IP Library Granted Patent US 12,561,237
Granted Patent B2
US 12,561,237 · App. 18/361,416 · Granted Feb 24, 2026

Mapping applications to computing environments

Inventors: Jose Asencio (Charlotte, NC); Ryan Atkins (San Francisco, CA); Paulo Ayala (O'Fallon, MO); Jones Devlin (St. Louis, MO); Daniel Schmitz (O'Fallon, IL); William Stimson (Maryville, IL); Jesse Updegraff (St. Louis, MO)
Assignee: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
G06F11/3698G06F9/547
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,561,237
App. No.
18/361,416
Granted
Feb 24, 2026
Kind
B2
Abstract

Mapping a message sent between computing applications to a computing environment associated with one of the computing applications. The computing environment can be a test environment used for developing the computing application. Identification of the computing environment and other data from the message can be extracted from a header of the message and logged. The logged data can be stored in a storage and displayed via a user interface.

Claims (58)

1 . A method for mapping a client computing application to a computing environment, comprising:

receiving a data transmission between the client computing application and a target computing application, the target computing application operating across a plurality of computing environments;

determining, from the data transmission, that the data transmission was sent to the target computing application operating in a target computing environment of the plurality of computing environments;

storing, in a computer-readable storage, a log of the data transmission, the log including an indicator of the target computing environment; and

determining, based on the indicator, whether a discrepancy in a response provided by the target computing application is caused by the target computing environment, the target computing application, or the client computing application, including:

(i) when the indicator is a first indicator, determining that the discrepancy is caused by the target computing environment, not caused by the target computing application, and not caused by the client computing application; and

(ii) when the indicator is a second indicator different from the first indicator, determining that the discrepancy is caused by the target computing application or caused by the client computing application.

2 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the data transmission is associated with one of:

a request sent from the client computing application to the target computing application; or

a response sent from the target computing application to the client computing application, the response being in response to a request sent by the client computing application to the target computing application.

3 . The method of claim 1 , wherein determining that the data transmission was sent to the target computing application is performed by the target computing application.

4 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the data transmission includes an identification of the target computing environment, the identification being added to the data transmission by an Application Programming Interface (API) gateway.

5 . The method of claim 4 , wherein the API gateway includes a proxy layer.

6 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the client computing application is a microservice application that uses a plurality of microservices.

7 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the plurality of computing environments includes a first testing environment and a second testing environment different from the first testing environment, the first testing environment and the second testing environment being configured to develop at least one of the client computing application and the target computing application.

8 . The method of claim 7 , wherein the target computing environment is either the first testing environment or the second testing environment.

9 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising generating, based on the log, a user interface that visually maps the client computing application and the data transmission to the target computing environment.

10 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising extracting, from the data transmission, a data payload.

11 . The method of claim 10 , further comprising:

generating a test data transmission for the client computing application based on the data payload; and

processing the test data transmission in a test computing environment corresponding to the target computing environment.

12 . The method of claim 1 , wherein determining that the data transmission was sent to the target computing application includes extracting an identifier of the target computing environment from a header of a message corresponding to the data transmission.

13 . The method of claim 12 , wherein the message is a request sent from the client computing application to the target computing application or a response sent from the target computing application to the client computing application.

14 . A system for mapping a client computing application to a computing environment, comprising:

at least one processor; and

non-transitory computer-readable storage having stored thereon instructions which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one processor to:

receive a data transmission between the client computing application and a target computing application, the target computing application operating across a plurality of computing environments;

determine, from the data transmission, that the data transmission was sent to the target computing application operating in a target computing environment of the plurality of computing environments;

store a log of the data transmission, the log including an indicator of the target computing environment; and

determine, based on the indicator, whether a discrepancy in a response provided by the target computing application is caused by the target computing environment, the target computing application, or the client computing application, including:

(i) when the indicator is a first indicator, determine that the discrepancy is caused by the target computing environment, not caused by the target computing application, and not caused by the client computing application; and

(ii) when the indicator is a second indicator different from the first indicator, determine that the discrepancy is caused by the target computing application or caused by the client computing application.

15 . The system of claim 14 ,

wherein the plurality of computing environments includes a first testing environment and a second testing environment different from the first testing environment, the first testing environment and the second testing environment being configured to develop at least one of the client computing application and the target computing application; and

wherein the target computing environment is either the first testing environment or the second testing environment.

16 . The system of claim 14 , wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the at least one processor to generate, based on the log, a user interface that visually maps the client computing application and the data transmission to the target computing environment.

17 . The system of claim 14 , wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, further cause the at least one processor to:

extract, from the data transmission, a data payload;

generate a test data transmission for the client computing application based on the data payload; and

process the test data transmission in a test computing environment corresponding to the target computing environment.

18 . The system of claim 14 , wherein the data transmission sent to the target computing application operating in a target environment of the plurality of computing environments is determined by extracting an identifier of the target computing environment from a header of a message corresponding to the data transmission.

19 . The system of claim 18 , wherein the message is a request sent from the client computing application to the target computing application or a response sent from the target computing application to the client computing application.

20 . A method for mapping a client computing application to a computing environment, comprising:

receiving messages, the messages including:

a request message, sent by the client computing application via an Application Programming Interface (API) gateway to a target computing application; and

a response message, in response to the request message, sent by the target computing application via the API gateway to the client computing application;

extracting data from each message of the messages, the data including:

a data transmission type indicator indicating whether the message is a request message or a response message;

a client computing application identifier identifying the client computing application;

a target computing application identifier identifying the target computing application;

a payload;

a first computing environment identifier identifying a client computing environment in which the client computing application was operating when processing the message; and

a second computing environment identifier identifying a target computing environment in which the target computing application was operating when processing the message;

logging the data to generate logged data;

generating a user interface that displays a log of the logged data; and

determining, based on a discrepancy indicator, the discrepancy indicator including at least one of the data transmission type identifier, the client computing application identifier, the target computing application identifier, the first computing environment identifier, and the second computing environment identifier, whether a discrepancy in the response message is caused by the target computing environment, the target computing application, or the client computing application, including:

(i) when the discrepancy indicator is a first indicator, determining that the discrepancy is caused by the target computing environment, not caused by the target computing application, and not caused by the client computing application; and

(ii) when the discrepancy indicator is a second indicator different from the first indicator, determining that the discrepancy is caused by the target computing application or caused by the client computing application.

Assignments (2)
STATEMENT OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS OF ASSIGNEE Recorded Jun 17, 2025
From: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
To: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
Reel/Frame 071644/0971 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Feb 6, 2024
From: ASENCIO, JOSE; ATKINS, RYAN; AYALA, PAULO; DEVLIN, JONES; SCHMITZ, DANIEL; STIMSON, WILLIAM; UPDEGRAFF, JESSE
To: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
Reel/Frame 066389/0242 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20250036560A1 · Jan 30, 2025
References Cited (26)
US 9842045B2 · Heorhiadi et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 10552293B2 · Rajasekar · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 11256604B2 · Agarwal et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11347622B1 · Agarwal et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11416380B2 · Gefen et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20090089761A1 · Lazzaro · 2009 [cited by examiner]
US 20120265726A1 · Padmanabhan · 2012 [cited by examiner]
US 20130346980A1 · Branch · 2013 [cited by examiner]
US 20150212853A1 · Makino · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 20160092339A1 · Straub · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20170075792A1 · Udvuleanu · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170111257A1 · Nozawa · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20180088935A1 · Church et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180309637A1 · Gill et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190163610A1 · Vent · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20200236187A1 · Tal · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200259715A1 · Schermann et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200306970A1 · Latkar · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20210157710A1 · Alexander · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210334384A1 · Ranjan et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20220091916A1 · Liu et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220245131A1 · Loeb · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220398187A1 · Balasubramanian et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
Gazzola et al., “Automatic Ex-Vivo Regression Testing of Microservices,” 2020 IEEE/ACM 1st International Conference on Automation of Software Test (AST) (pp. 11-20) (2020). [cited by applicant]
Zhou et al., “Latent Error Prediction and Fault Localization for Microservice Applications by Learning from System Trace Logs,” ESEC/FSE '19, Tallinn, Estonia (12 pgs) (Aug. 2019). [cited by applicant]
Zhang et al., “DeepTraLog: Trace-Log Combined Microservice Anomaly Detection through Graph-based Deep Learning,” 2022 IEEE/ACM 44th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), ICSE '22, Pittsburgh, PA, USA … [cited by applicant]