DETAILED ACTION
The present application 19/125,710, filed on 04/29/2025, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A preliminary amendment filed on 04/29/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-14 are pending.
Drawings
The drawings received on 04/29/2025 are accepted by the Examiner.
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 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.
Claims 1-5, 8, 11 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Klenk (US 2020/0242114 A1) and in view of Cunningham (WO 2005/045590 A2).
Referring to claim 1, Klenk discloses a computer-implemented method comprising:
generating an object-centric data model of recorded process data (See para. [0009], [0056]-para. [0066], determines business objects suitable for creation of a process protocol such as “orders” and “vendors” [e.g. objects], wherein the orders and vendors are stored in respective data tables; select additional related tables based on the selected base table; and creates a process protocol based on the selected base table and the related tables), wherein the recorded process data is a multidimensional data set (See para. [0002], para. [0003], para. [0010]-para. [0014], the selected related tables containing respective attributes and process information corresponds to multidimensional data set) which comprises data recorded during executions from processes and is extracted from at least one external computer system (See para. [0002]-para. [0003], [0010]-para. [0014], para. [0025] para. [0056]-para. [0066], each process step creates data during execution, which is stored in the corresponding computer system, the process data is stored in a number of data tables in external computer system(s)) wherein a process comprises a number of process steps (See para. [0002], para. [0087]-para. [0092], para. [0100], the process may comprise several process steps, for example, creation of an order, price changes, vendor calls, and confirmation of an order), wherein a number of object instances participate in executing the number of process steps (See para. [0072]-para. [0075], para. [0080]-para. [0093], idenfies business objects such as orders and vendors, with orders stored in one table and vendors in another table, the process activities including creation/change of an order, vendor calls, and confirmation of an order are performed with respect to those business objects, thus individual orders/vendors corresponding to object instances associated with and participating in the disclosed process activities) wherein the method comprises:
providing a number of first data structures, wherein a number of attributes of each first data structure define an object type (See para. [0066]-para. [0067], para [0072]-para. [0078] and para. [0093], providing a plurality of data tables having attributes and columns and identifying tables corresponding to respective business objects, such as orders and vendors. The attributes and column names and corresponding values characterize the information stored for corresponding business object), for each object type, determining a number of object instances in the recorded process data and storing each object instance in a record of the first data structure […] (See para. [0072]-para. [0075], para. [0078], determining business objects from the imported process data. Orders are stored in the orders table and vendors are stored in the vendors table, with individual records of the respective table representing individual instances of the corresponding business-object type); and generating the object-centric data model based on the number of first data structures (See para. [0075]-para. [0077], para. [0095], para. [0097]-para. [0099] generating a resulting process representation based on the data structures associated with the selected business object and their relationships. The disclosed transformation uses the selected base table together with relevant tables and relationships, which extracts data from the attributes of the tables and stores the extracted data as the process protocol).
Klenk does not explicitly disclose each object instance is assigned to exactly one object type and storing a scope value in at least one attribute of the first data structure.
Cunningham discloses each object instance is assigned to exactly one object type (See para. [0064] and para. [0073], each object having a type, a given instance may conform to at most one type together with that type’s supertypes) and storing a scope value in at least one attribute of the first data structure (See para. [0076], para [0078]-para. [0081], para. [0084], para. [0098]-para. [0099], storing a “type path” column in a table, wherein a hierarchical type-path value is stored with each object in the table, the value identifies the path through the hierarchy to the object’s type, and the encoding enables lookup based on the object’s type-hierarchy location), wherein the scope value comprises a pointer into an emerging hierarchical structure (See para. [0076], para [0078]-para. [0081], para. [0084], para. [0098]-para. [0099], the stored type-path value corresponds to the claimed scope value because it is stored as an attribute/column associated with the object and identifies the object’s location within the hierarchical type structure, the stored type-path value functions as the claimed pointer into the hierarchical structure, note in para. [0073]-para. [0074] discloses an extensible type system in which an existing type can be extended to create a new type and the result inherence hierarchy containing newly derived subtypes).
Therefore, it 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 was made to modify the Klenk’s object-based process-data tables to store each object instance and a hierarchical type-path value identifying the object’s type and its position within a type hierarchy, as taught by Cunningham. One of ordinary skill art would have been motivated to make such a modification to improve the efficiency of identifying and retrieving object instances according to object type and hierarchy type location, because Cunningham expressly teaches that the type-path technique provides efficient searching of object instances and can be used in fast-access indexing structures for searching objects based on type or type hierarchy (See Cunningham, para. [0077] and para [0078]).
As to claim 2, Cunningham also discloses wherein the scope value is a string comprising categorical data that is separated by a delimiter (See para. [0078]-para.[0081] assigns each type a respective identifier and stores a type-path value representing the object’s position in the type hierarchy; for example, “document” is encoded as “1”, “Legal document” as “1.2” and “Washington legal document” as “1.2.4”, the respective type identifiers correspond to categorical data identifying respective object types and the periods separating the respective type identifiers function as delimiters in the stored type-path string).
As to claim 3, Cunningham also discloses wherein the string has the format of a pathname (See para. [0078]-para.[0081] a hierarchal type-path string comprising successive type identifiers arranged according to their respective positions in the type hierarchy, e.g., “1.2.4” wherein the type-path string identifies a path through successive levels of the hierarchy to the object’s type, corresponding to the claimed pathname).
As to claim 4, Klenk discloses comprises extracting the categorical data from the recorded process data (See para. [0072]-para. [0078], para. [0095], para. [0097]-para. [0099], generating a resulting process representation by extracting data from attributes of the corresponding data tables; the extracted information identifies and characterizes the respective business-object types, corresponding to categorical data extracted from the recorded process).
As to claim 5, Klenk discloses wherein the method further comprises extracting the categorical data according to a logical structure (See para. [0018]-para. [0023], para. [0029]-para. [0031], creating an executable transformation based on the selected first data table, the selected second data tables, and the relationships between the selected data tables, wherein the transformation extracts data from the selected tables; the relationships between the data tables are reconstructed based on a data model, the data model and the relationships among the tables corresponding to the claimed logical structure).
As to claim 8, Klein does not explicitly disclose wherein the first data structure is a first table of a relational database, wherein the object type defines at least a part of a schema of the first table.
Cunningham discloses wherein the first data structure is a first table of a relational database (See para. [0052], para. [0053], para. [0070], para. [0072], a data store implemented using a relational database engine and comprising a table of objects, each object having a respective type), wherein the object type defines at least a part of a schema of the first table (See para. [0064], para. [0069], the storage platform schemas are mapped to UDT classes in the databases engine and that data-store objects are mapped to UDT classes).
Therefore, it 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 was made to modify the Klenk’s relational database structure such that an object type defines at least a portion of the schema of a table, as taught by Cunningham. One of ordinary skill art would have been motivated to make such a modification in order to provide a schematized and extensible data structure that supports efficient storage and retrieval of objects according to their types, because Cunningham teaches that its common storage foundation and schematized data enable more efficient application development and that its type-based structure facilitate efficient retrieval of objects based on type (See Cunningham, para. [0026]-para. [0029] and para. [0059]).
As to claim 11, Klenk discloses providing a number of second data structures, wherein a number of attributes of each second data structure defines an event type (See para. [0093], para. [0095], para. [0100]-para. [0104], para. [0107], providing a number of data structures corresponding to event/activity types, for each determined activity , the system identifies and stores the attributes/column names required for creation of a process protocol, each data set of the process protocol represents a process step/activity/event, and the process protocol includes attributes identifying the process and the respective process step), for each event type, determining a number of process steps in the recorded process data and storing each process step in a record of the second data structure such that each process step is assigned to exactly one event type (See para. [0095], para. [0100], para. [0107], an own process protocol is created for each selected activity/event type, that each data set stored in the respective process protocol represents a process step/activity/event, and that an identifier corresponding to the respective process step/activity is determined and stored); storing [..] values in at least one attribute of the second data structure (See para. [0101]-para. [0106]); determining at least one relationship, wherein the relationship links a process step to an object instance (See para. [0102], para. [0106], para. [0132]-para. [0141], each process-step record stores a unique identifier of the process, for example, for an order, the unique order number is read from the base table and stored as the process identifier in the process protocol, each process-step/event record is linked to corresponding order object instance), and generating the object-centric data model based on the number of first data structures, the number of second data structures and the at least one relationship (See para. [0097]-para. [0098], generating a resulting process data structure based on the base table corresponding to the business object, the additional tables corresponding to the selected activities/events, and the determined relationships among the relevant tables).
Klenk does not explicitly disclose storing a scope value in at least one attribute of a data structure.
Cunningham discloses storing a scope value in at least one attribute of a data structure (See para. [0076], para [0078]-para. [0081], para. [0084], para. [0098]-para. [0099], storing a “type path” column in a table, wherein a hierarchical type-path value is stored with each object in the table, the value identifies the path through the hierarchy to the object’s type, and the encoding enables lookup based on the object’s type-hierarchy location).
Therefore, it 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 was made to modify the Klenk’s object-based process-data tables to store each object instance and a hierarchical type-path value identifying the object’s type and its position within a type hierarchy, as taught by Cunningham. One of ordinary skill art would have been motivated to make such a modification to improve the efficiency of identifying and retrieving object instances according to object type and hierarchy type location, because Cunningham expressly teaches that the type-path technique provides efficient searching of object instances and can be used in fast-access indexing structures for searching objects based on type or type hierarchy (See Cunningham, para. [0077] and para [0078]).
As to claim 14, Klenk discloses discovering a process graph from the object-centric data model, wherein the process graph is provided for an analysis of the recorded process data (See para. [0109], the Process Mining System reads and processes the process protocol and that a complete process graph can be created and visualized, the graph comprising the process steps of the processes stored in the process protocol, a complete process hierarchy can be created and visualized as a process graph).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Klenk (US 2020/0242114 A1) and in view of Cunningham (WO 2005045590 A2) and further in view of Chen (US 20230145273 A1).
As to claim 6, Klenk discloses wherein extracting the categorical data by
- providing a number of attributes being assigned to the logical structure (See para. [0067], para. [0072] and para. [0078] identifies relationships between imported data tables are reconstructed and stored within a database scheme/data model and determines the attributes/column names required for creation of the process protocol, the attributes/columns are associated with the tables and relationships making up the reconstructed data model used for the process protocol);
- assigning each attribute to at least one data source of at least one external computer system to determine process data related to the respective attribute (See para. [0056]-para. [0067], para. [0072]-para. [0078], external computer systems EC1-EC3 that provide process data, where respective data is stored in respective tables of the external computer systems, for example, the data of an order process may be stored in EC1, vendor-related data may be stored in EC2, and other process data maybe stored in EC3, the tables are imported from those external systems, and the system determines attributes of the respective tables that are required the process protocol).
Klenk does not explicitly disclose generating for each attribute, at least one execution command for extracting the categorical data corresponding to the respective attribute.
Chen discloses generating, for each attribute, at least one execution command to extract the categorical data corresponding to the respective attribute (See para. [0036] and para. [0037], receiving tables from the same or different data sources, including one or more remote databases, where the tables contain attributes and corresponding attribute data, and identifying the attributes and corresponding attribute data from each table), and
executing, for each attribute, the at least one execution command (See para. [0097]-para. [0099], creating SQL code to identify attributes and corresponding attribute data and creating an executable transformation that extracts data from the necessary attributes of the relevant tables and executing the transformation).
Therefore, it 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 was made to modify the Klenk’s to employ Chen’s executable code for extracting data corresponding the respective attributes. One of ordinary skill art would have been motivated to make such a modification to improve data-access performance by decreasing the bandwidth, resources and time required to generate query results (See Chen, para [0025]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Klenk (US 2020/0242114 A1) and in view of Cunningham (WO 2005045590 A2) and Chen (US 20230145273 A1) and further in view of Faulkner (US 20160379146 A1).
As to claim 7, Klenk in view of Chen does not explicitly disclose generating the at least one execution command based on a configuration file and wherein executing the at least one execution command by an executor.
Faulkner discloses generating at least one execution command based on a configuration file (See para. [0030] and para. [0031], selecting or creating a configuration file that specifies the work to be performed between an endpoint and a construction jobsite system) and wherein executing at least one execution command by an executor (see para. [0030] and para. [0031] and para. [0038], the integrator platform 132 executes via a processor, the integrator platform executes to connect the plugin with the wrapper, opens the configuration file and performs the specified operations).
Therefore, it 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 was made to modify the Klenk’s to generate the execution command based on a configuration file and execute the execution command using an executor, as taught by Faulkner. One of ordinary skill art would have been motivated to make such a modification to facilitate integration with different external data sources and reduce the need to manually construct individual execution commands (See Faulkner, para. [0030], para. [0031], para. [0048]).
Claims 9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Klenk (US 2020/0242114 A1) and in view of Cunningham (WO 2005045590 A2) and further in view of Haley (US Patent 8131757 B2).
As to claim 9, Klenk in view of Cunningham does not explicitly disclose providing at least one first taxonomy, wherein each first taxonomy comprises a number of classes, wherein each class defines a number of object type attributes.
Haley discloses providing at least one first taxonomy, wherein each first taxonomy comprises a number of classes, wherein each class defines a number of object type attributes (See para. [0041]-para. [0046] and para. [0060], providing multiple separately defined taxonomies comprising categories, wherein respective categories define/support corresponding attributes, such as Height, Depth and Material); linking each object type to a number of classes (See para. [0043], para. [0045] and para. [0081], a concrete example, the category “sliding metal doors” in the MasterFormat taxonomy and “sliding doors” in the OmniClass taxonomy both map to the same canonical category “sliding doors”, the categories belonging to different taxonomies are linked to the same canonical category type), wherein each class is part of a different first taxonomy such that the number of attributes of the first data structure is defined by the number of classes the respective object type is linked to (See para. [0073], para. [0074] and para. [0085], for each mapping category associated with a canonical category, attributes defined by the mapping category are inserted into the data representation and corresponding attribute fields are added to the resulting data structure).
Therefore, it 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 was made to modify the Klenk’s/Cunningham to organize object types using the multiple taxonomy and category-attribute mappings taught by Haley. One of ordinary skill art would have been motivated to employ Haley’s taxonomy-based classification to provide a more flexible and scalable mechanism for defining and organizing the attributes associated with the object types (See Haley, para. [0055] and para. [0056]).
As to claim 12, Klenk in view of Cunningham does not explicitly disclose providing at least one second taxonomy, wherein each second taxonomy comprises a number of classes, wherein each class defines a number of object type attributes.
Haley discloses providing at least one second taxonomy, wherein each second taxonomy comprises a number of classes, wherein each class defines a number of object type attributes (See para. [0041]-para. [0046] and para. [0060], providing multiple separately defined taxonomies comprising categories, wherein respective categories define/support corresponding attributes, such as Height, Depth and Material); linking each object type to a number of classes (See para. [0043], para. [0045] and para. [0081], a concrete example, the category “sliding metal doors” in the MasterFormat taxonomy and “sliding doors” in the OmniClass taxonomy both map to the same canonical category “sliding doors”, the categories belonging to different taxonomies are linked to the same canonical category type), wherein each class is part of a different second taxonomy such that the number of attributes of the second data structure is defined by the number of classes the respective object type is linked to (See para. [0073], para. [0074] and para. [0085], for each mapping category associated with a canonical category, attributes defined by the mapping category are inserted into the data representation and corresponding attribute fields are added to the resulting data structure).
Therefore, it 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 was made to modify the Klenk’s/Cunningham to organize object types using the multiple taxonomy and category-attribute mappings taught by Haley. One of ordinary skill art would have been motivated to employ Haley’s taxonomy-based classification to provide a more flexible and scalable mechanism for defining and organizing the attributes associated with the object types (See Haley, para. [0055] and para. [0056]).
Claims 10 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Klenk (US 2020/0242114 A1) and in view of Cunningham (WO 2005045590 A2) and Haley (US Patent 8,131,757 B2) and further in view of Althoff (US Patent 6,374,252 B1).
As to claim 10, Klenk in view of Haley discloses the taxonomy/class links from claim 9 but does not explicitly disclose a pointer assigned to the object type pointing to the class.
Althoff discloses assigning a number of first pointers to the object type, wherein each first pointer refers to a single class (See col 13, lines 8-23 and col 14, lines 34-36, each class 301 may have zero or more associated Pointer class property 304 objects, and that each Pointer Class Property 304 has a pointer to an object of the user-defined type, the pointer is represented by a pointer valid class 305, each Pointer valid class 305 links the respective Pointer Class Property 304 to a target class 101).
Therefore, it 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 was made to modify the taxonomy-based data model of Haley to implement the links between an object type and the respective classes using the pointer mechanism, taught by Althoff in order to provide a known and predictable way to expressly represent and maintain the relationships between a type and its associated target classes (See Althoff, col 12, lines 16-23; col 14, lines 34-36)
As to claim 13, Klenk in view of Haley discloses the taxonomy/class links from claim 12 (See Haley, para. [0081] and para. [0082]) but does not explicitly disclose a pointer assigned to the event type pointing to the class.
Althoff discloses assigning a number of second pointers to the event type, wherein each second pointer refers to a single class (See col 13, lines 8-23 and col 14, lines 34-36, each class 301 may have zero or more associated Pointer class property 304 objects, and that each Pointer Class Property 304 has a pointer to an object of the user-defined type, the pointer is represented by a pointer valid class 305, each Pointer valid class 305 links the respective Pointer Class Property 304 to a target class 101, the respective target classes/categories belong to different taxonomies).
Therefore, it 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 was made to modify the taxonomy-based data model of Haley to implement the links between an event type and the respective classes using the pointer mechanism, taught by Althoff in order to provide a known and predictable way to expressly represent and maintain the relationships between a type and its associated target classes (See Althoff, col 12, lines 16-23; col 14, lines 34-36)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Bohme et al. (US 2021/0133172 A1) discloses a method of creating, storing and retrieving data sets including many complex data elements comprising the steps of receiving multiple data elements to be stored from an input data structure, providing a transformed and normalized data structure for storage into an inverted index and storage data system and providing a inverted index based search engine that allows to retrieve those data elements using hierarchical and relational data queries.
Tsypliaev et al. (US 10019537 B1) discloses storing input data including axioms representing facts into data objects. The data objects are retrieved and converted into n-tuple format based on context. The axioms in order to determine a subject is processed. The attributes of the data objects at runtime are defined. The data objects are tagged with the auto-tags based on the indirect relationships between the data objects. The data objects are ranked according to the auto-tags. A search area is identified based on the data objects. The search area variants are represented for specified search areas. A request is received for search of a data object in the search area and searching for auto-tagged data objects.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUK TING CHOI whose telephone number is (571)270-1637. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-6pm.
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, AMY NG can be reached at 5712701698. 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.
/YUK TING CHOI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2164
Prosecution Insights