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.
The claims and only the claims form the metes and bounds of the invention. “Office personnel are to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. In re Morris, 127 3d 1048, 1054-55, 44 USPQ2d 1023, 1027-28 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Limitations appearing in the specification but not recited in the claim are not read into the claim. In re Prater, 415 F.2d 1393, 1404-05, 162 USPQ 541, 550-551 (CCPA 1969)” (MPEP p 2100-8, c 2, I 45-48; p 2100-9, c 1, l 1-4). The Examiner has full latitude to interpret each claim in the broadest reasonable sense. The Examiner will reference prior art using terminology familiar to one of ordinary skill in the art. Such an approach is broad in concept and can be either explicit or implicit in meaning.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,386,855.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because following the rationale in In re Goodman, cited above, where applicant has once been granted a patent containing a claim for the specific or narrower invention, applicant may not then obtain a second patent with a claim for the generic or broader invention without first submitting an appropriate terminal disclaimer.
Instant Application
US Patent No. 12,386,855
1. A computing platform comprising: at least one processor; a communication interface communicatively coupled to the at least one processor; and memory storing computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to:
generate a multi-layered ingestion program configured to automatically ingest information from an information management system to a central information repository, wherein the central information repository is remote from the computing platform;
automatically generate, using the multi-layered ingestion program, a plurality of executable scripts, wherein each executable script of the plurality of executable scripts corresponds to a layer of the multi-layered ingestion program;
identify, by automatically executing at least one script corresponding to a first layer of the multi-layered ingestion program,
a first subset of information stored in the information management system,
wherein the first subset of information stored in the information management system comprises information marked for ingestion to the central information repository; and
execute a plurality of scripts corresponding to a second layer of the multi-layered ingestion program to ingest the first subset of information, wherein executing the plurality of scripts corresponding to the second layer causes the computing platform to:
transfer the first subset of ingested information stored in the information management system to a third layer, wherein transferring the first subset of ingested information to the third layer comprises:
initially transferring the first subset of ingested information to a stage sublayer of the third layer, wherein the stage sublayer comprises memory that stores the first subset of ingested information in a first format;
merging the stage sublayer with a secure sublayer of the third layer,
wherein the secure sublayer comprises a structured query language layer of the central information repository that stores the first subset of ingested information in the first format and in a second format; and causing, based on the merging, synchronization of the central information repository with the third layer.
1. A computing platform comprising: at least one processor; a communication interface communicatively coupled to the at least one processor; and memory storing computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to:
generate a multi-layered ingestion program configured to automatically ingest information from an information management system to a central information repository;
receive a query requesting ingestion of information, from the information management system and to the central information repository, wherein the central information repository is remote from the computing platform;
automatically generate, using the multi-layered ingestion program and based on the query, a plurality of executable scripts, wherein each executable script of the plurality of executable scripts corresponds to a layer of the multi-layered ingestion program, wherein the plurality of executable scripts comprises: at least one script corresponding to a first layer of the multi-layered ingestion program, and a plurality of scripts corresponding to a second layer of the multi-layered ingestion program,
identify, by automatically executing the at least one script corresponding to the first layer, a first subset of information stored in the information management system,
wherein the first subset of information stored in the information management system comprises information marked for ingestion to the central information repository; and
execute the plurality of scripts corresponding to the second layer to ingest the first subset of information, wherein executing the plurality of scripts corresponding to the second layer causes the computing platform to: deploy a schedule management program for the second layer; and
transfer, using the schedule management program, the first subset of ingested information stored in the information management system to a third layer, wherein transferring the first subset of ingested information to the third layer comprises:
initially transferring the first subset of ingested information to a stage sublayer of the third layer, wherein the stage sublayer comprises memory that stores the first subset of ingested information in a first format;
merging the stage sublayer with a secure sublayer of the third layer,
wherein the secure sublayer comprises a structured query language layer of the central information repository that stores the first subset of ingested information in the first format and in a second format; and causing, based on the merging, synchronization of the central information repository with the third layer.
2. The computing platform of claim 1, wherein initially transferring the first subset of ingested information to the stage sublayer comprises: causing, by automatically executing a first script of the plurality of scripts corresponding to the second layer, execution of a shell script corresponding to the first script; translating, by executing the shell script, the first subset of ingested information into a transferable format; and
storing the translated first subset of ingested information in the stage sublayer of the third layer of the multi-layered ingestion program.
2. The computing platform of claim 1, wherein initially transferring the first subset of ingested information to the stage sublayer comprises: causing, by automatically executing a first script of the plurality of scripts corresponding to the second layer, execution of a shell script corresponding to the first script; translating, by executing the shell script, the first subset of ingested information into a transferable format; and
storing the translated first subset of ingested information in the stage sublayer of the third layer of the multi-layered ingestion program.
3. he computing platform of claim 1, wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to: store, prior to transferring the first subset of ingested information to the third layer, the first subset of ingested information to a view sublayer of the third layer of the multi-layered ingestion program, wherein the view sublayer is configured to, based on an authenticated view request, cause display of the first subset of ingested information; and cause, based on the authenticated view request and via the view sublayer, display of the first subset of ingested information.
3. The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to: store, prior to transferring the first subset of ingested information to the third layer, the first subset of ingested information to a view sublayer of the third layer of the multi-layered ingestion program, wherein the view sublayer is configured to, based on an authenticated view request, facilitate display of the first subset of ingested information; and cause, based on the authenticated view request and via the view sublayer, display of the first subset of ingested information.
4. The computing platform of claim 3, wherein the causing display of the first subset of ingested information comprises: executing, based on the storing, at least one script, of the plurality of executable scripts, corresponding to the third layer of the multi-layered ingestion program; and
caching, by executing the at least one script corresponding to the third layer, one or more portions of the first subset of ingested information.
4. The computing platform of claim 3, wherein the causing display of the first subset of ingested information comprises: executing, based on the storing, at least one script, of the plurality of executable scripts, corresponding to the third layer of the multi-layered ingestion program; and
caching, by executing the at least one script corresponding to the third layer, one or more portions of the first subset of ingested information.
5. The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to:
receive a request to update the first subset of ingested information based on a second subset of information;
transfer, using a schedule management program and by automatically executing a script of the plurality of scripts corresponding to the second layer, the second subset of information from the information management system to the stage sublayer of the third layer of the multi-layered ingestion program; and
update, based on the second subset of information, the first subset of ingested information at the secure sublayer by merging the first subset of ingested information with the second subset of information.
5. The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to:
receive a request to update the first subset of ingested information based on a second subset of information;
transfer, using the schedule management program and by automatically executing a script of the plurality of scripts corresponding to the second layer, the second subset of information from the information management system to the stage sublayer of the third layer of the multi-layered ingestion program; and
update, based on the second subset of information, the first subset of ingested information at the secure sublayer by merging the first subset of ingested information with the second subset of information.
6. The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the secure sublayer includes historical information previously ingested by the central information repository within a specific period of time.
6. The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the secure sublayer includes historical information previously ingested by the central information repository within a specific period of time.
7. The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to: automatically generate an ingestion result document, wherein the ingestion result document comprises: a plurality of categories associated with the first subset of ingested information;
a mapping of one or more portions of the first subset of ingested information and corresponding to each of the plurality of categories; and one or more permissible use fields indicating a portion of the first subset of ingested information that requires authentication to receive access to the portion.
7. The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to: automatically generate an ingestion result document, wherein the ingestion result document includes: a plurality of categories associated with the first subset of ingested information;
a mapping of one or more portions of the first subset of ingested information and corresponding to each of the plurality of categories; and one or more permissible use fields indicating a portion of the first subset of ingested information that requires authentication to receive access to the portion.
8. The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to store the multi-layered ingestion program to the memory of the computing platform.
8. The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to store the multi-layered ingestion program to the memory of the computing platform
9. The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the central information repository comprises a data lake.
20. The computing platform of claim 1, wherein the central information repository comprises a data lake.
Claim 10 (a method claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 1, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 17 (a computer readable medium claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 1, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 11 (a method claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 2, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 18 (a computer readable medium claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 2, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 12 (a method claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 3, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 19 (a computer readable medium claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 3, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 13 (a method claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 4, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 20 (a computer readable medium claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 4, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 14 (a method claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 5, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 15 (a method claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 7, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 16 (a method claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 8, and is similarly rejected.
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 1-20 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.
Claims 1, 10 and 17 recite “… wherein the secure sublayer comprises a structured query language layer of the central information repository that stores the first subset of ingested information in the first format and in a second format”.
It is not clear whether it is the “structured query language layer” or the “central information repository” that stores “the first subset of ingested information in the first format and in a second format”.
Claims 2-9, 11-16 and 18-20 depend from claim 1, 9 and 17, and are rejected for the same reason(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph.
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.
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.
Claims 1-2, 5-6, 8, 10-11, 14 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US PGPUB 2018/0089289 by Zhang et al. (“Zhang”) in view of US PGPUB 2018/0198614 by Neumann et al. (“Neumann”).
As to Claim 1, Zhang teaches a computing platform comprising: at least one processor (Zhang: at least ¶0107; “one or more hardware processors configured to execute the instructions stored in the one or more memories”; ¶¶0533-0534 also disclose “hardware architecture of a computing system 450 can be used to implement any one or more of the functional components described herein” and “one or more processing devices 452”); a communication interface communicatively coupled to the at least one processor (Zhang: at least ¶0534; “one or more communication devices 456, one or more input/output (I/O) devices 458”); and memory storing computer-readable instructions (Zhang: at least ¶0536; “memory device 454 and/or mass storage device 460 can store (individually or collectively) data and instructions”) that, when executed by the at least one processor (Zhang: at least ¶0537; “generally, a processor will receive instructions and data from a read-only memory or a random access memory or both. The essential elements of a computer are a processor for performing instructions and one or more memory devices for storing instructions and data”), cause the computing platform to: generate a multi-layered ingestion program configured to automatically ingest information from an information management system (Zhang: at least ¶0126; “each data source 44 broadly represents a distinct source of data that can be consumed by a system 32”; ¶0128 further discloses “data store 48 may contain events derived from machine data from a variety of sources all pertaining to the same component in an IT environment, and this data may be produced by the machine in question or by other components in the IT environment”; ¶0322 further discloses “data ingested by the data intake and query system”; note: software program generated in memories for execution) to a central information repository, wherein the central information repository is remote from the computing platform (Zhang: at least ¶¶0125, 0128; “store the data in one or more data stores 48” and “data store 48 may contain events derived from machine data from a variety of sources all pertaining to the same component in an IT environment, and this data may be produced by the machine in question or by other components in the IT environment”; ¶0544 further discloses “multiple computers that are located at one site or distributed across multiple sites and interconnected by a communication network”);
automatically generate, using the multi-layered ingestion program, a plurality of executable scripts, wherein each executable script of the plurality of executable scripts corresponds to a layer of the multi-layered ingestion program (Zhang: at least ¶0125; “system 32 includes one or more forwarders 42 …. one or more indexers 46 … one or more data stores 48”; ¶0322 further discloses “data ingested by the data intake and query system”; ¶0543 explains that “a computer program (also known as a program, software, software application, script, or code)”; note: Zhang’s layers of forwarders, indexers, data stores that are programs or scripts comprising sequence of instructions);
identify, by automatically executing at least one script corresponding to a first layer of the multi-layered ingestion program, a first subset of information stored in the information management system (Zhang: at least ¶¶0125, 0127; “forwarders and indexers can comprise separate computer systems, or may alternatively comprise separate processes executing on one or more computer systems” and “forwarders 42 identify which indexers 46 receive data collected from a data source 44 and forward the data to the appropriate indexers. Forwarders 42 can also perform operations on the data before forwarding, including removing extraneous data, detecting timestamps in the data, parsing data, indexing data, routing data based on criteria relating to the data being routed, and/or performing other data transformations”; note: Fig. 4 shows a first layer of forwarders 42), wherein the first subset of information stored in the information management system comprises information marked for ingestion to the central information repository (Zhang: at least ¶0266; “universal forwarder 216 may collect data securely from one or more remote sources over a computer network and forward the collected data to the receiver 212 of a data intake and query system for processing, storage, and analysis”; ¶0127; “forwarders 42 identify which indexers 46 receive data collected from a data source 44 and forward the data to the appropriate indexers”; note: information on remotes sources identified or marked for ingestion); and
execute a plurality of scripts corresponding to a second layer of the multi-layered ingestion program to ingest the first subset of information (Zhang: at least ¶¶0128, 0135; “a forwarder 42 may perform routing of events to indexers” and “an indexer receives data blocks from a forwarder and parses the data to organize the data into events”; ¶0263 further discloses “collection mechanisms that can transfer metric or non-metrics data to a receiver of a data intake and query system” and “the receiver 212 can be an indexer”; ¶0543 explains that “a computer program (also known as a program, software, software application, script, or code) typically includes one or more instructions set at various times in various memory devices of a computing device”; note: script is a sequence of instructions which can be software modules or processes such as Zhang’s forwarders and indexers; Fig. 4 shows a second layer of indexers 46), wherein executing the plurality of scripts corresponding to the second layer causes the computing platform to: transfer the first subset of ingested information stored in the information management system to a third layer (Zhang: at least ¶0265; “customizable scheduler of the LSDC that can enable certain collection mechanisms for certain types of data or resources at certain times in accordance with a schedule. As such, a user can customize collections of metrics data and non-metrics data”; ¶0300 further discloses “the metric index 240 illustrates an example of a structure for storing multiple metrics”; ¶0368 further discloses “a metrics store may contain a number of metric indexes. The scope of each metric index may be defined by a user before ingestion of metrics data. For example, a metric index may have a scope limited by a range of time, a set of source types, or any dimension or data derived from a dimension”), wherein transferring the first subset of ingested information to the third layer comprises: initially transferring the first subset of ingested information to a stage sublayer of the third layer, wherein the stage sublayer comprises memory that stores the first subset of ingested information in a first format (Zhang: at least ¶0297; “each metric 242 can be structured as an n-tuple record including required dimensions 244, optional dimensions 246, and a measure value 248. Examples of the required dimensions 244 include a time dimension or a name dimension”; note: subset of metrics data stored in records that are tuples or rows that are sublayer contained in metric store that is third layer; all data are stored in some memory);
merging the stage sublayer with a secure sublayer of the third layer (Zhang: at least ¶0037; “a metric index including ingested metrics”; ¶0260 further discloses “… store ingested metrics data in indexes of the metrics store 210”; ¶0300 also discloses “the metric index 240 illustrates an example of a structure for storing multiple metrics” and “metric index 240 is depicted in a table format”; ¶0301 further discloses “a metric in each row of the table. The distinct metric of each row includes dimensions that are common to all the metrics of the index and some values for some of the dimensions”; ¶0327 further discloses “ingested raw data can be processed into metrics having an n-tuple of elements including a timestamp, a metric name, a measured numerical value, and many other dimensions as represented in FIG. 22”; note: according to ¶0042 of Applicant’s Specification, “information at the secure sublayer may be represented by a table of rows and columns of information, and merging the stage sublayer with the secure sublayer may include adding the subpart of information stored at the stage sublayer to the table at the secure sublayer, in the form of additional rows and/or columns of information”; Zhang teaches adding ingested metrics tuples to metrics index that has structure of a table), wherein the secure sublayer comprises a structured query language layer of the central information repository that stores the first subset of ingested information in the first format and in a second format (Zhang: at least ¶0210; “multiple events that collectively warrant review, such as a large number of authentication failures on a host followed by a successful authentication” and “a set of incident attribute fields 166 that, for example, enables a user to specify a time range field 168 for the displayed events. It also includes a timeline 170 that graphically illustrates the number of incidents that occurred in time intervals over the selected time range”; Fig. 11B shows incidents such as “Insecure or Cleartext Authentication Detected”; ¶0166 further discloses “data visualizations also can be generated in a variety of formats, by reference to the data model”; note: structured query language layer may be a layer that stores ingested information in first format and second format).
Zhang does not explicitly disclose, but Neumann discloses merging the stage sublayer with a secure sublayer of the third layer (Neumann: at least ¶0026; “a secured communication channel is created between the first authentication device and the authentication server, the synchronization data is transmitted through this secured communication channel from the first authentication device to the authentication server, the synchronization data on the authentication server are queued in a synchronization queue … after login of any such other authentication device, a secured communication channel is created between this another authentication device and the authentication server and the contents of the synchronization queue is transferred”; ¶0132 also discloses “Personal local authentication factor administration module 1 in co-operation with the Personal local authentication factor administration support module 2 of Authentication server 201 of service provider SP1 process the reference value”); and causing, based on the merging, synchronization of the central information repository with the third layer (Neumann: at least ¶0026; “after login of any such other authentication device, a secured communication channel is created between this another authentication device and the authentication server and the contents of the synchronization queue is transferred to this other authentication device”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Neumann’s feature of merging the stage sublayer with a secure sublayer of the third layer (Neumann: at least ¶¶0026, 0132); and causing, based on the merging, synchronization of the central information repository with the third layer (Neumann: at least ¶0026) with Zhang’s computing platform.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to “ensure secure exchange and synchronization of sensitive information between authentication devices” (Neumann: at least ¶0002).
Claim 10 (a method claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 1, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 17 (a computer readable medium claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 1, and is similarly rejected.
As to Claim 2, Zhang and Neumann teach the computing platform of claim 1, wherein initially transferring the first subset of ingested information to the stage sublayer comprises: causing, by automatically executing a first script of the plurality of scripts corresponding to the second layer, execution of a shell script corresponding to the first script (Zhang: at least ¶0138; “indexer may optionally apply one or more transformations to data”; ¶0294 further discloses “metrics data can be ingested in any format and transformed into a multi-dimensional structure”; ¶0125 explains that “… indexers can comprise separate computer systems, or may alternatively comprise separate processes executing on one or more computer”; ¶0541 explains “routines executed to implement the disclosed techniques may be implemented as part of OS software (e.g., MICROSOFT WINDOWS® or LINUX®) or a specific software application, algorithm component, program, object, module, or sequence of instructions referred to as “computer programs”; note: instructions run in Linux shell as shell script);
translating, by executing the shell script, the first subset of ingested information into a transferable format (Zhang: at least ¶0138; “indexer may optionally apply one or more transformations to data”; ¶0294 further discloses “metrics data can be ingested in any format and transformed into a multi-dimensional structure”; ¶0312 further discloses “the data intake and query system can ingest very large volumes of data, having metrics structured in different formats, and convert all of them into the same common format described above. The formatted metrics can then be arranged into one or more metric indexes for subsequent processing, search, and analysis”; note: format transferable to metric indexes and metric store); and
storing the translated first subset of ingested information in the stage sublayer of the third layer of the multi-layered ingestion program (Zhang: at least ¶¶0294, 0297; “metrics data can be ingested in any format and transformed into a multi-dimensional structure” and “each metric 242 can be structured as an n-tuple record”; ¶0305 further discloses “the metrics can collected and routed to receivers of the data intake and query system are ingested and processed to store in structures such as multi-dimensional metric indexes”; note: subset of metrics data stored in records that are tuples or rows that are sublayer contained in metric store that is third layer).
Claim 11 (a method claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 2, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 18 (a computer readable medium claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 2, and is similarly rejected.
As to Claim 5, Zhang and Neumann teach the computing platform of claim 1, wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to: receive a request to update the first subset of ingested information based on a second subset of information (Zhang: at least ¶0419; “selection of one or more of the displayed metrics 306 initiates ingestion”; ¶0037 also discloses “a metric index including ingested metrics”; ¶0260 further discloses “… store ingested metrics data in indexes of the metrics store 210”; ¶0277 also further discloses “metrics are extracted and logged in batches according to a schedule”; ¶0300 also discloses “the metric index 240 illustrates an example of a structure for storing multiple metrics” and “metric index 240 is depicted in a table format”; ¶0327 further discloses “ingested raw data can be processed into metrics having an n-tuple of elements including a timestamp, a metric name, a measured numerical value, and many other dimensions as represented in FIG. 22”; note: new ingested metrics as second set of information; “multiple metrics” and “batches” means at least a first subset of information and a second subset of information);
transfer, using a schedule management program and by automatically executing a script of the plurality of scripts corresponding to the second layer, the second subset of information from the information management system (Zhang: at least ¶0264, 0284; “large scale data collector (LSDC) 230 that supports metrics can coordinate the collection mechanisms to improve ingestion by mitigating congestion”; “the LSDC 230 is a distributed task scheduler that can manage different APIs to coordinate scheduling across multiple collectors for one or more indexers”; ¶0265 further discloses “customizable scheduler of the LSDC that can enable certain collection mechanisms for certain types of data or resources at certain times in accordance with a schedule. As such, a user can customize collections of metrics data and non-metrics data”; note: multiple collectors would collect at least first subset and second subset) to the stage sublayer of the third layer of the multi-layered ingestion program (Zhang: at least ¶0297; “each metric 242 can be structured as an n-tuple record including required dimensions 244, optional dimensions 246, and a measure value 248. Examples of the required dimensions 244 include a time dimension or a name dimension”; ¶0300 further discloses “the metric index 240 illustrates an example of a structure for storing multiple metrics”; note: subset of metrics data stored in records that are tuples or rows that are sublayer contained in metric store that is third layer); and
update, based on the second subset of information, the first subset of ingested information at the secure sublayer by merging the first subset of ingested information with the second subset of information (Zhang: at least ¶¶0136 and 0297; “indexer determines a timestamp for each event. Similar to the process for creating events, an indexer may again refer to a source type definition associated with the data to locate one or more properties that indicate instructions for determining a timestamp for each event” and “time dimension includes a value indicative of a time when the measure value was taken. The name dimension includes a value indicative of a computing resource and the characteristic of that computing resource that was measured to obtain the measure value”; ¶0260 further discloses “… store ingested metrics data in indexes of the metrics store 210”; ¶0277 also further discloses “metrics are extracted and logged in batches according to a schedule”; ¶0300 also discloses “the metric index 240 illustrates an example of a structure for storing multiple metrics”; note: data subsets ingested at different time (different time values or timestamps) are merged into tabular form).
Claim 14 (a method claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 5, and is similarly rejected.
As to Claim 6, Zhang and Neumann teach the computing platform of claim 1, wherein the secure sublayer includes historical information previously ingested by the central information repository within a specific period of time (Zhang: at least ¶0297; “Examples of the required dimensions 244 include a time dimension or a name dimension. The time dimension includes a value indicative of a time when the measure value was taken”; ¶0412 further discloses “metrics data tile 286-3 is configured to display the visualization 290 over a predetermined time period. In some embodiments, a user can adjust the predetermined time period, for example, to increase/decrease a historical time period and/or view a metric in real-time”).
As to Claim 8, Zhang and Neumann teach the computing platform of claim 1, wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to store the multi-layered ingestion program to the memory of the computing platform (Zhang: at least ¶0222; “a cloud-based data intake and query system 184 may comprise a plurality of system instances 186. In general, each system instance 186-1 and 186-2 may include one or more computing resources managed by a provider of the cloud-based system 184 made available to a particular subscriber. The computing resources comprising a system instance 186 may, for example, include one or more servers or other devices configured to implement one or more forwarders, indexers, search heads, and other components of a data intake and query system, similar to system 32”).
Claim 16 (a method claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 8, and is similarly rejected.
Claims 3-4, 7, 12-13, 15, 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US PGPUB 2018/0089289 by Zhang et al. (“Zhang”) in view of US PGPUB 2018/0198614 by Neumann et al. (“Neumann”), and further in view of US PGPUB 2014/0373177 by Arning et al. (“Arning”).
As to Claim 3, Zhang and Neumann teach the computing platform of claim 1, wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to: store, prior to transferring the first subset of ingested information to the third layer, the first subset of ingested information to a view sublayer of the third layer of the multi-layered ingestion program (Zhang: at least ¶¶0370-0371; “metrics-aware UI 258 can return the outputs such as query results, which can be rendered in a variety of formats including visualizations that reduce the cognitive burden on users to understand” and “user can input an SPL command into a search field of the metric-aware UI 258 to directly access the metrics data stored in the metrics store 256”; ¶0166 also discloses “user may refine and/or filter search results to produce more precise reports” and “the report generator may aggregate search results across sets of events and generate statistics based on aggregated search results”).
Zhang and Neumann do not explicitly disclose, but Arning wherein the view sublayer is configured to, based on an authenticated view request, cause display of the first subset of ingested information; and cause, based on the authenticated view request and via the view sublayer, display of the first subset of ingested information (Arning: at least ¶0034; “identify search results that include the search terms in the fields that the user is authorized to view”; ¶0036 also discloses “if the user has authorization to view the restricted search term "socks", then search modifying program 115 identifies the encrypted version of "socks" to be "splkc", and uses "splkc" as a search term. Therefore, in the case of an encrypted document, search results that contain "splkc" in fields that the user is authorized to view are returned, and decrypted for the user to view, based on the user's degree of authorization”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Arning’s wherein the view sublayer is configured to, based on an authenticated view request, cause display of the first subset of ingested information; and cause, based on the authenticated view request and via the view sublayer, display of the first subset of ingested information (Arning: at least ¶¶0034, 0036) with the computing platform disclosed by Zhang and Neumann.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to “control access to information” and “determines, based on a degree of authorization of a user, that a user has authorization to view a type of field” (Arning: at least ¶0005).
Claim 12 (a method claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 3, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 19 (a computer readable medium claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 3, and is similarly rejected.
As to Claim 4, Zhang, Neumann and Arning teach the computing platform of claim 3, wherein the causing display of the first subset of ingested information comprises: executing, based on the storing, at least one script, of the plurality of executable scripts, corresponding to the third layer of the multi-layered ingestion program (Zhang: at least ¶¶0370-0371; “metrics-aware UI 258 can return the outputs such as query results, which can be rendered in a variety of formats including visualizations that reduce the cognitive burden on users to understand” and “user can input an SPL command into a search field of the metric-aware UI 258 to directly access the metrics data stored in the metrics store 256”; ¶0166 also discloses “user may refine and/or filter search results to produce more precise reports” and “the report generator may aggregate search results across sets of events and generate statistics based on aggregated search results”; note: script is a sequence of instructions which can be software modules or processes such as Zhang’s module for storing metrics; metric stores as modules of third layer and displaying using user interface associated with metric stores); and
caching, by executing the at least one script corresponding to the third layer, one or more portions of the first subset of ingested information (Zhang: at least ¶¶0371-0372; “catalog 254 provides in memory caching to enable rapid access to metrics or metrics related data”).
Claim 13 (a method claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 4, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 20 (a computer readable medium claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 4, and is similarly rejected.
As to Claim 7, Zhang and Neumann teach the computing platform of claim 1, wherein the memory stores additional computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to: automatically generate an ingestion result document (Zhang: at least ¶0166; “user may refine and/or filter search results to produce more precise reports” and “the report generator may aggregate search results across sets of events and generate statistics based on aggregated search results”; ¶0171 further discloses “the page includes a “Filters” element 108, a “Split Rows” element 110, a “Split Columns” element 112, and a “Column Values” element 114. The page may include a list of search results 118”), wherein the ingestion result document comprises: a plurality of categories associated with the first subset of ingested information (Zhang: at least ¶¶0419 & 0430; “displays a list of user-selectable performance categories 308” and “the search results 318 include one or more logs, metrics, value, categories, dimensions, or datasets that match the search term”);
a mapping of one or more portions of the first subset of ingested information and corresponding to each of the plurality of categories (Zhang: at least ¶0430; “search results 318 include one or more logs, metrics, value, categories, dimensions, or datasets that match the search term”).
Zhang and Neumann do not explicitly disclose, but Arning discloses one or more permissible use fields indicating a portion of the first subset of ingested information that requires authentication to receive access to the portion (Arning: at least ¶0034; “identify search results that include the search terms in the fields that the user is authorized to view”; ¶0036 also discloses “if the user has authorization to view the restricted search term "socks", then search modifying program 115 identifies the encrypted version of "socks" to be "splkc", and uses "splkc" as a search term. Therefore, in the case of an encrypted document, search results that contain "splkc" in fields that the user is authorized to view are returned, and decrypted for the user to view, based on the user's degree of authorization”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Arning’s one or more permissible use fields indicating a portion of the first subset of ingested information that requires authentication to receive access to the portion (Arning: at least ¶¶0034, 0036) with the computing platform disclosed by Zhang and Neumann.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to “control access to information” and “determines, based on a degree of authorization of a user, that a user has authorization to view a type of field” (Arning: at least ¶0005).
Claim 15 (a method claim) corresponds in scope to Claim 7, and is similarly rejected.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US PGPUB 2018/0089289 by Zhang et al. (“Zhang”) in view of US PGPUB 2018/0198614 by Neumann et al. (“Neumann”), and further in view of US PGPUB 2020/0293559 by Rehal et al. (“Rehal”).
As to Claim 9, Zhang and Neumann teach the computing platform of claim 1.
Zhang and Neumann do not explicitly disclose, but Rehal discloses wherein the central information repository comprises a data lake (Rehal: at least ¶0045; “a central data repository 110, which may also be referred to herein as a “data lake”, and may comprise any data storage technology. Preferably, the data lake allows data to be stored in an unstructured or flexibly structured manner”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Rehal’s feature of wherein the central information repository comprises a data lake (Rehal: at least ¶0045) with the computing platform disclosed by Zhang and Neumann.
The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to allow data to be stored in both “… an unstructured or flexibly structured manner” and “conventional structured database such as a relational database or object database” implemented as “a Hadoop data repository employing a Hadoop Distributed File System (HDFS) with an Apache Hive data warehousing infrastructure” (Rehal: at least ¶¶0045-0046).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to Huen Wong whose telephone number is (571) 270-3426. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday (10:30AM EST - 6:30PM EST). 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 for regular communications and after final communications.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from thePatent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information forpublished 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. Shouldyou have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the ElectronicBusiness Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from aUSPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated informationsystem, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/H .W./
Examiner, AU 2168
02 April 2026
/CHARLES RONES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2168
Prosecution Insights