CTNF 19/304,188 CTNF 89461 DETAILED ACTION 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013 , is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. This Office Action is sent in response to Applicant's Communication received on August 19, 2025 for application number 19/304,188 . This Office hereby acknowledges receipt of the following and placed of record in file: Specification, Drawings, Abstract, Oath/Declaration, and Claims. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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 of this title, 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-3, 7, 9-12, 16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Como et al. (US 2023/0012832)(hereinafter Como) in view of Lopez (US 2024/0086803)(hereinafter Lopez) . Regarding claim 1 , Como teaches a method for managing data offerings, the method being implemented by at least one processor, the method comprising: receiving, by the at least one processor via at least one from among a user interface and an automated feed to a system interface, a first data offering ( see Figs. 3-4, para [0011], para [0072], discloses owners submitting project version (first data offering) to an industrial development hub, IDH repository system (automated feed )); analyzing, by the at least one processor, a series of rules relating to at least one data property of the first data offering ( see Fig. 4, para [0078-0080], para [0100], discloses analyzing feedback and plant standards (series of rules) relating to code and project quality metrics (property) of projects ); determining, by the at least one processor based on a result of the analyzing of the series of rules, a current status of the first data offering ( see Figs. 4-5, para [0066], para [0083], discloses real-time operational and status data from industrial devices and determining current status in recommending alternative control coding to bring current project into conformity with previous design strategies ). Como does not explicitly teach wherein the first data offering is in a first administrative state that is only viewable to a data owner of the first data offering ; shifting, by the at least one processor, the first data offering from being in the first administrative state to a second administrative state based on whether the current status is in a predetermined status; receiving, by the at least one processor via the user interface, a first request to publish the first data offering; and publishing, by the at least one processor in response to the first request and the first data offering being in the second administrative state, the first data offering. Lopez teaches wherein the first data offering is in a first administrative state that is only viewable to a data owner of the first data offering ( see Figs. 1-2, para [0114], discloses loading initial project documentation and permissions (first administrative state) for team members to access projects (first data offering) according to team member’s role ); shifting, by the at least one processor, the first data offering from being in the first administrative state to a second administrative state based on whether the current status is in a predetermined status ( see Figs. 1-3, para [0112], para [0114], discloses reducing project plan (second administrative state) to actionable tasks and subtasks that are in Task Groups (predetermined status) and assigned to Units at a project site ); receiving, by the at least one processor via the user interface, a first request to publish the first data offering ( see Fig. 1, Figs. 14B-14C, para [0054-0055], para [0112], discloses automatically queries to all required information to generate and send out to users a Project Completion Report ); and publishing, by the at least one processor in response to the first request and the first data offering being in the second administrative state, the first data offering ( see Fig. 1, Fig. 14B, para [0112], para [0114], discloses Project Completion Report sent to users that includes Tasks/Milestone completions and status in the Project Completion Report ). Como/Lopez are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Como to include administrative state data from disclosure of Lopez. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Lopez as “improve future Vendor productivity and service quality” (para [0200]) and including administrative state data is well known to persons of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success. Regarding claim 10 , Como teaches computing apparatus for managing data offerings, the computing apparatus comprising: a processor ( see para [0046], discloses processor ); a memory storing instructions ( see para [0060], discloses memory ); and a communication interface coupled to each of the processor and the memory, wherein the processor is configured to: receive, via at least one from among a user interface and an automated feed to a system interface, a first data offering ( see Figs. 3-4, para [0011], para [0072], discloses owners submitting project version (first data offering) to an industrial development hub, IDH repository system (automated feed )); analyze a series of rules relating to at least one data property of the first data offering( see Fig. 4, para [0078-0080], para [0100], discloses analyzing feedback and plant standards (series of rules) relating to code and project quality metrics (property) of projects ); determine, based on a result of the analysis, a current status of the first data offering ( see Figs. 4-5, para [0066], para [0083], discloses real-time operational and status data from industrial devices and determining current status in recommending alternative control coding to bring current project into conformity with previous design strategies ). Como does not explicitly teach wherein the first data offering is in a first administrative state that is only viewable to a data owner of the first data offering; shift the first data offering from being in the first administrative state to a second administrative state based on whether the current status is in a predetermined status; receive, via the user interface, a first request to publish the first data offering; and in response to the first request and the first data offering being in the second administrative state, publish the first data offering. Lopez teaches wherein the first data offering is in a first administrative state that is only viewable to a data owner of the first data offering ( see Figs. 1-2, para [0114], discloses loading initial project documentation and permissions (first administrative state) for team members to access projects (first data offering) according to team member’s role ); shift the first data offering from being in the first administrative state to a second administrative state based on whether the current status is in a predetermined status ( see Figs. 1-3, para [0112], para [0114], discloses reducing project plan (second administrative state) to actionable tasks and subtasks that are in Task Groups (predetermined status) and assigned to Units at a project site ); receive, via the user interface, a first request to publish the first data offering ( see Fig. 1, Figs. 14B-14C, para [0054-0055], para [0112], discloses automatically queries to all required information to generate and send out to users a Project Completion Report ); and in response to the first request and the first data offering being in the second administrative state, publish the first data offering ( see Fig. 1, Fig. 14B, para [0112], para [0114], discloses Project Completion Report sent to users that includes Tasks/Milestone completions and status in the Project Completion Report ). Como/Lopez are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Como to include administrative state data from disclosure of Lopez. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Lopez as “improve future Vendor productivity and service quality” (para [0200]) and including administrative state data is well known to persons of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success. Regarding claim 19 , Como teaches a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing instructions for managing data offerings, the storage medium comprising executable code which, when executed by a processor ( see Fig. 2 ), causes the processor to: receive, via at least one from among a user interface and an automated feed to a system interface, a first data offering ( see Figs. 3-4, para [0011], para [0072], discloses owners submitting project version (first data offering) to an industrial development hub, IDH repository system (automated feed )); analyze a series of rules relating to at least one data property of the first data offering ( see Fig. 4, para [0078-0080], para [0100], discloses analyzing feedback and plant standards (series of rules) relating to code and project quality metrics (property) of projects ); determine, based on a result of the analysis, a current status of the first data offering ( see Figs. 4-5, para [0066], para [0083], discloses real-time operational and status data from industrial devices and determining current status in recommending alternative control coding to bring current project into conformity with previous design strategies ). Como does not explicitly teach wherein the first data offering is in a first administrative state that is only viewable to a data owner of the first data offering; shift the first data offering from being in the first administrative state to a second administrative state based on whether the current status is in a predetermined status; receive, via the user interface, a first request to publish the first data offering; and in response to the first request and the first data offering being in the second administrative state, publish the first data offering. Lopez teaches wherein the first data offering is in a first administrative state that is only viewable to a data owner of the first data offering ( see Figs. 1-2, para [0114], discloses loading initial project documentation and permissions (first administrative state) for team members to access projects (first data offering) according to team member’s role ); shift the first data offering from being in the first administrative state to a second administrative state based on whether the current status is in a predetermined status ( see Figs. 1-3, para [0112], para [0114], discloses reducing project plan (second administrative state) to actionable tasks and subtasks that are in Task Groups (predetermined status) and assigned to Units at a project site ); receive, via the user interface, a first request to publish the first data offering ( see Fig. 1, Figs. 14B-14C, para [0054-0055], para [0112], discloses automatically queries to all required information to generate and send out to users a Project Completion Report ); and in response to the first request and the first data offering being in the second administrative state, publish the first data offering ( see Fig. 1, Fig. 14B, para [0112], para [0114], discloses Project Completion Report sent to users that includes Tasks/Milestone completions and status in the Project Completion Report ). Como/Lopez are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Como to include administrative state data from disclosure of Lopez. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Lopez as “improve future Vendor productivity and service quality” (para [0200]) and including administrative state data is well known to persons of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success. Regarding claims 2, 11, and 20 , Como/Lopez teach a method of claim 1 and an apparatus of claim 10, and a medium of claim 20. Como further teaches wherein the first data offering includes at least one data set that is accessible via at least one data platform from among a plurality of data platforms ( see Figs.3- 4, para [0090], discloses control project development platforms that can submit data to IDH repository system ). Regarding claims 3 and 12 , Como/Lopez teach a method of claim 1 and an apparatus of claim 10. Como further teaches wherein the at least one data property includes at least one from among a name of the first data offering, a purpose of the first data offering, a line of business of the first data offering, access rights of the first data offering, and a data dictionary of attributes for the first data offering ( see para [0082], discloses project versions (name of first data offering )). Regarding claims 7 and 16 , Como/Lopez teach a method of claim 1 and an apparatus of claim 10. Como does not explicitly teach wherein the first data offering is maintained by at least one application programming interface (API) that distributes the first data offering using at least one data distribution service from among a plurality of data distribution services. Lopez teaches wherein the first data offering is maintained by at least one application programming interface (API) that distributes the first data offering using at least one data distribution service from among a plurality of data distribution services ( see Fig. 14C, Fig. 14G, Fig. 14J, para [0054-0055], para [0210-0211], discloses Task Group distributions ). Regarding claims 9 and 18 , Como/Lopez teach a method of claim 1 and an apparatus of claim 10. Como further teaches wherein the user interface generates notifications that are transmitted to the data owner when at least one change is made to the first data offering ( see Fig. 7, para [0083], para [0095], discloses generating notifications of project recommended changes ) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4-6 and 13-15, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Como et al. (US 2023/0012832)(hereinafter Como) in view of Lopez (US 2024/0086803)(hereinafter Lopez) as applied to claims 1 and 10, and in further view of Casares et al. (US 2024/0256271)(hereinafter Casares) . Regarding claims 4 and 13 , Como/Lopez teach a method of claim 1 and an apparatus of claim 10. Como does not explicitly teach receiving, by the at least one processor via at least one from among the user interface and the automated feed to the system interface, an updated version of the first data offering, wherein the updated version of the first data offering is in the first administrative state and an active registration state; analyzing, by the at least one processor, the series of rules relating to the at least one data property of the updated version of the first data offering; determining, by the at least one processor based on a result of the analyzing of the series of rules for the updated version of the first data offering, a current status of the updated version of the first data offering; shifting, by the at least one processor, the updated version of the first data offering from being in the first administrative state to the second administrative state based on whether the current status of the updated version of the first data offering is in the predetermined status; receiving, by the at least one processor via the user interface, a second request to publish the updated version of the first data offering; and publishing, by the at least one processor in response to the second request and the updated version of the first data offering being in the second administrative state and the active registration state, the updated version of the first data offering. Lopez teaches receiving, by the at least one processor via at least one from among the user interface and the automated feed to the system interface, an updated version of the first data offering ( see Fig. 3, para [0117], para [0453], discloses updating project on Project Dashboard and aligning or overriding project version between portal and mobile application ), wherein the updated version of the first data offering is in the first administrative state and an active registration state ( see Fig. 2, Fig. 4, para [0114], para [0422], discloses assigning permissions and confirmation of a new user registration ). Como/Lopez do not explicitly teach analyzing, by the at least one processor, the series of rules relating to the at least one data property of the updated version of the first data offering; determining, by the at least one processor based on a result of the analyzing of the series of rules for the updated version of the first data offering, a current status of the updated version of the first data offering; shifting, by the at least one processor, the updated version of the first data offering from being in the first administrative state to the second administrative state based on whether the current status of the updated version of the first data offering is in the predetermined status; receiving, by the at least one processor via the user interface, a second request to publish the updated version of the first data offering; and publishing, by the at least one processor in response to the second request and the updated version of the first data offering being in the second administrative state and the active registration state, the updated version of the first data offering. Casares teaches analyzing, by the at least one processor, the series of rules relating to the at least one data property of the updated version of the first data offering ( see Fig. 2, para [0028], para [0032], discloses requires user appropriate credentials to allow user developer access to applications ); determining, by the at least one processor based on a result of the analyzing of the series of rules for the updated version of the first data offering, a current status of the updated version of the first data offering ( see Figs. 2-3, para [0028, 0031], discloses determining a current state of project based on user with developer access making tentative changes ); shifting, by the at least one processor, the updated version of the first data offering from being in the first administrative state to the second administrative state based on whether the current status of the updated version of the first data offering is in the predetermined status ( see Fig. 3, Fig. 9, para [0031], para [0044], discloses committing (second administrative state) based on updated changes in project ); receiving, by the at least one processor via the user interface, a second request to publish the updated version of the first data offering ( see Fig. 9, para [0044], discloses receiving a query task to save changes ); and publishing, by the at least one processor in response to the second request and the updated version of the first data offering being in the second administrative state and the active registration state, the updated version of the first data offering ( see Figs. 9-10, para [0043-0044], discloses save and displaying changes ). Como/Lopez/Casares are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Como/Lopez to analyze series of rules for updated version of offering from disclosure of Lopez. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Lopez as “monitors and tracks changes across multiple web-based software applications or products, while a user is performing work within a development environment” (para [0003]) and analyzing series of rules for updated version of offering is well known to persons of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success. Regarding claims 5 and 14 , Como/Lopez teach a method of claim 1 and an apparatus of claim 10. Como/Lopez does not explicitly teach wherein the first data offering is in the second administrative state while the updated version of the first data offering is in the first administrative state. Casares teaches wherein the first data offering is in the second administrative state while the updated version of the first data offering is in the first administrative state ( see Figs. 2-3, para [0028],para [0044], discloses projects with tentative changes and projects with committed changes ). Como/Lopez/Casares are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Como/Lopez to analyze series of rules for updated version of offering from disclosure of Lopez. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Lopez as “monitors and tracks changes across multiple web-based software applications or products, while a user is performing work within a development environment” (para [0003]) and analyzing series of rules for updated version of offering is well known to persons of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success. Regarding claims 6 and 15 , Como/Lopez teach a method of claim 1 and an apparatus of claim 10. Como/Lopez does not explicitly teach wherein the user interface comprises a filtering tool that allows a user to filter differences between the first data offering and the updated version of the first data offering. Casares teaches wherein the user interface comprises a filtering tool that allows a user to filter differences between the first data offering and the updated version of the first data offering ( see Fig. 10, para [0043], discloses filtering list of changes to allow user to select any of listed changes for saving ). Como/Lopez/Casares are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Como/Lopez to analyze series of rules for updated version of offering from disclosure of Lopez. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Lopez as “monitors and tracks changes across multiple web-based software applications or products, while a user is performing work within a development environment” (para [0003]) and analyzing series of rules for updated version of offering is well known to persons of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 8 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Como et al. (US 2023/0012832)(hereinafter Como) in view of Lopez (US 2024/0086803)(hereinafter Lopez) as applied to claims 1 and 10, and in further view of Izenson et al. (US 2023/0385248)(hereinafter Izenson) . Regarding claims 8 and 17 , Como/Lopez teach a method of claim 1 and an apparatus of claim 10. Como/Lopez does not explicitly teach wherein the first data offering includes at least one field name that is mappable to a logical data dictionary to be recognizable across the plurality of data distribution services. Izenson teaches wherein the first data offering includes at least one field name that is mappable to a logical data dictionary to be recognizable across the plurality of data distribution services ( see Figs. 1-2, para [0083], para [0156], discloses data dictionary to link information about data objects ). Como/Lopez/Izenson are analogous arts as they are each from the same field of endeavor of database systems. Before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Como/Lopez to include a data dictionary from disclosure of Izenson. The motivation to combine these arts is disclosed by Izenson as “enabling efficient data integration, data quality improvements, or supporting the overall data management and analytics initiatives” (para [0105]) and including a data dictionary is well known to persons of ordinary skill in the art, and therefore one of ordinary skill would have good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp that would lead to anticipated success . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See Kim et al. US Publication No. 2024/0078728 . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY HARMON whose telephone number is (571)270-5861. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5pm. 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, Ann Lo can be reached at 571-272-9767. 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. /Courtney Harmon/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2159 Application/Control Number: 19/304,188 Page 2 Art Unit: 2159 Application/Control Number: 19/304,188 Page 3 Art Unit: 2159 Application/Control Number: 19/304,188 Page 4 Art Unit: 2159
Prosecution Insights