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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is issued in response to RCE filed September 2, 2026.
Claims 1-10, 12-15, 17-25 are pending.
Claims 21-25 are added and claims 11 and 16 are cancelled.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on September 2, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-10, 12-15, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen (U.S. Patent Application No. 2021/0250327) in view of Huffner (U.S. Patent Application No. 2020/0267119), further in view of Prakash (U.S. Patent Application No. 2020/0195688).
Regarding Claim 1, Nguyen discloses a system for categorizing and visualizing web domain details, comprising:
instructions stored on one or more non-transitory computer-readable media (par [0017], Nguyen – non-transitory computer-readable medium which stores computer instructions);
one or more processors configured to execute the instructions (par [0017], [0033], Nguyen – instructions that are executable by a processor… domain processing system includes a processor) to:
automatically determine a plurality of domain variants, using a provided seed domain, based on a level of similarity with the seed domain (par [0037], [0041-0045], Nguyen – domain filter is operable to review candidate domains against one or more seed domains and filter down the number of candidate domains that might be considered similar or close); and
automatically categorize the domain variants into a plurality of categories (par [0028-0029], Nguyen – there is a need to process (i.e., classify and/or categorize) domains… par [0037-0038] – candidate domains are classified and filtered based on an n-gram distance); and
one or more servers communicatively coupled with one or more computing devices and configured to provide one or more user interfaces for display on the one or more computing devices (Fig.7; par [0096-0097], Nguyen), the one or more user interfaces comprising:
for each of the categories, an indicator indicating a total number of the domain variants within that category (par [0051-0061], Nguyen – candidate domains are classified based on the n-gram distances, such as 0 n-gram distance, 1 n-gram distance, etc.; wherein a number is associated with each classification of n-gram distance and that information is passed to a computing facility with a UI of domain processing system that is generated by an interface module and presented on a user device).
While Nguyen teaches the use of displays and monitors, as well as the n-gram classifications being generated on a user interface and presented on a user device to the user (see par [0061] and [0096]). However, Nguyen is not as detailed as the examiner would like with respect to a visual display of the categories.
On the other hand, Huffner discloses categorize the domain variants into a plurality of categories and a visual display of the categories (par [0012], [0097], [0099], Huffner - the processed results are provided to a GUI, wherein the GUI provides a display of a list of domain names with classification of the domain names and other information related to the domain names). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Huffner’s teachings into Nguyen’s domain name processing system. A skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine in order to provide a system for classifying domain names using language models and determining whether the particular domain names are relevant to a brand or not. This is used as a way to provide sufficient protection from potential spoofing or phishing.
However, Nguyen is not as detailed with respect to train one or more machine learning (ML) modules.
On the other hand, Prakash discloses training one or more machine learning (ML) modules (par [0034], Prakash – the model is a trained object representing mathematical relationships, wherein the model can be trained using components of webpages; any of a variety of machine learning techniques can be applied to the labeled webpage components to generate the model… par [0109]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Prakash’s teachings into Nguyen and Huffner system. A skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine in order to swiftly and accurately detect and block access to malicious websites while ensuring the system is learning throughout the process.
Therefore, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, disclose wherein the categories include at least: a category for unregistered domains recommended for acquisition; a category for registered domains recommended for monitoring (par [0062], Nguyen); and a category for registered domains recommended for takedown (par [0106-0107], Prakash).
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the domain variants are associated with a plurality of top-level domains (TLDs) (par [0006], [0064], Nguyen – first-level set of domain names are the top-level domains including the generic TLDs).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to determine a registration status of registered or unregistered, for each of the domain variants, and wherein the one or more user interfaces includes a visual display of the registration status of at least some of the domain variants (par [0062], Nguyen – candidate domains stored in a database can include registered domains and unregistered domains… obvious to allow such information to be displayed/visible to a user).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are configured to determine, for each of the domain variants, a score related to a potential maliciousness of the domain variant (par [0041], Huffner – relevance is determined based on lexicons that covers topics such as phishing terms; wherein the terms relevance to the brand name is determined and scored… [0096-0098], Huffner).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, disclose the system of claim 4 wherein, if the domain variant is registered, the score is based on one or more of: a determined intended use for the domain variant (par [0072], Huffner – a score is computed that indicates how relevant the particular word is to the domain and to the brand); a number of malicious sites previously accessible using the domain variant; a number of malicious pages previously accessible using the domain variant; a number of malicious sites previously hosted on an internet protocol (IP) address of the domain variant; a number of malicious pages previously hosted on the IP address of the domain variant; Security Sockets Layer (SSL) certificate details associated with the domain variant; a determined score for a top-level domain (TLD) of the domain variant; and a determination of likely deception related to a known brand name.
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, disclose the system of claim 4 wherein, if the domain variant is unregistered, the score is based on one or more of: an average domain registration price associated with a top-level domain (TLD); a price for registration of the domain variant; a determined TLD maliciousness; one or more terms in the domain variant determined to be suspicious; and the level of similarity with the seed domain (par [0072], [0078-0079], [0096], Huffner).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, disclose the system of claim 4, wherein the one or more processors are configured to, based on the score, determine whether the domain variant should be recommended for acquisition and, if so, initiate display of an acquisition recommendation on the one or more user interfaces (par [0088-0090], Huffner).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to determine, for each of the domain variants which is registered, whether a website associated with the domain variant includes malicious content (par [0096-0098], Huffner – determination is made of what type of website is associated with the questionable domain, such as whether the website is associated with phishing or include a negative page).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, disclose the system of claim 8, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to, in response to determining that the website includes malicious content (par [0096-0098], Huffner), initiate display of a takedown recommendation on the one or more user interfaces (par [0100], [0103], Prakash – counterfeit website domain takedown is utilized and involves requesting/notifying the owner to take down the website).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, disclose the system of claim 9, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to monitor content of the website after a takedown and, in response to determining that the website again includes malicious content, initiate display of another takedown recommendation on the one or more user interfaces (par [0105-0107], Prakash – the system periodically checks to see if the counterfeit website is still live, after one or more requests have been made, then the system sends out another request again to take down the domain).
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the category for registered domains recommended for monitoring comprises a plurality of subcategories, including at least one subcategory for parked domains (par [0047], [0105], Prakash – parked domain page).
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, disclose the system of claim 1, wherein the visual display of the categories includes, for each category, a displayed container (par [0099], Huffner – displaying a list of the domain names with classifications of the domain names and other information related to the domain names… examiner notes the particulars about how the category is “displayed” is deemed to be non-functional descriptive language which does not carry any weight).
Claim 14 contains similar subject matter as claims 1 and 3 above; and is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 15 contains similar subject matter as claim 5 above; and is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 17 contains similar subject matter as claim 9 above; and is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 18-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, and further in view of Kamdar (U.S. Patent Application No. 2015/0154294).
Regarding Claim 18, Nguyen discloses a system for categorizing and visualizing web domain details, comprising:
one or more processors; one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions executable by the one or more processors (par [0017], [0033], Nguyen – instructions that are executable by a processor… domain processing system includes a process… non-transitory computer-readable medium which stores computer instructions), wherein the instructions, when executed, cause the system to:
automatically determine a plurality of domain variants, using a provided seed domain, based on a level of similarity with the seed domain (par [0037], [0041-0045], Nguyen – domain filter is operable to review candidate domains against one or more seed domains and filter down the number of candidate domains that might be considered similar or close); and
automatically categorize the domain variants into a plurality of categories (par [0028-0029], Nguyen – there is a need to process (i.e., classify and/or categorize) domains… par [0037-0038] – candidate domains are classified and filtered based on an n-gram distance); and
one or more servers communicatively coupled with one or more computing devices and configured to provide one or more user interfaces for display on the one or more computing devices (Fig.7; par [0096-0097], Nguyen), the one or more user interfaces comprising:
for each of the categories, an indicator indicating a total number of the domain variants within that category (par [0051-0061], Nguyen – candidate domains are classified based on the n-gram distances, such as 0 n-gram distance, 1 n-gram distance, etc.; wherein a number is associated with each classification of n-gram distance and that information is passed to a computing facility with a UI of domain processing system that is generated by an interface module and presented on a user device).
While Nguyen teaches the use of displays and monitors, as well as the n-gram classifications being generated on a user interface and presented on a user device to the user (see par [0061] and [0096]). However, Nguyen is not as detailed as the examiner would like with respect to a visual display of the categories.
On the other hand, Huffner discloses categorize the domain variants into a plurality of categories and a visual display of the categories (par [0012], [0097], [0099], Huffner - the processed results are provided to a GUI, wherein the GUI provides a display of a list of domain names with classification of the domain names and other information related to the domain names). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Huffner’s teachings into Nguyen’s domain name processing system. A skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine in order to provide a system for classifying domain names using language models and determining whether the particular domain names are relevant to a brand or not. This is used as a way to provide sufficient protection from potential spoofing or phishing.
However, Nguyen is not as detailed with respect to train one or more machine learning (ML) modules.
On the other hand, Prakash discloses training one or more machine learning (ML) modules (par [0034], Prakash – the model is a trained object representing mathematical relationships, wherein the model can be trained using components of webpages; any of a variety of machine learning techniques can be applied to the labeled webpage components to generate the model… par [0109]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Prakash’s teachings into Nguyen and Huffner system. A skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine in order to swiftly and accurately detect and block access to malicious websites while ensuring the system is learning throughout the process.
Therefore, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, disclose wherein the categories include at least: a category for unregistered domains recommended for acquisition; a category for registered domains recommended for monitoring (par [0062], Nguyen); and a category for registered domains recommended for takedown (par [0106-0107], Prakash).
However, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, are not as detailed with respect to the unregistered domains recommended for acquisition are classified into one or more priority levels.
On the other hand, Kamdar discloses the unregistered domains recommended for acquisition are classified into one or more priority levels (par [0088-0091], Kamdar - The created available name identifiers may be prioritized. Names identifiers that are thought to be more valuable or higher quality (generally shorter and more general domain names or social media handles) may be displayed more prominently, such as at the beginning of a list (i.e., prioritized)... the user indicates that they would like to register one or more of the selected available domain name identifiers, the domain names may then be registered to the user with a Registry; wherein the user will have to submit the contact and payment information for the selected domain names… par [0009-0010], Kamdar – the name identifiers, such as domain names, are preferably prioritized, so that the name identifiers that are mostly likely to be chosen have a higher priority than name identifiers that are less likely to be chosen. If the number of name identifiers exceeds a predetermined number, the lower priority name identifiers may be dropped from consideration… see par [0144]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Kamdar’s teachings into Nguyen, Huffner, and Prakash system. A skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine in order to more prominently display domain name availability; thus enhancing efficiency by immediately providing what is believed to be of importance to the user.
Regarding Claim 19, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, and further in view of Kamdar, disclose the system of claim 18 wherein the instructions, when executed, cause the system to train the one or more ML modules to determine, for each of the domain variants, a score related to a potential maliciousness of the domain variant (par [0041], Huffner – relevance is determined based on lexicons that covers topics such as phishing terms; wherein the terms relevance to the brand name is determined and scored… [0096-0098], Huffner), wherein the score is based on one or more of: a determined intended use for the domain variant (par [0072], Huffner – a score is computed that indicates how relevant the particular word is to the domain and to the brand); a number of malicious sites previously accessible using the domain variant; a number of malicious pages previously accessible using the domain variant; a number of malicious sites previously hosted on an internet protocol (IP) address of the domain variant; a number of malicious pages previously hosted on the IP address of the domain variant; Security Sockets Layer (SSL) certificate details associated with the domain variant; a determined score for a top-level domain (TLD) of the domain variant; a determination of likely deception related to a known brand name; an average domain registration price associated with a top-level domain (TLD); a price for registration of the domain variant; a determined TLD maliciousness; one or more terms in the domain variant determined to be suspicious; and the level of similarity with the seed domain.
Regarding Claim 20, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, and further in view of Kamdar, disclose the system of claim 18 wherein the instructions, when executed, cause the system to train the one or more ML modules to determine, for each of the domain variants which is registered, whether a website associated with the domain variant includes malicious content (par [0096-0098], Huffner – determination is made of what type of website is associated with the questionable domain, such as whether the website is associated with phishing or include a negative page).
Regarding Claim 21, the combination of Nguyen in view of Huffner, further in view of Prakash, and further in view of Kamdar, disclose the system of claim 18, wherein the priority levels include a high priority level, a medium priority level, and a low priority level (par [0009-0010], Kamdar – the name identifiers, such as domain names, are preferably prioritized, so that the name identifiers that are mostly likely to be chosen have a higher priority than name identifiers that are less likely to be chosen. If the number of name identifiers exceeds a predetermined number, the lower priority name identifiers may be dropped from consideration… par [0144]).
Claim 22 contains similar subject matter as claim 18 above; and is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 23 contains similar subject matter as claim 21 above; and is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 24 contains similar subject matter as claim 18 above; and is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim 25 contains similar subject matter as claim 21 above; and is rejected under the same rationale.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments toward claims 1 and 14, with respect to the newly incorporated features from dependent claims 11 and 16, respectively; were originally considered and addressed within the Appeal Brief or Reply Brief previously filed on 7/28/2025. As a result, the examiner is using the affirmed 103 grounds of rejection from the Board Decision (that affirmed claims 1-20) which are the “law of the case” and is thus controlling in that application and any subsequent, related application and we must follow (see MPEP 706.07(h)(XI)(A)).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended claim(s) 18-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Points of Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHELCIE L DAYE whose telephone number is (571) 272-3891. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7:30-4:00pm. 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, Apu Mofiz can be reached on 571-272-4080. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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).
Chelcie Daye
Patent Examiner
Technology Center 2100
September 13, 2026
/CHELCIE L DAYE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2161
Prosecution Insights