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
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 4/24/2026 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3/27/2026, for application 18/279,803 has been entered.
This Office Action is in response to the application filed 3/25/2026 for 18/279,803.
Claims 1-13 and 18-22 are currently pending. Claim 1 has been amended. Claims 1 and 18 are independent claims. Claims 1-13 and 18-22 have been examined. This Action is made non-FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment, filed 3/25/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-13 and 18-22 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts as follows: Independent Claim 1 is Patentable Claims 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carley in view of Roennow. Office Action at Page 8. Applicant respectfully traverses the rejection on the basis that combination of Carley and Roennow does not disclose or suggest all recitations of amended independent Claim 1. Independent Claim 1 is amended to recite at least, for example, the newly presented features of "in response to the first indication being partial access, enforcing access at the terminal device by providing the first application access to the first type of stored data with a subset of the stored data of the first type removed, masked or anonymized in accordance with a set of rules and/or a trained machine learning model". Support for the amendments to the claims can be found at least, for example, in Paragraphs [0038] and [0048] of the Specification as published. For example, amended independent Claim 1 recites: A method for managing access to data stored on a terminal device, the method at the terminal device comprising: receiving, from a first application executing on the terminal device, a request for access to a first type of stored data; receiving, as a user input, a first indication of whether the first application is to be allowed: full access to the first type of stored data, partial access to the first type of stored data, or no access to the first type of stored data; and in response to the first indication being partial access, enforcing access at the terminal device by providing the first application access to the first type of stored data with a subset of the stored data of the first type removed, masked or anonymized in accordance with a set of rules and/or a trained machine learning model, and otherwise providing the first application full, partial or no access to the first type of stored data according to the first indication. (Emphasis added.) Therefore, Applicant respectfully submits that the combination of Carley and Roennow does not disclose or suggest the feature "terminal device by providing the first application access to the first type of stored data with a subset of the stored data of the first type removed, masked or anonymized in accordance with a set of rules and/or a trained machine learning model" of amended independent Claim 1. (emphasis added.) Therefore, Applicant respectfully submits that the combination of Carley and Roennow does not disclose or suggest all the features of amended independent Claim 1. Accordingly, allowance of amended independent Claim 1 is respectfully requested.
Examiner respectfully submits claims 1-13 are properly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carley (US20220067181), filed September 1, 2020, in view of Roennow (EP3211555), published 8/30/2017, and Ramanathan (US20200334608), filed April 17, 2020 . Regarding claim 1, Carley discloses, paragraphs 0035 and 0046, a method for managing access to data stored on a terminal device, the method at the terminal device comprising: receiving, from a first application executing on the terminal device, a request for access by disclosing user’s access or permission levels determined based on login credentials that user may provide before using a training device; user permission of access levels, machine learning model; paragraph 0049, providing access to the first type of stored data according to the first indication by disclosing transmit data units that correspond with the identified access level; paragraphs 0060, 0044, in accordance with a set of rules and/or a trained machine learning model by disclosing update the model, model temporarily stored until provided to the user. Carley discloses receiving, from a first application executing on the terminal device, a request for access; providing the first application access to stored data according to the first indication; however, Carley does not explicitly disclose receiving, from a first application executing on the terminal device, a request for access to a first type of stored data; receiving), as a user input, a first indication of whether the first application is to be allowed: full access to the first type of stored data; partial access to the first type of stored data; or no access to the first type of stored data; providing the first application full, partial or no access to the first type of stored data according to the first indication. Roennow discloses, paragraph 0049, receiving from a first application executing on the terminal device, a request for access to a first type of stored data by disclosing second user attempting to operate device; paragraph 0051, receiving, as a user input by disclosing user input, paragraph 0055, a first indication of whether the first application is to be allowed: full access to the first type of stored data by disclosing full access; paragraph 0055, partial access to the first type of stored data by disclosing access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis; paragraph 0055, no access to the first type of stored data by disclosing no access. Carley and Roennow disclose providing the first application full, partial or no access to the first type of stored data according to the first indication, but do not explicitly disclose in response to the first indication being partial access, enforcing access at the terminal device by providing the first application access to the first type of stored data with a subset of the stored data of the first type removed, masked or anonymized in accordance with a set of rules and/or a trained machine learning model, and otherwise providing the first application full, partial or no access to the first type of stored data according to the first indication. Ramanathan discloses, paragraphs 0101, 0151, in response to the first indication being partial access, enforcing access at the terminal device by providing the first application access to the first type of stored data with a subset of the stored data of the first type removed, masked or anonymized in accordance with a set of rules and/or a trained machine learning model, and otherwise providing the first application full, partial or no access to the first type of stored data according to the first indication by disclosing model, stored data can be masked, anonymized, or removed.
Applicant asserts as follows: Independent Claim 18 is Patentable Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carley in view of Roennow. Office Action at Page 8. Applicant respectfully traverses the rejection on the basis that combination of Carley and Roennow does not disclose or suggest all recitations of independent Claim 18. For example, independent Claim 18 recites: A method for managing access to data stored on a terminal device, the method at a data analysis function comprising: determining a first set of rules and/or training a first machine learning model, wherein the first set of rules and/or first trained machine learning model is for identifying a subset of stored data of a first type that is not to be accessed by a first application executing on the terminal device in the event that a user of the terminal device indicates the first application is to be allowed partial access to stored data of the first type; and sending the first set of rules and/or the first trained machine learning model to the terminal device. In rejecting Claim 18, the Examiner, at Pages 12 and 13 of the Office Action, concedes and asserts that "[r]egarding Claim 18, Carley ... does not explicitly disclose identifying a subset of stored data of a first type that is not to be accessed by a first application executing on the terminal device in the event that a user of the terminal device indicates the first application is to be allowed partial access to stored data of the first type. ... Roennow discloses identifying a subset of stored data of a first type that is not to be accessed by a first application executing on the terminal device in the event that a user of the terminal device indicates the first application is to be allowed partial access to stored data of the first type (Roennow, Paragraph 0055, access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis)". (Emphasis in original.) According to Paragraph [0055] of Roennow: "For example, a plurality of levels of access may be provided including at least two or more of; i) full access to the electronic device; ii) access to a subset of a plurality of applications available for use at the electronic device; iii) access to a predetermined application available for use at the electronic device; iv) access to files available at the electronic device on a read-only basis; v) access to one or more classes of application available for use at the electronic device such as word processing applications, web browsing applications, or messaging applications or other classes vi) no access (i.e. deny access)."
Examiner respectfully submits claims 1-11 and 18-24 are properly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carley (US20220067181), filed September 1, 2020, in view of Roennow (EP3211555), published 8/30/2017. Regarding claim 18, Carley discloses, title, a method for managing access to data stored on a terminal device, the method at a data analysis function comprising by disclosing data analysis in the title; paragraph 0054, determining a first set of rules and/or training a first machine learning model, wherein the first set of rules and/or first trained machine learning model is for identifying a subset of stored data of a first type by disclosing receive data, identify subsets of data, training of machine language model; paragraph 0044, sending the first set of rules and/or the first trained machine learning model to the terminal device by disclosing model temporarily stored until provided to the user. Carley does not explicitly disclose identifying a subset of stored data of a first type that is not to be accessed by a first application executing on the terminal device in the event that a user of the terminal device indicates the first application is to be allowed partial access to stored data of the first type. Roennow discloses, paragraph 0055, identifying a subset of stored data of a first type that is not to be accessed by a first application executing on the terminal device in the event that a user of the terminal device indicates the first application is to be allowed partial access to stored data of the first type by disclosing access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis. Paragraph 0055, item vi) discloses “no access (i.e., deny access)”.
Applicant asserts as follows: Roennow's enumerates broad "levels of access" (subset of applications, predetermined application, files on read-only basis) in an access-control UI; it does not teach any data-analysis function that: " determines rule sets/ML models for classifying stored data items of a type, and " identifies, per application and per data type, which items are excluded when partial access is allowed. The Examiner's mapping equates "subset of applications / read-only" to "subset of stored data not to be accessed," but that conflates application-level access with data-item-level classification. There is no suggestion in Roennow to generate and distribute a model whose purpose is to classify individual stored data items for per-app, per-type partial access as claimed. Even assuming Carley's data-analysis model and Roennow's access levels are known in the art, there is no articulated rationale why a skilled person would specifically configure Carley's model: " to be conditioned on user partial-access indications for particular apps and data types, and " to output exactly the subset of stored data of that type that must be excluded from access for those apps. The cited goal ("provide users with the benefits of access control") is already satisfied by Carley's own access-level system and Roennow's coarse access levels; it does not point toward the claimed fine-grained, dual-component structure (cloud-side rules/ML per type, terminal-side enforcement per app and type).
Examiner respectfully submits claims 1-11 and 18-24 are properly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carley (US20220067181), filed September 1, 2020, in view of Roennow (EP3211555), published 8/30/2017. Regarding claim 18, Carley discloses, title, a method for managing access to data stored on a terminal device, the method at a data analysis function comprising by disclosing data analysis in the title; paragraph 0054, determining a first set of rules and/or training a first machine learning model, wherein the first set of rules and/or first trained machine learning model is for identifying a subset of stored data of a first type by disclosing receive data, identify subsets of data, training of machine language model; paragraph 0044, sending the first set of rules and/or the first trained machine learning model to the terminal device by disclosing model temporarily stored until provided to the user. Carley does not explicitly disclose identifying a subset of stored data of a first type that is not to be accessed by a first application executing on the terminal device in the event that a user of the terminal device indicates the first application is to be allowed partial access to stored data of the first type. Roennow discloses, paragraph 0055, identifying a subset of stored data of a first type that is not to be accessed by a first application executing on the terminal device in the event that a user of the terminal device indicates the first application is to be allowed partial access to stored data of the first type by disclosing access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis. Paragraph 0055, item vi) discloses “no access (i.e., deny access)”.
Applicant asserts as follows: Thus, Roennow does not discuss that subset of stored data of a first type is identified that is not to be accessed by an application executing on a terminal device in an event that a user of the terminal device indicates the application is to be allowed partial access to stored data of the first type. Therefore, Applicant respectfully submits that Roennow does not disclose or suggest the feature "wherein the first set of rules and/or first trained machine learning model is for identifying a subset of stored data of a first type that is not to be accessed by a first application executing on the terminal device in the event that a user of the terminal device indicates the first application is to be allowed partial access to stored data of the first type" of independent Claim 18. (Emphasis added.) Therefore, Applicant respectfully submits that Roennow does not disclose or suggest all the features of independent Claim 18. Accordingly, allowance of independent Claim 18 is respectfully requested.
Examiner respectfully submits claims 1-11 and 18-24 are properly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carley (US20220067181), filed September 1, 2020, in view of Roennow (EP3211555), published 8/30/2017. Regarding claim 18, Carley discloses, title, a method for managing access to data stored on a terminal device, the method at a data analysis function comprising by disclosing data analysis in the title; paragraph 0054, determining a first set of rules and/or training a first machine learning model, wherein the first set of rules and/or first trained machine learning model is for identifying a subset of stored data of a first type by disclosing receive data, identify subsets of data, training of machine language model; paragraph 0044, sending the first set of rules and/or the first trained machine learning model to the terminal device by disclosing model temporarily stored until provided to the user. Carley does not explicitly disclose identifying a subset of stored data of a first type that is not to be accessed by a first application executing on the terminal device in the event that a user of the terminal device indicates the first application is to be allowed partial access to stored data of the first type. Roennow discloses, paragraph 0055, identifying a subset of stored data of a first type that is not to be accessed by a first application executing on the terminal device in the event that a user of the terminal device indicates the first application is to be allowed partial access to stored data of the first type by disclosing access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis. Paragraph 0055, item vi) discloses “no access (i.e., deny access)”.
The Examiner respectfully suggests that the claim be further amended and details in the specification be incorporated to distinguish the claimed invention over prior art of record. Should the Applicant desire an interview to further clarify the claim interpretation/rejections, please contact the Examiner at (571) 272 5368 to schedule an interview.
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carley (US20220067181), filed September 1, 2020, in view of Roennow (EP3211555), published 8/30/2017, and further in view of Ramanathan (US20200334608), filed April 17, 2020.
Regarding claim 1, Carley discloses a method for managing access to data stored on a terminal device, the method at the terminal device comprising: receiving, from a first application executing on the terminal device, a request for access (Carley, paragraph 0035, user’s access or permission levels determined based on login credentials that user may provide before using a training device; paragraph 0046, user permission of access levels, machine learning model);
providing access to the first type of stored data according to the first indication (Carley, paragraph 0049, transmit data units that correspond with the identified access level);
in accordance with a set of rules and/or a trained machine learning model (Carley, paragraph 0060, update the model, paragraph 0044, model temporarily stored until provided to the user)..
Carley discloses receiving, from a first application executing on the terminal device, a request for access; providing the first application access to stored data according to the first indication; however, Carley does not explicitly disclose receiving, from a first application executing on the terminal device, a request for access to a first type of stored data; receiving), as a user input, a first indication of whether the first application is to be allowed: full access to the first type of stored data; partial access to the first type of stored data; or no access to the first type of stored data; providing the first application full, partial or no access to the first type of stored data according to the first indication.
However, in an analogous art, Roennow discloses receiving from a first application executing on the terminal device, a request for access to a first type of stored data (Roennow, paragraph 0049, second user attempting to operate device);
receiving, as a user input (Roennow, paragraph 0051, user input), a first indication of whether the first application is to be allowed: full access to the first type of stored data (Roennow, paragraph 0055, full access);
partial access to the first type of stored data (Roennow, paragraph 0055, access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis);
or no access to the first type of stored data (Roennow, paragraph 0055, no access); and
providing the first application full, partial or no access to the first type of stored data according to the first indication (Carley, paragraph 0049, transmit data units that correspond with the identified access level).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Roennow with the device/method of Carley to include receiving, from a first application executing on the terminal device, a request for access to a first type of stored data; receiving), as a user input, a first indication of whether the first application is to be allowed: full access to the first type of stored data; partial access to the first type of stored data; or no access to the first type of stored data; providing the first application full, partial or no access to the first type of stored data according to the first indication to provide users with the benefits of access control (Roennow: paragraph 0001).
Carley and Roennow disclose wherein partial access to the first type of stored data comprises access to the stored data (Roennow, paragraph 0055, access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis).
Carley and Roennow disclose providing the first application full, partial or no access to the first type of stored data according to the first indication, in accordance with a set of rules and/or a trained machine learning model, but do not explicitly disclose in response to the first indication being partial access, enforcing access at the terminal device by providing the first application access to the first type of stored data with a subset of the stored data of the first type removed, masked or anonymized in accordance with a set of rules and/or a trained machine learning model, and otherwise providing the first application full, partial or no access to the first type of stored data according to the first indication.
However, in an analogous art, Ramanathan discloses in response to the first indication being partial access, enforcing access at the terminal device by providing the first application access to the first type of stored data with a subset of the stored data of the first type removed, masked or anonymized in accordance with a set of rules and/or a trained machine learning model, and otherwise providing the first application full, partial or no access to the first type of stored data according to the first indication (Ramanathan, paragraph 0101, model, paragraph 0151, stored data can be masked, anonymized, or removed).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ramanathan with the device/method of Carley and Roennow to include in response to the first indication being partial access, enforcing access at the terminal device by providing the first application access to the first type of stored data with a subset of the stored data of the first type removed, masked or anonymized in accordance with a set of rules and/or a trained machine learning model, and otherwise providing the first application full, partial or no access to the first type of stored data according to the first indication to provide users with the benefits of determining recommendations and alerts (Ramanathan: paragraph 0009).
Regarding claim 2, Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method according to claim 1. Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method further comprising: receiving, from a data analysis function (Carley, title data analysis), a first set of rules and/or a first trained machine learning model for identifying a subset of the stored data of the first type that is not to be accessed by the first application when partial access to the first type of stored data is allowed (Carley, paragraph 0060, update the model, paragraph 0044, model temporarily stored until provided to the user).
Regarding claim 3, Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method according to claim 2. Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method further comprising: receiving, from the data analysis function :(Carley, title data analysis), an updated first set of rules and/or an updated first trained machine learning model for identifying a subset of the stored data of the first type that is not to be accessed by the first application when partial access is allowed (Carley, paragraph 0060, update the model, paragraph 0044, model temporarily stored until provided to the user).
Regarding claim 4, Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method according to claim 1. Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method further comprising: after receiving the request for access to the first type of stored data, requesting a user to indicate whether the first application is to be allowed: full access to the first type of stored data; partial access to the first type of stored data; or no access to the first type of stored data (Roennow, paragraph 0051, second user presence detected, first user selects whether or not the second user should be provided with access, paragraph 0055, full access, partial access, no access).
Regarding claim 5, Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method according to claim 1. Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method further comprising: using a first set of rules and/or a first trained machine learning model to identify a subset of the stored data of the first type that is not to be accessed by the first application when partial access is allowed (Roennow, paragraph 0051, second user presence detected, first user selects whether or not the second user should be provided with access, paragraph 0055, full access, partial access, no access).
Regarding claim 6, Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method according to claim 5. Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose wherein the step of using the first set of rules and/or the first trained machine learning model is performed prior to both the step of receivingCarley, paragraph 0039, suggests that the machine learning model can be used multiple times, the model is dynamic and can be updated, it is maintained, recurring training, recurring training suggests a first use followed by a request and receiving a first indication as well as a subsequent user after a request and a first indication).
Regarding claim 7, Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method according to claim 5. Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose wherein the step of using the first set of rules and/or the first trained machine learning model is performed following the step of receivingCarley, paragraph 0039, suggests that the machine learning model can be used multiple times, the model is dynamic and can be updated, it is maintained, recurring training, recurring training suggests a first use followed by a request and receiving a first indication as well as a subsequent user after a request and a first indication).
Regarding claim 8, Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method according to claim 1. Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method further comprising: receiving, from the first application, a request for access to a second type of stored data (Roennow, paragraph 0049, second user attempting to operate device);
receiving, as a user input, a second indication of whether the first application is to be allowed: full access to the second type of stored data; partial access to the second type of stored data, or no access to the second type of stored data (Roennow, paragraph 0055, access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis) (Carley, paragraph 0057, trained model is ready for user in various applications);
providing the first application full, partial or no access to the second type of stored data according to the second indication. (Roennow, paragraph 0055, access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis).
Regarding claim 9, Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method according to claim 8. Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method further comprising: using a second set of rules and/or a second trained machine learning model to identify a subset of the stored data of the second type that is not to be accessed by the first application when partial access to the second type of stored data is allowed (Roennow, paragraph 0055, access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis).
Regarding claim 10, Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method according to claim 1. Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method further comprising: receiving, from a second application, a request for access to the first type of stored data (Roennow, paragraph 0049, second user attempting to operate device);
receiving, as a user input, a third indication of whether the second application is to be allowed: full access to the first type of stored data; partial access to the first type of stored data, or no access to the first type of stored data (Roennow, paragraph 0055, access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis) (Carley, paragraph 0057, trained model is ready for user in various applications)
providing the second application full, partial or no access to the first type of stored data according to the third indication (Carley, paragraph 0049, transmit data units that correspond with the identified access level).
Regarding claim 11, Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method according to claim 10. Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method further comprising:
using a third set of rules and/or a third trained machine learning model to identify a subset of the stored data of the first type that is not to be accessed by the second application when the second application is allowed partial access to the first type of stored data. (Roennow, paragraph 0055, access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis) (Carley, paragraph 0057, trained model is ready for user in various applications).
Regarding claim 12, Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method according to claim 10. Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose wherein partial access to the first type of stored data comprises access to the stored data (Roennow, paragraph 0055, access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis); wherein partial access to the first type of stored data comprises access to the stored data of the first type with a subset of the stored data removed, masked or anonymised (Ramanathan, paragraph 0101, model, paragraph 0151, stored data can be masked, anonymized, or removed).
Regarding claim 13, Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose the method according to any of claim 1. Carley, Roennow, and Ramanathan disclose wherein partial access to the first type of stored data comprises access to a stored copy of the stored data (Roennow, paragraph 0055, access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis); wherein partial access to the first type of stored data comprises access to a stored copy of the stored data of the first type with a subset of the stored data removed, masked or anonymized (Ramanathan, paragraph 0101, model, paragraph 0151, stored data can be masked, anonymized, or removed).
Claims 18-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carley (US20220067181), filed September 1, 2020, in view of Roennow (EP3211555), published 8/30/2017.
Regarding claim 18, Carley discloses a method for managing access to data stored on a terminal device, the method at a data analysis function comprising (Carley, title data analysis);
determining a first set of rules and/or training a first machine learning model, wherein the first set of rules and/or first trained machine learning model is for identifying a subset of stored data of a first type (Carley, paragraph 0054, receive data, identify subsets of data, training of machine language model);
sending the first set of rules and/or the first trained machine learning model to the terminal device (Carley, paragraph 0044, model temporarily stored until provided to the user).
Carley does not explicitly disclose identifying a subset of stored data of a first type that is not to be accessed by a first application executing on the terminal device in the event that a user of the terminal device indicates the first application is to be allowed partial access to stored data of the first type.
However, in an analogous art, Roennow discloses identifying a subset of stored data of a first type that is not to be accessed by a first application executing on the terminal device in the event that a user of the terminal device indicates the first application is to be allowed partial access to stored data of the first type (Roennow, paragraph 0055, access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Roennow with the device/method of Carley to include identifying a subset of stored data of a first type that is not to be accessed by a first application executing on the terminal device in the event that a user of the terminal device indicates the first application is to be allowed partial access to stored data of the first type to provide users with the benefits of access control (Roennow: paragraph 0001).
Regarding claim 19, Carley and Roennow disclose the method according to claim 18. Carley and Roennow disclose sending an updated first set of rules and/or an updated first trained machine learning model to the terminal device. (Carley, paragraph 0060, update the model, paragraph 0044, model temporarily stored until provided to the user)
Regarding claim 20, Carley and Roennow disclose the method according to claim 18. Carley and Roennow disclose determining a second set of rules and/or training a second machine learning model, wherein the second set of rules and/or second trained machine learning model is for identifying a subset of stored data of a second type that is not to be accessed by the first application in the event that a user of the terminal device indicates the first application is to be allowed partial access to stored data of the second type (Roennow, paragraph 0055, access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis); and
sending the second set of rules and/or the second trained machine learning model to the terminal device (Carley, paragraph 0049, transmit data units that correspond with the identified access level).
Regarding claim 21, Carley and Roennow disclose the method according to claim 18. Carley and Roennow disclose determining a third set of rules and/or training a third machine learning model, wherein the third set of rules and/or third machine learning model is for identifying a subset of stored data of the first type that is not to be accessed by a second application in the event that a user of the terminal device indicates the second application is to be allowed partial access to stored data of the first type (Roennow, paragraph 0055, access to a subset of the application, access to a predetermined application, access to files on a read only basis) (Carley, paragraph 0057, trained model is ready for user in various applications);
sending the third set of rules and/or the third trained machine learning model to the terminal device. (Carley, paragraph 0049, transmit data units that correspond with the identified access level).
Regarding claim 22, Carley and Roennow disclose the method according to claim 18. Carley and Roennow disclose wherein the first type of stored data is short message service, SMS, data, image data, video data or contact data, calendar data, call logs, terminal device location information, user files, measurements of the user by one or more sensors in the terminal device, or any other data stored in the terminal device (Carley, paragraph 0054, health data).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WALTER J MALINOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-5368. The examiner can normally be reached 8-6:30 MTWH.
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, LUU PHAM can be reached at 5712705002. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/W.J.M/
Examiner, Art Unit 2439
/LUU T PHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2439
Prosecution Insights