DETAILED ACTION
The present office action is responsive to the applicant’s filling the application on 08/08/2025.
The application contains claims 1-5-8, 10, 14 and 19, all have been examined.
This action is made Final.
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 .
Examiner Notes
Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. The entire reference is considered to provide disclosure relating to the claimed invention. The claims & only the claims form the metes & bounds of the invention. Office personnel are to give the claims their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the supporting disclosure. Unclaimed limitations appearing in the specification are not read into the claim. Prior art was referenced using terminology familiar to one of ordinary skill in the art. Such an approach is broad in concept and can be either explicit or implicit in meaning. Examiner's Notes are provided with the cited references to assist the applicant to better understand how the examiner interprets the applied prior art. Such comments are entirely consistent with the intent & spirit of compact prosecution.
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, 5-8, 10, 14, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abrams et al. (US 20080077593), in view of Gurbuxani et al. (US 20210150541), Demmler et al. (US 10778692), Williams et al. (US 20070079385), Aziz et al. (US 11675927) and Mowatt et al. (US 20160379292).
In regards to claim 1, Abrams teaches a method for a digital content management system, comprising: providing a downloadable template for an application program product to a spreadsheet engine running on a computer (See at least para 44-45; teaches entity templates and data processing application), importing information of users of the application program product into the template (see para 43, 46, 51, 52: importing information); assigning roles from a predefined set of the template (see at least para 51-53: assigning roles); automatically populating the template for each of the roles assigned with predetermined access rights (see para 51: role rights).
Abrams doesn’t specifically teach an option for a trial access right.
Gurbuxani teaches an option for a trial access right (see para 177, 216-219: teaches GUI with functions available to administrator including editing permissions and trial periods).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with Gurbuxani’s system which allows an administrator to have options for editing permissions and trial periods, since one would have been motivated to make this modification in order to further control role rights for a duration of time in a probatory time until it’s decided that it can become permanent or not meeting expectations.
Abrams further teaches uploading the template with the information imported in association with the roles and the access rights therefor to the application program product (see Fig 1: shows web interface, data processing applications and entity templates. At least para 51-53: teaches assigning roles and associated data);
Abrams doesn’t specifically teach instancing a graphical user interface ("GUI") for group management with the template within the application program product; and displaying an admin menu with the GUI configured for setting group access within the application program product.
Demmler teaches instancing a graphical user interface ("GUI") for group management with the template within the application program product; with the GUI configured for setting group access within the application program product. (see at least Fig. 2-3 and column 10, lines 46-65: as role membership allocation including permission information, role-based rules and user-group associations).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with Demmler’s system of role-based permission integration to create groups using roles and access rights, since one would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide for secure sharing of information among organizations by controlling access to entities based on organizational membership and assigned roles of system users.
Abrams doesn’t specifically teach displaying an admin menu; setting temporary access.
Gurbuxani teaches admin menu; setting temporary access (see para 177, 216-219: teaches Gui with functions available to administrator including editing permissions and trial periods).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with Gurbuxani’s system which allows an administrator to have options for editing permissions and trial periods, since one would have been motivated to make this modification in order to further control role rights for a duration of time in a probatory time until it’s decided that it can become permanent or not meeting expectations.
Abrams doesn’t specifically teach wherein the template has: an overview sheet and at least one group sheet placeholder; fields for names and corresponding emails for the users; assignment menus automatically associated with each of the users; and each of the assignment menus including the roles of the predefined set for selection for the assigning.
Williams teaches wherein the template has: an overview sheet and at least one group sheet placeholder; fields for names and corresponding emails for the users; assignment menus automatically associated with each of the users; and each of the assignment menus including the roles of the predefined set for selection for the assigning (see at least FIG. 10 and para 34: shows an interface which provides, groups, users and their email and allows an administrator menus which different access permissions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with William’s system which allows an administrator to have an overview with options for editing permissions, since one would have been motivated to make this modification in order to easily see and control role rights for users and groups.
Abrams doesn’t specifically teach wherein the GUI includes a modified version of the overview sheet to display one or more associated groups for each of the users.
Aziz teaches wherein the GUI includes a modified version of the overview sheet to display one or more associated groups for each of the users. (see FIGS. 3A-C, 8, 9 and at least Col 4 lines 20-31, col 5 line 24 to col 6 line 8, Col 8 line 38 to Col 9 line 2 provides, groups, users members to the group. A modified view (editing interface) provides members associated to specific groups the administrator can edit).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with Aziz’ system which allows an administrator to have an overview (editing interface) with options for editing group and associated users, since one would have been motivated to make this modification in order to easily see, edit and control role rights for users and groups.
Abrams doesn’t specifically teach wherein: the modified version of the overview sheet includes a user menu to indicate the trial access right for an associated user of the users is ending; the user menu is configured to allow the user to request the trial access right anew; and the user menu is configured to allow the user to request the temporary group access to a selected group.
Mowatt teaches the modified version of the overview sheet includes a user menu to indicate the trial access right for an associated user of the users is ending; the user menu is configured to allow the user to request the trial access right anew; and the user menu is configured to allow the user to request the temporary group access to a selected group (see para 17-18: teaches organizations permissions and access roles and providing the user a notification within an interface which tells the user about a trial period ending and allows the user to request access).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with Mowatt teachings for trial access notification and access request for a user, since one would have been motivated to make this modification in order to further control role rights for a user and provide means for user to easily request access when a trial period is ending (see para 18).
In regards to claim 10, the claim is rejected along the same rational as claim 1 as the provides the same steps/limitations of claim 1 above in method claim.
Additionally, Abrams doesn’t specifically teach wherein the modified version of the overview sheet includes an admin menu for management within the application program product of the one or more associated groups and access status for each with respect to each of the users.
Aziz teaches wherein the modified version of the overview sheet includes an admin menu for management within the application program product of the one or more associated groups and access status for each with respect to each of the users (see FIGS. 3A-C, 8, 9 and at least Col 4 lines 20-31, col 5 line 24 to col 6 line 8, Col 8 line 38 to Col 9 line 2 provides, groups, users members to the group. A modified view (editing interface) provides members associated to specific groups the administrator can edit group. Each member shown their info e.g. email and status FIG. 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with Aziz’ system which allows an administrator to have an overview (editing interface) with options for editing group and associated users, since it would have been motivated to make this modification in order to easily see, edit and control role rights for users and groups.
In regards to claim 14, the claim is rejected along the same rational as claim 1 as the provide the same steps/limitations of claim 1 above in a system claim.
Additionally, Abrams doesn’t specifically teach wherein the modified version of the overview sheet includes an admin menu for management within the application program product of the one or more associated groups and access status for each with respect to each of the users.
Aziz teaches wherein the modified version of the overview sheet includes an admin menu for management within the application program product of the one or more associated groups and access status for each with respect to each of the users (see FIGS. 3A-C, 8, 9 and at least Col 4 lines 20-31, col 5 line 24 to col 6 line 8, Col 8 line 38 to Col 9 line 2 provides, groups, users members to the group. A modified view (editing interface) provides members associated to specific groups the administrator can edit group. Each member shown their info e.g. email and status FIG. 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with Aziz’ system which allows an administrator to have an overview (editing interface) with options for editing group and associated users, since it would have been motivated to make this modification in order to easily see, edit and control role rights for users and groups.
In regards to claim 5, Abrams doesn’t specifically teach wherein the modified version of the overview sheet includes an admin menu for management within the application program product of the one or more associated groups and access status for each with respect to each of the users.
Aziz teaches wherein the modified version of the overview sheet includes an admin menu for management within the application program product of the one or more associated groups and access status for each with respect to each of the users (see FIGS. 3A-C, 8, 9 and at least Col 4 lines 20-31, col 5 line 24 to col 6 line 8, Col 8 line 38 to Col 9 line 2 provides, groups, users members to the group. A modified view (editing interface) provides members associated to specific groups the administrator can edit group. Each member shown their info e.g. email and status FIG. 9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with Aziz’ system which allows an administrator to have an overview (editing interface) with options for editing group and associated users, since it would have been motivated to make this modification in order to easily see, edit and control role rights for users and groups.
In regards to claim 6 and 19, Abrams doesn’t specifically teach wherein the admin menu is configured for the setting of the group access for each of the one or more groups within the application program product.
Aziz teaches wherein the admin menu is configured for the setting of the group access for each of the one or more groups within the application program product (see FIGS. 3A-C, 8, 9 and at least Col 4 lines 20-31, col 5 line 24 to col 6 line 8, Col 8 line 38 to Col 9 line 2 provides, groups, users members to the group. A modified view (editing interface) provides members associated to specific groups the administrator can search groups and edit from the selected group).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with Aziz’ system which allows an administrator to have an overview (editing interface) with options for editing group and associated users, since it would have been motivated to make this modification in order to easily see, edit and control role rights for users and groups.
Abrams doesn’t specifically teach temporary group access.
Gurbuxani teaches temporary group access (see para 177, 216-219: teaches Gui with functions available to administrator including editing permissions and trial periods).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with Gurbuxani’s system which allows an administrator to have options for editing permissions and trial periods, since it would have been motivated to make this modification in order to further control role rights for a duration of time in a probatory time until it’s decided that it can become permanent or not meeting expectations.
In regards to claims 7, Abrams doesn’t specifically teach wherein the admin menu includes a temporary access command for the temporary group access.
Gurbuxani teaches wherein the admin menu includes a temporary access command for the temporary group access (see para 177, 216-219: teaches Gui with functions available to administrator including editing permissions and trial periods).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with Gurbuxani’s system which allows an administrator to have options for editing permissions and trial periods, since it would have been motivated to make this modification in order to further control role rights for a duration of time in a probatory time until it’s decided that it can become permanent or not meeting expectations.
In regards to claim 8, Abrams teaches wherein: the template is configured for creation of the one or more groups by a corresponding copy and paste operation from the overview sheet to one of the at least one group sheet placeholder; and the roles, the predetermined access rights and the trial access right corresponding thereto: follow from the overview sheet to the one or more groups; and are generated together with the one or more groups in one screen at one time (see para 43, 46, 51-53: importing the information and associated roles, settings).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the combination of Abrams, Gurbuxani, Demmler, Williams, Aziz and Mowatt fails to teach the limitations as provided by the claim language. Applicant argues that the combination is the result of hindsight. Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Applicant argues that the teachings from claims 2-4 and 9, and the same matter for the other set of claims with similar claim language, are not taught by the prior art of record. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Each of the combination as provided has a reason for combination, and as shown, are in the same art of endeavor.
With regard to an option for a trial access rights, as provided in the rejection, Gurbuxani is brought for the teachings of an option for a trial access right (the paragraphs 177, 216-219: teaches GUI with functions available to administrator including editing permissions and trial periods). As provided above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with Gurbuxani’s system which allows an administrator to have options for editing permissions and trial periods, since one would have been motivated to make this modification in order to further control role rights for a duration of time in a probatory time until it’s decided that it can become permanent or not meeting expectations.
Applicant argues that Demmler fails to teach instancing a graphical user interface ("GUI") for group management with the template within the application program product; and displaying an admin menu with the GUI configured for setting group access within the application program product.
However, as provided in the rejection above Demmler teaches instancing a graphical user interface ("GUI") for group management with the template within the application program product; with the GUI configured for setting group access within the application program product. (see at least Fig. 2-3 and column 10, lines 46-65: as role membership allocation including permission information, role-based rules and user-group associations).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with Demmler’s system of role-based permission integration to create groups using roles and access rights, since one would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide for secure sharing of information among organizations by controlling access to entities based on organizational membership and assigned roles of system users.
Applicant argues that Gurbuxani fails to teach displaying an admin menu; setting temporary access.
The reference of Gurbuxani teaches admin menu; setting temporary access (see para 177, 216-219: teaches Gui with functions available to administrator (which would be an admin menu), including editing permissions and trial periods. This allows administrator to adjust any parameter for an employee/user as needed or required). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with Gurbuxani’s system which allows an administrator to have options for editing permissions and trial periods, since one would have been motivated to make this modification in order to further control role rights for a duration of time in a probatory time until it’s decided that it can become permanent or not meeting expectations.
Applicant argues that Williams fails to teach wherein the template has: an overview sheet and at least one group sheet placeholder; fields for names and corresponding emails for the users; assignment menus automatically associated with each of the users; and each of the assignment menus including the roles of the predefined set for selection for the assigning.
As provide above, Williams teaches wherein the template has: an overview sheet and at least one group sheet placeholder; fields for names and corresponding emails for the users; assignment menus automatically associated with each of the users; and each of the assignment menus including the roles of the predefined set for selection for the assigning (see at least FIG. 10 and para 34: shows an interface which provides, groups, users and their email and allows an administrator menus which different access permissions). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with William’s system which allows an administrator to have an overview with options for editing permissions, since one would have been motivated to make this modification in order to easily see and control role rights for users and groups.
Applicant argues that Aziz fails wherein the GUI includes a modified version of the overview sheet to display one or more associated groups for each of the users.
The rejection above shows that Aziz teaches wherein the GUI includes a modified version of the overview sheet to display one or more associated groups for each of the users. (see FIGS. 3A-C, 8, 9 and at least Col 4 lines 20-31, col 5 line 24 to col 6 line 8, Col 8 line 38 to Col 9 line 2 provides, groups, users members to the group. A modified view (interpreted as the editing interface) provides members associated to specific groups the administrator can edit).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with Aziz’ system which allows an administrator to have an overview (editing interface) with options for editing group and associated users, since one would have been motivated to make this modification in order to easily see, edit and control role rights for users and groups.
Applicant argues that Mowatt fails wherein: the modified version of the overview sheet includes a user menu to indicate the trial access right for an associated user of the users is ending; the user menu is configured to allow the user to request the trial access right anew; and the user menu is configured to allow the user to request the temporary group access to a selected group.
The reference of Mowatt is brought into the rejection because it teaches the modified version of the overview sheet includes a user menu to indicate the trial access right for an associated user of the users is ending; the user menu is configured to allow the user to request the trial access right anew; and the user menu is configured to allow the user to request the temporary group access to a selected group (as can be seen para 17-18: the art teaches organizations permissions and access roles and providing the user a notification within an interface which tells the user about a trial period ending and allows the user to request access).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Abram’s system of assigning roles and access rights with Mowatt teachings for trial access notification and access request for a user, since one would have been motivated to make this modification in order to further control role rights for a user and provide means for user to easily request access when a trial period is ending (see para 18).
Each of the combination as shown teaches the limitations as provided by the claim language and each contains a reason to combine by a person of ordinary skill in the art, and the prior art is of the same art of endeavor given that the prior art are related to permission environments and interfaces which a person of ordinary skill in the art would combine to facilitate managing employees/users permission, trials within an enterprise/work environment as provided by the reasons to combine provided on each of the art rejections. Examiner suggest including any intermediate or additional step within the management GUI that would differentiate from the prior art as provided on the rejection above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIO M VELEZ-LOPEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-7971. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9:30am-5:30pm
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Scott Baderman, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-3644. 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 Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/MARIO M VELEZ-LOPEZ/
Examiner, Art Unit 2118
/SCOTT T BADERMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2118