(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) 10-16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20190089371 to Minoru Ozaki (hereinafter “Ozaki”).
As to claim 10, Ozaki teaches a method for compressing and decompressing log files using customizable dictionaries, the method comprising (computer implemented method in a system comprising processor and non-transitory computer readable storage medium, par. 0009-0011, 0050):
monitoring, by a monitoring unit, a runtime component, generating, by the monitoring unit based on the monitoring, a source log file, wherein the source log file documents behavior of the runtime component described during the monitoring (Fig. 3, par. 0041-0045, generating log data);
reading, by the monitoring unit, the source log file into a log encoder (Fig. 3, par. 0041-0045, compression processor 220 performs compression process, that is interpreted as a log encoder);
initializing, by the log encoder, a coding table from a versioned dictionary or from the source log file (Fig. 3, 7, par. 0041-0049, 0072-0075, 0081-0086, Device-side dictionary storage unit 250, including versioned dictionary);
generating, by the log encoder, an encoded log file by applying the coding table to the source log file (Fig. 3, par. 0041-0045, compression processor 220 performs compression process, that is interpreted as a log encoder);
transferring the encoded log file from the monitoring unit to a developer unit (Fig. 4, par. 0052-0057, log receiver 410 receive log files);
reading, by the developer unit, the encoded log file into a log decoder and obtaining, by the developer unit, a version reference to the versioned dictionary used by the log encoder or to the coding table from the monitoring unit (Fig. 4, par. 0052-0066, 0072-0075, 0081-0086, read encoded log file, including versioned dictionary);
accessing, by the developer unit, a dictionary database comprising different versioned dictionaries (Fig. 4, par. 0052-0066, 0072-0075, 0081-0086, versioned dictionary);
providing, by the developer unit to the log encoder, a dictionary corresponding to the version reference (Fig. 4, par. 0052-0066, 0072-0075, 0081-0086, versioned dictionary);
initializing, by the log encoder, a coding table from the versioned dictionary (Fig. 4, par. 0052-0066, 0072-0075, 0081-0086, versioned dictionary comprising codes); and
generating, by the log decoder, a decoded log file by applying the coding table to the encoded log file, wherein the monitoring unit reads in the source log file, generates a coding table depending on the information contained in the source log file, derives a dictionary from the coding table and provides the derived dictionary with a version reference, and transfers the dictionary and the version reference to the dictionary database for storage (Fig. 5-7, par. 0052-0066, 0072-0075, 0081-0086, 0090, storing versioned dictionary in dictionary storage unit 250 and 450).
As to claim 11, Ozaki teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the dictionary database is stored on a central computing device (Fig. 5-7, par. 0032-0038, 0052-0066, 0072-0075, 0081-0086, decode log file, including storing versioned dictionary in dictionary storage unit 250 and 450, and log collection server 400).
As to claim 12, Ozaki teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the log encoder writes the version reference into the encoded log file when generating the encoded log file depending on the dictionary used (Fig. 5-7, par. 0052-0066, 0072-0075, 0081-0086, 0117-0118, version reference, i.e. “decompression processor 420 specifies the compressed dictionary (and version thereof) shared with log generation device 200, which is the transmission source of the received log data from dictionary sharing information 530 stored in dictionary storage unit 450 (see FIG. 8). The transmission source of the log data can be specified from the identification information attached to the log data”).
As to claim 13, Ozaki teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the developer unit proactively requests the version reference from the monitoring unit or reads it from the encoded log file (Fig. 5-7, par. 0052-0066, 0072-0075, 0081-0086, request different versioned dictionary in dictionary storage unit 250 and 450).
As to claim 14, Ozaki teaches the method of claim 10, wherein the log encoder continues to use the initialized coding table to generate different encoded log files from different source log files or reinitializes the coding table when a new source log file is read in (Fig. 5-7, par. 0052-0066, 0072-0075, 0081-0086, different encoded log files based on different versioned dictionary in dictionary storage unit 250 and 450).
As to claim 15, Ozaki teaches an information technology system comprising (computer implemented method in a system comprising processor and non-transitory computer readable storage medium, par. 0009-0011, 0050):
a monitoring unit (Fig. 1, 3); and
a developer unit (Fig. 1, 4), wherein the monitoring unit is configured to monitoring a runtime component, generate, based on the monitoring, a source log file, wherein the source log file documents behavior of the runtime component described during the monitoring (Fig. 3, par. 0041-0045, generating log data), read the source log file into a log encoder (Fig. 3, par. 0041-0045, compression processor 220 performs compression process, that is interpreted as a log encoder), wherein the log encoder is configured to initialize a coding table from a versioned dictionary or from the source log file(Fig. 3, 7, par. 0041-0049, 0072-0075, 0081-0086, Device-side dictionary storage unit 250, including versioned dictionary) and the log encoder is configured to generate an encoded log file by applying the coding table to the source log file (Fig. 3, par. 0041-0045, compression processor 220 performs compression process, that is interpreted as a log encoder), and transfer the encoded log file to the developer unit (Fig. 4, par. 0052-0057, log receiver 410 receive log files), read in the source log file, generate a coding table depending on the information contained in the source log file, derive a dictionary from the coding table and provides the derived dictionary with a version reference (Fig. 4, par. 0052-0066, 0072-0075, 0081-0086, read encoded log file, including versioned dictionary), and transfer the dictionary and the version reference to a dictionary database for storage (Fig. 5-7, par. 0052-0066, 0072-0075, 0081-0086, storing versioned dictionary in dictionary storage unit 250 and 450), wherein the developer unit is configured to read the encoded log file into a log decoder and obtain a version reference to the versioned dictionary used by the log encoder or to the coding table from the monitoring unit file (Fig. 5-7, par. 0052-0066, 0072-0075, 0081-0086, request different versioned dictionary in dictionary storage unit 250 and 450), access the dictionary database comprising different versioned dictionaries, provide a dictionary corresponding to the version reference, wherein the log encoder is configured to initialize a coding table from the versioned dictionary file (Fig. 5-7, par. 0052-0066, 0072-0075, 0081-0086, request different versioned dictionary in dictionary storage unit 250 and 450), and the log encoder is configured to generate a decoded log file by applying the coding table to the encoded log file (par. 0087-0090, decompress log files).
As to claim 16, Ozaki teaches the information technology system of claim 15, wherein the monitoring unit and the developer unit are integrated into a common system (Fig. 1, par. 0027-0031, separate systems and/or common system).
As to claim 18, Ozaki teaches the information technology system of claim 15, wherein the monitoring unit and the developer unit are integrated into separate systems or form the separate systems (Fig. 1, par. 0027-0031, separate systems and/or common system).
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) 17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ozaki, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20210407220 to Fang et al. (hereinafter “Fang”).
As to claim 17, Ozaki teaches the information technology system of claim 16. Fang does not explicitly teach wherein the common system is a vehicle as claimed.
Fang teaches wherein the common system is a vehicle (par. 0018-0021, 0237-0242, system is a vehicle.)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine and/or modify the teaching of Ozaki with the teaching of Fang because they are in the same field of endeavor. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention would have been motivated to do so because the teaching of Fang would allow Ozaki to facilitate “… reduce and/or eliminate any one or more of: a cost per entity added to a data collection system, a basic learning cost for a new entity to implement an application utilizing collected data, an adaptation cost to changing vehicle network configuration(s), a cost incurred to meet the increasing demand for data collection, a cost to adapt to a changing regulatory environment, and/or a cost to secure data and/or losses incurred for breaches or unauthorized use …” (Fang, par. 0011-0017, 0220).
As to claim 19, Ozaki teaches the information technology system of claim 18. Ozaki does not explicitly teach wherein the monitoring unit is integrated into a vehicle and the developer unit is external to the vehicle as claimed.
Fang teaches wherein the monitoring unit is integrated into a vehicle and the developer unit is external to the vehicle (par. 0018-0021, 0237-0242, collecting data from a vehicle using external device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine and/or modify the teaching of Ozaki with the teaching of Fang because they are in the same field of endeavor. One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention would have been motivated to do so because the teaching of Fang would allow Ozaki to facilitate “… reduce and/or eliminate any one or more of: a cost per entity added to a data collection system, a basic learning cost for a new entity to implement an application utilizing collected data, an adaptation cost to changing vehicle network configuration(s), a cost incurred to meet the increasing demand for data collection, a cost to adapt to a changing regulatory environment, and/or a cost to secure data and/or losses incurred for breaches or unauthorized use …” (Fang, par. 0011-0017, 0220).
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANHTAI V TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5129. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Thursday from 8:00 AM to 4:00 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, Charles Rones can be reached on (571)272-4085. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANHTAI V TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2168
Prosecution Insights