06/30/2086 16:14 212-697-3086 SOFER HAROUN LLP PAGE 14 Application No. 10/450.581 Amendment dated June 30, 2006 Reply to Office Action dated December 30, 2005 Claims 1-17 are pending. Claims 1-17 stand rejected Claims 1, 3-5, 7-8, 10-11, 13, 15, 16 have been amended. Claims 2, 6 and 17 have been cancelled without prejudice, Claims 1, 3-5 and 7-16 are presented hercin for review. No new matter has been added. In paragraph 2 of the Office Action dated December 30, 2005, the examiner rejected claims 1-14 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 101 for failure to show a “useful, concrete, and tangible result.” Applicants respectfully disagree. Claims 1-4 and 16 refer to a system, tangibly embodied in a computer system, comprising data storage devices, servers and the like. In the context of computer related inventions, a rejection for failure to show a “useful, concrete, and tangible result” generally applies to methods comprising nothing more than an idea or concept. MPEP 2106 (II)(A): ‘The claimed invention as a whole must sccomplish a prectical application. That is, it must produce a “useful, concrete and tangible result.” State Sreet, 149 F 3d at 1373, 47 USPQ2d st 1601-02. The purpose iremeos is to limit patent Jnventions that ‘certain level of "real world" ‘PAGE 14/19* RCVD AT 67302006 5:14:49 PM Easter Dayight Time) * SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-214*DNIS:2738000 CSID:212 687 3004* DURATION (rm-ss): 05-4006/30/2008 16:14 212-697-3804 SOFER HAROUN LLP PAGE 15 Application No, 10/450.581 Amendment dated June 30, 2006 Reply to Office Action dated December 30, 2005 valu 689, 653. ion or: (Brenner v. Manson, 383 U.S. $19, 528-36, 148 USP }sAn re Ziegler, 992, P24 1197, 1200-03, 26 USPQ2A 1600, 1603-06 (Fed. Cir. 1993)... On id ofa ion to a practical ion i the technological arts should it bereected under 35 U.S.C. 101. Compare Musgrave, 431 F.2d at 893, 167 USPQ at 289. In Fores a8 1013, 169 USPQ99, 101 (CCPA 1971). Further, wi Off expres h Examiner has failed to explain exactly how the rejected claims have been interpreted to support ‘the contention that the present invention is “devoid of any limitation to a practical limitation in the technological arts.” The present invention is a system that allows a user to retrieve data from ‘an information source using an application programming interface, by relating logical and physical metadata elements. No presentation of the data to the user is necessary for the system to be useful. The mere retrieval of such data has sufficient utility, more so than the borderline ‘examples given in MPEP 2106 (II(A). The retrieved data may simaply be stored or used as input for some future process. For this reason, Applicants respectfully request the withdrawal of the 35 U.8.C. 101 ‘ejection from claims 1-14 and 16. In paragraph 3, Examiner rejected claims 1-17 under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, as boing indefinite duc to the use of the trademark MetaMatrix™, Applicants have amended the Claims to remove this term and respectfully requests withdrawal of the rejection. ‘In paragraph 4, Examiner has rejected claims 1-3, 5-7, 9-10, and 15-17 under 35 U.S.C. 103(@) as being unpatentable over Tabbara et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,460,043) in view of Chen (US. Patent No. 6,411,961). Jn paragraph 5, Examiner has rejected claims 4, 8, and 11-12 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Tabbara in view of Chen and further in view of Kingberg (U.S. Patent 10 PAGE 1519" RCVD AT 6790/2006 5:14:49 PH Eastern Daylight Time] * SVRCUSPTO-EFKRE-214* DNIS:2738300 CSID:212 697 3004 * DURATION (rn-ss}:05.006/30/2005 16:14 212-697-3804 ‘SOFER HAROUN LLP PAGE 16 Application No. 10/450.581 Amendment dated June 30, 2006 Reply to Office Action dated December 30, 200S No. 5,734,887), ‘in paragroph 6, Examiner has rejected claims 13-14 under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being ‘unpatentable over Tabara in view of Chen and further in view of Graefe (U.S. Patent No 6,298,342), Applicants respectfully disagree with the Examiner's contentions and submits the following remarks in response. ‘The present invention as claimed relates to a data access system that has the ability to retrieve data in real time from a plurality of disparate information sources. A metadata Tepository is configured to store two sets of metadata elements, wherein the first set comprises Physical metadata elements, each of which corresponding to each one of the disparate information sources, and the second set comprises logical metadata elements, wherein each logical metadata clement represents a plurality of physical metadata elements of disparate information sources. As such each logical metadata element can correspond to one or more physical metadata elements, which in turn each set of physical metadata elements represents the deta schema of their corresponding information source. As stated in the background of the invention, the present system as claimed intends to ‘overcome the shortcomings associated with prior art systems that employ data warehousing, As ‘reiterated in the background, in data warehousing systems, an extraction transformation load extracts data from the disparate information sources on a pre-determined, periodic basis, and ‘transforms it into a common data format. The client application and the related query system are coupled to the data warehouse to access the transformed data stored in the data warehouse. u ‘PAGE 16/9* RCVD AT 6/30/2006 5:14:49 Ph [Eastem Dayight Te] * SVRLUSPTO-EFXRF-214* DNIS:2738300 *CSID:212 697 3004 DURATION (rm-ss}:05003 : PAGE 17 96/30/2006 16:14 212-697-2004 SOFER WAROUN LLP Application No. 10/450.581 Amendment dated June 30, 2006 Reply to Office Action dated December 30, 2005 ‘The warehousing system as described in the background of the invention does not employ data directly ftom the information sources, but instead employs data which has been ‘updated at some time in the past which is unknown to the client, and which may be stale or inaccurate for some applications. To this end the present invention as claimed includes a server that is configured to receive a query request for a logical metadata clement, wherein the server converts the query Tequest to a source specific data query request corresponding to each one of the information. sources. The server in the present invention retrieves the data from each information source directly. As such the query requests are converted to the query requests appropriate for each data source from which the server is retrieving the data, The references cited by the Examiner do not teach or suggest the present invention as claimed. Tabara describes a system accessing a single information source. There is no teaching or suggestion in Tabbara to include a system wherein two sets of metadata elements are ‘employed as set forth in the present invention as claimed. Furthermore, Tabbara does not teach ‘oF suggest an arrangement wherein each logical metadata element represents a plurality of Physical metadata elements of disparate information sources. Furthermore, there is no teaching ‘oF suggestion in Tabbara for an arrangement wherein each query request is converted to a source specific data query request so as to retrieve data dynamically in real time. Similarly the Chen reference cited by the Examiner does not teach or suggest the present invention as claimed. In fact, the Chen reference discloses an arrangement for a data ‘warehousing system, which was deseribed in the background of the present invention. Fig. | of 2 PAGE 1719* RCVD AT 6730/2006 5:14:49 Ph Easter Dayfight Time] * SVR:USPTO-EFXRE-214*DNS:2738300 * CSI0:212 687 3004 * DURATION (mmess):05-00: PAGE 18 06/30/2006 16:14 212-687-2004 SOFER HAROLN LLP Application No. 10/450.581 Amendment dated June 30, 2006 Reply to Office Action dated December 30, 2005 Chen discloses a data warchousing system wherein information from various data sources 101 is extracted and stored in a customer centric data warehouse. See also col. 4, lines 52-64, col. Slines 55-58. The client application retrieves the data from the customer centric data warehouse and as such there is no need for the system to convert query requests to source specifie query Tequests as set forth in the present invention. Furthermore, the Chen reference does not teach or Suggest an arrangement that allows the server to retrieve data directly from information sources ‘nreal time, wale each query is converted to its corresponding source-specific data request. Even if the two references cited by the Examiner, namely Tabbara and Chen were ‘combined as suggested by the Examiner, the resulting system still fails to include the features as cltimed in the present invention. The combined system would still be a data warehousing arrangement wherein a CQL query arrangement of Tabara would be imposed as a layer over the ‘data warehousing arrangement of Chen, The combined system would not include an arrangement wherein each logical metadata element represents a plurality of physical metadata clements of disparate information sources. Furthermore, the combined system would not include ‘an arrangement wherein the query requests received by the server are each converted to a source- specific query request to retrieve data stored in each disparate information souree in real time. For these reasons, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection of independent claims 1, 5 and 15-16 be withdrawn. Furthermore, as the remaining claims depend from the independent claims, the rejection of these claims should be withdrawn for the same reasons. In view of the foregoing, Applicants respectfully submit that pending claims 1, 3-5 and 7- 16 are in condition for allowance, the earliest possible notice of which is eamestly solicited. If 3B PAGE 18/19 RCVD AT 60/2006 5:14:48 PM [Eastem Daylight Time]* SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-214 * DNIS:2738300 * CSID:212 697 3004 * DURATION (mms): 05-00PAGE 19 06/30/2008 16:14 212-697-3084 SOFER HAROUN LLP Application No. 10/450.581 Amendment dated June 30, 2006 Reply to Office Action dated December 30, 2005 the Examiner feels that an interview would facilitate the prosecution of this Application he is invited to contact the undersigned at the number listed below. Respectfully submitted, SOFER & HAROUN, LLP. st : Joseph Sofer Reg. No 34,438, Dated: June 30, 2006 317 Madison Avenue Suite 910 New York, NY 10017 (212) 697-2800 14 PAGE 1919" RCVD AT 6/30/2006 $:14:49 PH (Eastem Daylight Time]* SVR:USPTO-EFXRF-214 * DHIS:2738300" CSID:212 697 3004 * DURATION (rm-ss:0500UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE. a LL EIS Paignton TAPPLIEATIONNO Tunopae | FIRST NAMED INVENTOR [A TORNEY DOCKETNG [ CONFIRMATION. 1043061 292004 Robert Seaion 76 005 368 790 ‘anoaons BANNER Joseph Sofer ARNO, PATRICK A Sofer & Haroun Suite 910 ToT PAPER NOWER 317 Madison Avenue 26 New York, NY 10017 DATE MAILED: 12/80/2005 Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. PTO90C (Rev. 1003)‘Application No. ‘Applicant(s) 101450,581 SCANLON ET AL, Office Action Summary Exam Patrick A. Damo 2163 F ‘Art Unit = Tie MAILING DATE of this communication appears on the cover shest with the correspondence address ~ Period for Reply A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTH(S) OR THIRTY (30) DAYS, WHICHEVER IS LONGER, FROM THE MAILING DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION. = Extensions of me may be avblatle unde th provision of 37 CFR 1.1368). In mo event however, may 8 rep Be ely flea ‘fer SI (@) MONTHS trom the maling te of ts communication HINO perloa or epi species above, he asim satu pros wi ppl and wal exire IX (6) MONTHS fom he mang dae ofthis communion Fura reply win te sel or extended pero er ely wl saute cause te appicaton fo became ABANDONED (95 U.S.C. § 199) ‘ny py received by tne Ofce ae han eo mons ae he mang te of ts commuieaton. even fly Md, may reduce any ‘amed patent tem aoustment.Se037 CFR 1 70s). Status 1B] Responsive to communication(s) filed on 09 February 2004 2a) This action is FINAL. 2b){8] This action is non-final 3) Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is closed in accordance with the practice under Ex parte Quayle, 1935 C.D. 11, 453 0.G. 213. Disposition of Claims 4)B%) Claim(s) 1-17 is/are pending in the application. 4a) Of the above claim(s) is/are withdrawn from consideration. 5)C] Claims) _is/are allowed 6) Claim(s) 1-17 is/are rejected, 7) Claim(s) is/are objected to. 8) Claims) are subject to restriction andior election requirement Application Papers 9) The specification is objected to by the Examiner. 10)B] The drawing(s) filed on 09 February 2004 is/are: a)[XJ accepted or b)[_] objected to by the Examiner. Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a). Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d). 11) The oath or declaration is objected to by the Examiner. Note the attached Office Action or form PTO-152. Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119 12)[1] Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (0. a)CIAN b)L] Some * c)L] None of 1.00 Certified copies of the priority documents have been received 2.0) Certitied copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No. _. 3.01 Copies of the certified copies ofthe priority documents have been received in this National Stage application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)). * See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received. ‘Atachmentts) + Ba Notice of References Gaed (PTO-892) 4) nterviow Summary (P10-413) 2) L Ntize of Drafsperson's Patent Drawing Review (PTO-948) Paper No()/Mai Dale. 3) BQ] Information Discosure Statement(s)(PTO-1449 or PTOISBI08) 5) [) Notice of Informal Patent Appication (PTO-152) Paper No(syMall Date 12182005 6) Llomer PTOL-326 (Rev. 7-05) Office Action Summary Part of Paper No/Mail Date 12192005Application/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 2 Art Unit: 2163 DETAILED ACTION 1. Claims 1-17 are pending in this office action. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: ‘Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of ‘matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the Conditions and requirements of this tte. 2. Claims 1-14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claims lack a practical application. This determination was made because the claims fail to show a useful, concrete and tangible result. This is because merely retrieving data on a computer is not a useful, concrete, and tangible result. It is not until the retrieved data is applied in a meaningful way, such as by providing it to the user, that it becomes a tangible result. In order to overcome this rejection and make the claims allowable, the claims 1, 5, and 16 must be amended to show that the retrieved data is either provided or presented to the user. Examiner notes that claims 2-4 and 6-14 are rejected because they inherit the deficiencies of either claims 1 or 5. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the second paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112: 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. 3. Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which applicant regards as the invention,Application/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 3 Art Unit: 2163 Claims 1-7, 10-11, 13, and 15-17 contain the trademark/trade name MetaMatrix. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe a server and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite Claims 8-9, 12, and 14 are rejected because they inherit the deficiencies of claims 1-7, 10-11, 13, and 15-17 stated above. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: (2) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this tte, ifthe differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made. 4, Claims 1-3, 5-7, and 9-10, 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Number 6,460,043 issued to Bassam Tabbara et al (hereinafter “Tabbara’) in further view of U.S. Patent Number 6,411,961 issued to Li- Wen Chen (hereinafter "Chen”).Application/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 4 Art Unit: 2163 Claims 1: Tabbara discloses a system for accessing data in an information source, said system comprising: an information source -having storage spaces, each said storage space configured to store types of data defined by physical metadata elements (Tabbara: column 8, lines 43-47 and Fig. 3, 12; The “underlying provider'/SQL Database is the information source.); wherein a first set of said metadata elements comprises said physical metadata elements of said information source (Tabara: column 7, lines 12-14; The physical schema is the physical metadata. Compare column 12, lines 44-52 to paragraph [0067], lines 1-3 of the applicant's specification.), and wherein said second set of metadata elements comprises logical metadata elements (Tabbara: column 7, lines 12. 14; The conceptual schema is the logical metadata. Compare column 46, lines 16-18 and applicant's specification paragraph [0069], line 8.), each of which correspond to at least one physical metadata element of said first set (Tabara: column 7, lines 23-26); and a MetaMatrix server coupled to said metadata repository and to said information source (Tabbara: Fig. 3, 62 is located on server Fig. 2, 49.), wherein said MetaMatrix server is configured to receive a query request for a logical metadata element from a user via an application programming interface (Tabbara: Fig. 3 and column 6, lines 39- 48; The consumer application is the application programming interface.), and to retrieveApplication/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 5 Art Unit: 2163 from said information source the data defined by the corresponding physical metadata element (Tabara: column 6, lines 58-66 and column 9, lines 24-28). Tabbara does not explicitly disclose a metadata repository configured to store two sets of metadata elements. However, Chen discloses a metadata repository configured to store two sets of metadata elements (Chen: Fig. 1, 109 and Fig. 7B and column 5, lines 9-10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skillin the art at the time the invention was made to modify Tabbara with the teachings of Chen noted above for the purpose of including a metadata repository. The skilled artisan would have been motivated to improve the teachings of Tabara per the above such that multiple meta models could be stored to allow the analyzing of data from one or more data sources (Chen: column 2, lines 28-31 and column 2, lines 17-20). Claim 2: The combination of Tabbara and Chen discloses all the elements of claim 1, as noted above, and Tabara further discloses: wherein upon receiving from a user said query request for a logical metadata element (Tabara: Fig. 3 and column 6, lines 39-48.), said MetaMatrix server is, configured to retrieve from both the first and second information sources the data defined by the corresponding physical metadata element (Tabbara: column 6, lines 58- 66 and column 9, lines 24-28; The invention by Tabara already maps a higher-level conceptual schema (logical metadata) to a lower level physical schema (physical metadata). By adding a second information source, one just adds more physical metadata elements (another physical schema) to the system (This is accomplished withApplication/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 6 Art Unit: 2163 the teachings of Chen noted below). The only change to the invention of Tabara would be to expand the mapping table that maps the conceptual schema to the physical schema, And simply expanding a table would be obvious to one ordinary skill in the art.). Tabbara does not explicitly disclose a second information source having storage spaces configured to store data defined by physical metadata elements, wherein said physical metadata elements of said second information source are also stored in said first set of metadata elements in said repository However, Chen discloses a second information source having storage spaces configured to store data defined by physical metadata elements (Chen: Fig. 1, 101 and column 2, 17-19), wherein said physical metadata elements of said second information source are also stored in said first set of metadata elements in said repository (Chen: column 10, lines 43-47; Once again here, the physical schema is the physical metadata.), It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the invention of Tabbara with the teaching of Chen noted above for the purpose of expanding the list of physical metadata elements (through the addition of a new physical schema) through the addition of another data source. The skilled artisan would have been motivated to improve the invention of Tabbara per the above such that data from more than one information source could be accessed (Chen: column 2, lines 17-19) Claim 3: The combination of Tabara and Chen discloses all the elements of claim 2, as noted above, and Tabbara further discloses wherein said second set of said metadataApplication/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 7 Art Unit: 2163 repository further comprises a logical rule element (Tabbara: column 18, lines 26; The logical rule element are the Filters. They contain rules such as simple comparisons, ‘like’ comparisons, range checks, and checks for a set of values (see column 18, lines 30-35).) comprising a rule and which corresponds to one of said logical metadata elements of said second set (Tabara: column 18, line 27; Note “The Filter applies to the scope in which it is located”. Scopes are the names of the logical metadata elements (portions of the conceptual schema) that are created to shorten the physical metadata element (portion of the physical schema) names (column 18, lines 5-6).), and wherein said data received by said MetaMatrix server is transformed in accordance with said rule (Tabara: column 18, lines 26-35; The Filters transform the data received by the server because different results are received based on the setting of the Filter. This is exactly what occurs with the logical rules disclosed by the applicant in the applicant's specification and drawings (specifically applicant's Fig. 5B).) Claim 5: Claim 5 is a method claim corresponding to system claim 1 and is rejected under the same reasons set forth in claim 1 Claim 6: Claim 6 is a method claim corresponding to system claim 2 and is rejected under the same reasons set forth in claim 2. Claim 7: Claim 7 is a method claim corresponding to system claim 3 and is rejected under the same reasons set forth in claim 3.Application/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 8 Art Unit: 2163 Claim The combination of Tabbara and Chen discloses all the elements of claim 5, as noted above, and Tabbara further discloses a method comprising the step of: upon receiving said query request for a logical metadata element from a user, generating a query plan for retrieving said data from said information source (Tabara: column 39, lines 1-3 and Figs 36 and 44; Tabbara’s invention takes a query of the conceptual data (logical metadata elements) and generates a query (this requires a query plan.) in order to get the data from the physical implantation of the database. Fig. 36 shows steps of the “query plan” that is part of the physical query generation process. Further the component that carries out the process of generating the query is in Fig. 44, 266. Also note that this process is referred to as a query plan in column 39, lines 17- 18). Claim 10: The combination of Tabbara and Chen discloses all the elements of claim 9, as noted above, and Tabbara further discloses a method wherein said query plan comprises a plurality of operations to be performed by said MetaMatrix server (Tabara: Fig. 36; This shows the process of generating a “query plan” which transtates the received query on conceptual data into a query that can access the physical data.). Claim 15: ‘Tabbara discloses method for accessing data in an information source, said method comprising the steps of:Application/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 9 Art Unit: 2163 a user providing, to a MetaMatrix server via a client application programming interface, a query request (Tabbara: column 38, lines 60-67; The consumer applications are the application programming interface.); parsing said query request provided by said user so as to generate a global query object (Tabara: column 39, lines 1-3; The global query object is the DML query, In order to generate this second query, the computer system must parse the original query request in order to break the request down and gather the information the request contains needed to generate the global query object (DML query).); converting said global query object into a plurality of information source-specific query requests (Tabbara: column 39, lines 3-15; Note that after the global query object (DML query) is generated in lines 1-3. Then as a result multiple (based on the plural for of the word) physical queries are generated (column 39, line 4). These physical queries are the information source specific query requests.); retrieving, with said information source-specific query requests, data from an information source (Tabara: column 39, lines 3-11); generating a set of information source-specific results (Tabbara: column 39, lines. 4-3; Note final result set.); converting said set of information source-specific results into a global result object (Tabara: column 38, lines 1-3; The structure of the final result set is the global result object.); delivering said global result object to said user (Tabara: column 39, lines 1-3; Note that the phrase “returning the final result set.”)Application/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 10 Art Unit: 2163 Tabbara does not explicitly disclose retrieving data from a plurality of information sources. However, Chen discloses retrieving data from a plurality of information sources (Chen: Fig. 1 and column 2, lines 17-19 and column §, lines 37-52). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the invention of Tabara with the teachings of Chen noted above for the purpose of retrieving data from a plurality of information sources. The skilled artisan would have been motivated to improve the teachings of Tabara per the above such that data from multiple legacy systems could be retrieved (Chen: column §, lines 37-52). Claim 16: A ssystem for accessing data in at least two information sources, said system comprising: a first information source having storage spaces, each said storage space configured to store types of data defined by physical metadata elements, said first database employing a first information system using a first query language for processing requests for data stored therein (Tabara: column 8, lines 43-47 and Fig. 3, 12; The “underlying provider’/SQL Database is the information source. The query language is CQL); wherein a first set of said metadata elements comprises said physical metadata elements of said first and second information sources (Tabara: column 7, lines 12-14; The physical schema is the physical metadata. Compare column 12, lines 44-52 to paragraph [0067], lines 1-3 of the applicant's specification.), and wherein said second set of metadata elements comprises logical metadata elements (Tabara: column 7,Application/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 11 Art Unit: 2163 lines 12-14; The conceptual schema is the logical metadata. Compare column 46, lines 16-18 and applicant's specification paragraph [0069}, line 8.), each of which correspond to at least one physical metadata element of said first set (Tabara: column 7, lines 23- 26); and wherein said MetaMatrix server is configured to receive a query request for a logical metadata element from a user using a third query language via an application programming interface (Tabara: Fig. 3 and column 6, lines 39-48; The consumer application is the application programming interface.), and to retrieve from said first and second information sources the data defined by the corresponding physical metadata element (Tabara: column 6, lines 58-66 and column 9, lines 24-28; The invention by Tabbara already maps a higher-level conceptual schema (logical metadata) to a lower level physical schema (physical metadata). By adding a second information source, one just adds more physical metadata elements (another physical schema) to the system (This is accomplished with the teachings of Chen noted below). The only change to the invention of Tabara would be to expand the mapping table that maps the conceptual schema to the physical schema. And simply expanding a table would be obvious to one ordinary skill in the art.) Tabbara does not explicitly disclose a metadata repository configured to store two sets of metadata elements; a second information source having storage spaces, each said storage space configured to store types of data defined by physical metadata elements, said second database employing a second information system using a second query language for processing requests for data stored therein; a MetaMatrixApplication/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 12 Art Unit: 2163 server coupled to said metadata repository and to said first and second information sources. However, Chen discloses a metadata repository configured to store two sets of metadata elements (Chen: Fig. 1, 109 and Fig. 7B and column 5, lines 9-10); a second information source having storage spaces, each said storage space configured to store types of data defined by physical metadata elements (Chen: Fig. 1, 101 and column 2, 17-19 and column 10, lines 43-47; Once again here, the physical schema is the physical metadata.), said second database employing a second information system using a second query language for processing requests for data stored therein (Chen: column 13, lines 53-58); a MetaMatrix server coupled to said metadata repository and to said first and second information sources (Chen: Fig. 1, 100) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the invention of Tabara with the teaching of Chen noted above for the purpose of expanding the list of physical metadata elements (by the addition of a new physical schema) through the addition of another data source. The skilled artisan would have been motivated to improve the invention of Tabara per the above such that data from more than one information source could be accessed by applying only one query (Chen: column 2, lines 17-19) Claims 47: Tabbara discloses a system for storing data in an information source, said system comprising an information source having storage spaces, each said storage space configured to store a type of data defined by a physical metadata element (Tabara:Application/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 13 Art Unit: 2163 column 8, lines 43-47 and Fig. 3, 12; The “underlying provider'/SQL Database is the information source.); wherein a first set of said metadata elements comprises said physical metadata elements of said information source (Tabara: column 7, lines 12-14; The physical schema is the physical metadata. Compare column 12, lines 44-52 to paragraph [0067], lines 1-3 of the applicant's specification.), and wherein said second set of metadata elements comprises logical metadata elements (Tabara: column 7, lines 12- 14; The conceptual schema is the logical metadata. Compare column 46, lines 16-18 and applicant's specification paragraph [0069], line 8.), each of which correspond to at least one physical metadata element of said first set (Tabbara: column 7, lines 23-26); and a MetaMatrix server coupled to said metadata repository and to said information source (Tabara: Fig. 3, 62 is located on server Fig. 2, 49.), wherein said MetaMatrix server is configured to data corresponding to a logical metadata element from a user via an application programming interface (Tabbara: Fig. 3 and column 6, lines 39-48; The consumer application is the application programming interface.), and to store the data in storage space of said information source the data defined by the corresponding physical metadata element (Tabbara: column 6, lines 58-66 and column 9, lines 24-28). Tabbara does not explicitly disclose a metadata repository configured to store two sets of metadata elements. However, Chen discloses a metadata repository configured to store two sets of metadata elements (Chen: Fig. 1, 109 and Fig. 7B and column 5, lines 9-10). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art atApplication/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 14 Art Unit: 2163, the time the invention was made to modify Tabbara with the teachings of Chen noted above for the purpose of including a metadata repository. The skilled artisan would have been motivated to improve the teachings of Tabara per the above such that multiple meta models could be stored to allow the analyzing of data from one or more data sources (Chen: column 2, lines 28-31 and column 2, lines 17-20). 5. Claims 4, 8, and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Tabbara in view of Chen and further in view of U.S. Patent 5,734,887 issued to Denis G. Kingberg et al. (hereinafter “Kingberg’) Claim 4: The combination of Tabbara and Chen discloses alll the elements of claim 2, as noted above, but does not explicitly disclose: wherein a logical metadata element of said second set corresponds to at least, two physical metadata elements of said first set, and wherein said second set of metadata repository also comprises a logical rule element comprising a rule and which also corresponds to said logical metadata element, and wherein said data retrieved by said MetaMatrix server is selected from one of said at least two physical metadata elements in accordance with said rule. However, Kingberg discloses wherein a logical metadata element of said second set corresponds to at least two physical metadata elements of said first set (Kingberg: column 11, lines 57-59); and wherein said second set of metadata repository also comprises a logical rule element comprising a rule and which also corresponds to said logical metadata elementApplication/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 15, Art Unit: 2163 (Kingberg: column 14, lines 9-13; The where clause sets the rule to specify which of the multiple physical locations should be selected.), and wherein said data retrieved by said MetaMatrix server is selected from one of said at least two physical metadata elements in accordance with said rule (Kingberg: column 11, lines 57-59 and column 14, lines 9- 13), It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the previously mentioned combination with the teachings of Kingberg noted above for the purpose of allowing a logical metadata element to point to more than one physical metadata element (Kingberg: column 11, lines 57-59). The skilled artisan would have been motivated to improve the previously mentioned combination per the above such that a logical element could be linked to numerous physical elements and the appropriate physical element would be chosen based upon a set condition (Kingberg: column 14, lines 6-13). Cl: Claim 8 is a method claim corresponding to system claim 4 and is rejected under the same reasons set forth in claim 4. Claim 14: The combination of Tabbara and Chen discloses all the elements of claim 10, as noted above, but does not explicitly disclose wherein one of said plurality of operations to be performed by said MetaMatrix server comprises joining data from a first and a second information source to form a single new information source. However, Kingberg discloses wherein one of said plurality of operations to be performed by said MetaMatrixApplication/Control Number: 10/450,581 : Page 16 Art Unit: 2163, server comprises joining data from a first and a second information source to form a single new information source (Kingberg: column 3, lines 51-61; This clearly explains the join operation between two information sources (database tables). This is very well known process in the art.). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the previously mentioned combination with the teachings of Kingberg noted above. The skilled artisan would have been motivated to improve the previously mentioned combination such that that a new data source relationship of two original data sources (Kingberg: column 3, lines 51-61; Note that the join table is the new information source that is derived from the join of the physical and logical information sources.). Cl 12: The combination of Tabbara, Chen, and Kingberg discloses all the elements of claim 11, as noted above, and Kingberg further discloses wherein said step of joining data from a first and a second information source further comprises the step of generating said new information source as a data table with a plurality of data columns, said plurality of data columns comprising data columns in said first and second information sources, and further comprising data columns corresponding to a data table name of said first and second information sources (Kingberg: column 3, lines 51-61; The join table is the new information source that is a result of the join operation performed on the physical and logical information sources. The join table, as noted in the reference, has entries (columns) corresponding to the original two information ‘source columns.).Application/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 17 Art Unit: 2163 6, Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Tabbara in view of Chen and further in view of U.S. Patent 6,298,342 issued to Goetz Graefe et al. (hereinafter “Graefe’). Claim 13: The combination of Tabbara and Chen discloses all the elements of claim 10, as noted above, but does not explicitly disclose wherein one of said plurality of operations to be performed by said MetaMatrix server comprises pivoting data in first information source storing data in a first format to form a second information source storing said data in a second format. However, Graefe discloses wherein one of said plurality of operations to be performed by said MetaMatrix server comprises pivoting data in first information source storing data in a first format to form a second information source storing said data in a second format (Graefe: column 8, lines 22-50 and Fig. 4; This describes in detail the process of ‘pivoting’. It should further be noted that this is very well known in the database art and is a fundamental operation that can be performed on a database table.), It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the previously mentioned combination with the teachings of Graefe noted above. The skilled artisan would have been motivated to improve the previously mentioned combination per the above such that the perspective from which the data is viewed changes (Graefe: column 3, lines 7-11).Application/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 18 Art Unit: 2163 Claim 14: The combination of Tabbara, Chen, and Graefe discloses all the elements of claim 13, as noted above, and Graefe further discloses wherein a query request for data in said first data format requires multiple query terms, while said query request for data in said second data format requires a single query term (Graefe: Note Fig. 4; The claim presented by the applicant is exactly what occurs from carrying out the pivot operation. So if one teaches the pivot operation, he/she also teaches the result of the pivot operation. By looking at Fig. 4, it can be seen that 4 query terms would need to be used to retum all the information for the EAST region in 1996 (one for every row). However, after the pivot, only one query term would be needed (since only one row needs to be. retumed).) Contact Information Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Patrick A. Darno whose telephone number is (571) 272- 0788. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday, 8:00 am - 4:30 pm, Ifattempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Safet Metjahic can be reached on (571) 272-4023. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.Application/Control Number: 10/450,581 Page 19 Art Unit: 2163 Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). atrick A. Darno Examiner