RESPONSE TO AMENDMENT
This communication is responsive to the amendment filed 2-April-2026 with respect to application 18/505,812 filed 9-November-2023.
Applicant has amended claims 1, 3-6, 8 and 13.
Claims 1-19 are currently pending.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-10, 12, 13 and 17 are rejected under 35 USC §103 as unpatentable over Aissi et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2014/0013452 A1), hereinafter Aissi, in view of Mahaffey et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2015/0163121 A1), hereinafter Mahaffey.
Consider claim 1: A method for managing operational data performed by a system comprising a processor and a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the system to perform the method, Aissi discloses systems and methods for protecting data at a data protection hub using a data protection policy, the methods performed by one or more processors and non-transitory computer-readable storage media, comprising code executable by the processors for implementing a method, [Title; Abstract; Fig. 1-2; Para. 0007-0009, 0054], the method comprising:
receiving, by a policy enforcement layer executing on the system from an application executing in a different execution space than the policy enforcement layer, a first request for a response generated based on operational data associated with at least one connected device managed by a data storage layer; a request to message data is received from a client computer (external application) by a data protection hub (step 601), wherein the data protection hub (200) determines data protection transformation using police parameters (step 602) which may be decided by a policy decision layer (220) [Fig. 1, 2, 6; Para. 0054, 0106-0108];
issuing, by the policy enforcement layer to an encryption layer, a second request, the second request being generated based on the first request; the data protection hub (200) determines data protection transformation using policy parameters (step 602) which may be decided by a policy decision layer (220) [Fig. 2, 6; Para. 0108];
receiving, from the encryption layer, a first response, the first response being generated based on the operational data associated with the at least one connected device; wherein a transformation is performed on unprotected data using a selected service layer component (230) (as determined by the policy decision) (step 103) [Fig. 2,6; Para. 0109]
accessing policy information associated with the operational data associated with the at least one connected device; wherein policy parameters are received from a hub management computer and generates a policy schema, in which policy may differ for a particular client computer [Fig. 4; Para. 0100-0105];
generating, by the policy enforcement layer, a governed response based, at least in part, on the accessed policy information and the first response; the data protection hub performs the selected transform to generate protected data (first response) (step 603) [Fig. 2, 6; Para. 0109], and
transmitting, by the policy enforcement layer to the application, the governed response; the data protection hub sends the protected data to the client computer (step 605) [Fig. 2, 6; Para. 0111-0113].
PNG
media_image1.png
362
474
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Aissi does not specifically disclose message communication and response generation by a policy service layer, and uses different terms to describe the functional computing elements, but clearly discloses these elements based on function, and discloses each of the method steps, and which operate as to achieve the claimed result.
It would have, therefore, been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing for the invention that the claimed method and the method described by Aissi are mere obvious variants performing the same function with the same result.
Aissi also does not specifically disclose use specifically with operational data of one or more connected devices. This is known in analogous art, and for example:
Mahaffey discloses the monitoring of and anomaly detection for multiple distributed devices [Title; Abstract; Fig. 1; 4, 7; Para. 0006-0008, 0036-0038, 0048-0049], and specifically a process in which (first) data is collected from each of a plurality of client/computer devices, the device monitoring by an application or by operating system module and which may take place in a secure mode such as from an exemplary ARM/TrustZone (step 1020); he first data in response to first policies distributed to a plurality of devices (step 1010-1015) wherein a plurality of policies may be stored and managed according to a policy server component (750/755) of a central server system (738) and stored and implemented in each computing device (705) by a device policy manager (715/730) of each device [Fig. 10; Para. 00230-0231], and where connected device information may include personal or identification data [Para. 0108-0109].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing for the invention, to for an anomaly detection system for distributed connected devices as taught by Mahaffey, to employ a data protection hub with policy and data protection applications (layers) and method of operation to secure communicated information, as taught by Aissi, where such devices may communicate information of a personal or sensitive nature.
Consider claim 2 and as applied to claim 1: The method of claim 1, wherein the execution space of the application comprises a trusted execution environment.
Aissi discloses that elements of the data protection hub are specifically trusted, including for exempt a hashing service module (231) and a tokenization service module (234) [Fig. 1; Para. 0060, 0065, 0076].
Mahaffey, moreover, discloses an exemplary ARM/TrustZone [Fig. 10; Para. 0109].
Consider claim 3 and as applied to claim 1: The method of claim 1, wherein the encryption layer comprises a service layer configured to perform cryptographic operation. Aissi specifically discloses encryption within a service layer (235) Fig. 2, Para. 0067-0068, 0076, 0078].
Consider claim 4 and as applied to claim 3: The method of claim 3, wherein the first response is generated by the encryption layer. Aissi discloses the data protection hub performs the selected transform to generate protected data (first response) using one or more service modules (231-235) (step 603) [Fig. 2, 6; Para. 0109],
Consider claim 5 and as applied to claim 4: The method of claim 4, wherein the first response is generated by the encryption layer based on the operational data associated with the at least one connected device.
Aissi discloses a response generated based on a request for one of more client computers, wherein the data protection hub comprises a data layer (240) and storage (241) which may store data relating to the data protection policy, transformation data parameters, mappings between tokens and unprotected data, protected data, or any other suitable data, as may be associated with the client computers. [Fig. 1-2; Para. 0054, 0070, 0071].
Aissi does not specifically disclose this as operational data.
Mahaffey discloses collection from a set of devices, established a norm with respect to the data and determines deviations from norm with respect to the data, and which may be considered “operational” data [Para. 0006-0008]
Consider claim 6 and as applied to claim 5: The method of claim 5, wherein the first response is generated by the encryption layer by applying at least one cryptographic operation to the operational data associated with the at least one connected device. Aissi specifically discloses encryption as a service (235) within a service layer and a crypto provider (254) which may be applied to client computer data [Fig. 2, 10; Para. 0067-0068; 0134-0139].
Consider claim 7 and as applied to claim 6: The method of claim 6, wherein the at least one cryptographic operation comprises a decryption operation. Aissi specifically discloses encryption as a service (235) within a service layer and a crypto provider (254) which may be applied to client computer data, and may act to encrypt or decrypt data according a request and policy [Fig. 2, 13; Para. 0067-0068; 0152-0155].
Consider claim 8 and as applied to claim 1: The method of claim 1, wherein the encryption layer is configured to access the operational data associated with the at least one connected device from the data storage layer. Aissi discloses a response generated based on a request for one of more client computers, wherein the data protection hub comprises a data layer (240) and storage (241) which may store data relating to the data protection policy, transformation data parameters, mappings between tokens and unprotected data, protected data, or any other suitable data, as may be associated with the client computers [Fig. 1-2; Para. 0054, 0070, 0071]
Consider claim 9 and as applied to claim 8: The method of claim 8, wherein the data storage layer is configured to protect the operational data associated with the at least one connected device. Aissi discloses that a data protection hub data layer (240) may comprise a key manager (242) for storage of encryption keys [Fig. 2; 0068, 0071] and a data storage (241) wherein, in embodiments, transformed data may be stored as protected data [Para. 0112].
Consider claim 10 and as applied to claim 1: The method of claim 1, wherein the operational data comprises at least one of device sensor data, device command information, duty cycle information, and device set point information. Mahaffey discloses that personal data may be provided by sensors, such as a camera, or location (GPS) or touch [Fig. 6; Para. 0075, 0083, 0088].
Consider claim 12 and as applied to claim 1: The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one connected device comprises at least one of a security system, a vehicle infotainment system, a streaming media device, a gaming device, an entertainment system, a networked lock, a connected thermostat, a connected furnace, a connected air conditioning system, an irrigation system, a water control system, a pump system, a utility meter, a network gateway, an activity sensor, a home alarm, a connected appliance, a connected vehicle, a mobile communication device, a wind turbine system, a solar panel system, and an industrial manufacturing system. Aissi does not disclose connected devices of the specific types claimed, but both Aissi and Mahaffey disclose that client devices are networked computer devices, and Mahaffey particularly discloses that that these may include various mobile communication devices such as a smartphone [Para. 0041, 0043].
Consider claim 13 and as applied to claim 1: The method of claim 1, wherein the method further comprises receiving, by the enforcement layer, the policy information. Aissi discloses that a data protection hub (200) may obtain a data protection policy file from a hub management computer (106) (step 402), and that the data protection policy may be integrated into the policy management machine (202) and/or policy decision layer (220) (step 403) [Fig. 1, 2, 4; Para. 0101, 0102].
Consider claim 17 and as applied to claim 1: The method of claim 1, wherein the second request is further generated based on the policy information. Aissi discloses that the data protection hub (200) determines data protection transformation using policy parameters (step 602) which may be decided by a policy decision layer (220), and performs the determined data transformation on the unprotected data to generate protected data (step 603) [Fig. 2, 6; Para. 0108-0109]. Aissi does not explicitly disclose a (second) request, but does disclose in embodiments that the transformation may be performed using an appropriate service layer (230) component (251-256), such as a crypto provider (254) [Fig. 2; Para. 0109], and where access of such a module services, may be considered broadly to be a request.
Claims 11 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 USC §103 as unpatentable over Aissi et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2014/0013452 A1), hereinafter Aissi, and Mahaffey et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2015/0163121 A1), hereinafter Mahaffey, further in view of Sinha et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2017/0284691 A1), hereinafter Sinha.
Consider claim 11 and as applied to claim 10: The method of claim 10, wherein the operational data comprises device sensor data, the device sensor data comprising at least one of data provided by an internal temperature sensor, an external temperature sensor, a humidity sensor, a current sensor, a voltage sensor, a fluid level sensor, an atmospheric sensor, and an environmental sensor.
Neither Aissi nor Mahaffey discloses operational data from the specific sensor types claimed. This is known in analogous prior art, however, and for example.
Sinha discloses secure device registration and operation in a distributed building management system in which operational data is collected from a plurality of building devices and systems, analyzed and distributed [Title; Abstract; FIG. 4-6, 11; Para. 0025, 0046-0047], and particularly that operational data is collected from sensors (1120) of smart connected devices (1102) and that the sensors include at least temperature sensors [Fig. 11; Para. 0029, 0050, 0087, 0154-0155].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing for the invention, to obtain operational data from sensors associated with smart connected devices, where the sensors include temperature sensors as taught by Sinha, and applied to a data protection hub with policy and data protection applications (layers) and method of operation as taught by Aissi and modified by Mahaffey where temperature may be an important operational parameter, as for example. In building management, or industrial manufacturing systems.
Consider claim 14 and as applied to claim 1: The method of claim 1, wherein generating the governed response is further based on data received from a data service provider.
Aissi discloses an infrastructure layer (250) comprising software and hardware elements user to perform data protection operations, comprising a crypto provider module (24) and random number generator (T-RNG) provider (255) [Fig. 2; Para. 0056, 0072, 0076-0077], but these are not disclosed as data or information is received from an external data service provider.
Mahaffey similarly does not disclose the receiving of data from a data service provider. This was known in analogous prior art however, and for example:
Sinha discloses secure device registration and operation in a distributed building management system in which operational data is collected from a plurality of building devices and systems, analyzed and distributed [Title; Abstract; FIG. 4-6, 11; Para. 0025, 0046-0047], specifically that data and information may also be received from external data services, particularly including those for weather data [Fig. 14; Para. 0055, 0121, 0144-0146], and also that provision of information from external sources (and particularly weather information) along with operational information to a user provides context and extra information for better [user] decision making [Para.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing for the invention to collect data from external data service providers, and in particular weather information for use in analysis and reporting of collected system operational data as taught by Sinha, and applied to a data protection hub with policy and data protection applications (layers) and method of operation as taught by Aissi and modified by Mahaffey, where data from external systems regarding weather, environmental or other external conditions may provide context for analysis of operational information as for example. In building management, or industrial manufacturing systems.
Consider claim 15 and as applied to claim 14: The method of claim 14, wherein the data received from the data service provider comprises weather data. Sinha discloses that data and information may also be received from external data services, including those for weather data, particularly that the weather data may be weather forecast data [Fig. 14; Para. 0055, 0121].
Consider claim 16 and as applied to claim 15:. The method of claim 15, wherein the weather data comprises weather forecast data. Sinha discloses that data and information may also be received from external data services, including those for weather data, particularly that the weather data may be weather forecast data [Fig. 14; Para. 0055, 0121].
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 USC §103 as unpatentable over Aissi et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2014/0013452 A1), hereinafter Aissi, and Mahaffey et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2015/0163121 A1), hereinafter Mahaffey, further in view of Nasle et al. (United States Patent Application Publication # US 2007/0213956 A1), hereinafter Nasle.
Consider claim 18 and as applied to claim 1: The method of claim 1, wherein the governed response is configured to be used by the application to update a model associated with the at least one connected device.
Aissi discloses the use of models to describe a “policy schema” and the updating of policies [Fig. 4; Para. 0043, 0103], but does not disclose the updating of models based on an output or response.
Mahaffey discloses a learning process, including the use of machine learning models [Para. 0084, 0102, 0184-0185] but also fails to teach the updating of models based on an output or response. This is known in analogous prior art, however, and for example:
Nasle teaches systems and methods for real-time protective evaluation relating to an electric power system [Title; Abstract; Fig. 1-4; Para. 0012-0014] and particularly embodiments in which a model is updated based on a real output compared to a predicted output [Fig. 8; Para. 0089-0091].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing for the invention to use observed data in comparison to calculated data (response) to update or calibrate a model, as taught by Nasle and applied to a data protection hub with policy and data protection applications (layers) and method of operation as taught by Aissi managing a network of sensing devices as taught by Mahaffey, where such updates and calibration over time, and number of data points will make the model increasingly accurate in accordance with artificial intelligence and machine learning principles.
Consider claim 19 and as applied to claim 18: The method of claim 18, wherein the model comprises a machine learning model. Both Mahaffey and Nasle teach the use of machine learning models [Mahaffey: Para. 0084, 0102, 0185; Nasle: Para. 0059].
Allowable Subject Matter
The following claim comprising the subject matter of claim 1, and further comprising limitations of claims 14, 15 and 18, has been drafted by the Examiner and considered to distinguish patentably over the art of record in this application, and is presented to the Applicant for consideration:
Claim 1 (Proposed): A method for managing operational data performed by a system comprising a processor and a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the system to perform the method, the method comprising:
receiving, by a policy enforcement layer executing on the system from an application executing in a different execution space than the policy enforcement layer, a first request for a response generated based on operational data associated with at least one connected device managed by a data storage layer;
issuing, by the policy enforcement layer to an encryption layer, a second request, the second request being generated based on the first request;
receiving, from the encryption layer, a first response, the first response being generated based on the operational data associated with the at least one connected device;
accessing policy information associated with the operational data associated with the at least one connected device;
generating, by the policy enforcement layer, a governed response based, at least in part, on the accessed policy information and the first response[[;]],
wherein the governed response is further based on weather data received from a data service provider,
wherein the governed response is configured to be used by the application to update a model associated with the one at least connected device; and
transmitting, by the policy enforcement layer to the application, the governed response.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 2-April-2026 have been carefully and fully considered by the Examiner, and responses are provided as follow:
Consider Applicant remarks with respect to objections made to Figures 6-9 as difficult to read [Remarks: page 6]: Applicant submission of replacement drawings for these figures obviates the objections, and the objections have been withdrawn.
Consider Applicant’s remarks with respect to the rejection of claims 1-19 under 35 USC §112(a), as failing to comply with the written description requirement [Remarks: page 6-7]:
Regarding claims 1, 3-6, 8 and 13: Amendment of these claims obviates the rejection of those claims, and the rejections art withdrawn.
Regarding claims 2, 7, 9-12 and 14-17: These claims were rejected as depending from a rejected claim, and the rejection of these claims is also withdrawn.
Regarding claim 18: Applicant arguments with respect to this rejection are deemed persuasive, and the rejection of this claim is withdrawn.
Regarding claim 19: this claim was reject as depending from rejected claims 1 and 18, and rejection of this claim is now also withdrawn.
Consider Applicant’s remarks with respect the rejection of claims 1-10, 12, 13 and 17 under 35 USC §103 over Aissi (US 2014/0013452 A1) and Mahaffey (US 2015/0163121 A1) [Remarks: page 8-10]:
Regarding independent claim 1: Applicant’s argument with respect to this claim, in summary, is that Aissi fails to disclose a second request to an encryption layer, as claimed. The argument is not persuasive because Aissi discloses: (a) the hub device (200), services requests from one or more client computers (101-104) (a first request) for data protection service, wherein the communication may include unprotected data and policy parameters [[Fig. 1, 2, 6; Para. 0054, 0106-0108]; (b) the hub, on receiving the request, determines particular data transformation/protection measures to be implemented, by a policy decision layer (220) of the hub, based on the received policy parameters [Fig. 6; Para. 0108]; (c) if determined protection measures comprise encryption, the policy decision layer communicates (second request) with an encryption as a service module (235) (service layer) which performs the encryption [Fig. 2, 6; Para. 0067-0068].
Aissi does not explicitly disclose a request by the policy layer to the service layer to perform the encryption, but specifically discloses the policy layer determines the requirement for encryption, encryption parameters to be used; that the policy layer communicates with the service layer and encryption module, and that the encryption module performs the encryption. It is, therefore, implicit, and would be obvious to an artisan, that the communication between the policy layer and service layer/encryption module constitutes or comprises an encryption request.
Applicant further asserts that Mahaffney fails to correct these alleged deficiencies in the Aissi disclosure. This argument is unpersuasive because Aissi does already teach these claim limitations. The rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC §103 over Aissi and Mahaffey is, therefore, Maintained.
Regarding claims 2-10, 12, 13 and 17: No additional, or separate arguments are made with respect to these claims, and allowability is asserted based on the alleged allowability of claim 1, from which they depend. These claims remain rejected under 35 USC §103 over Aissi and Mahaffey, based on the continued rejection of the base claim, and on the particular citations and analysis presented for each in this Office action.
Consider Applicant’s remarks with respect the rejection of claims 11 and 14-16 under 35 USC §103 over Aissi, Mahaffey and Sinha (US 2017/0284691 A1) [Remarks: page 10-11]: Applicant arguments with respect to these claims is, in summary, are that these claims are allowable, at least because the claims each depend from claim 1, alleged to be allowable, and that Sinha also fails to correct deficiencies in the rejection of that claim. The rejection of claims 11 and 14-16 under 35 USC §103 over Aissi, Mahaffey and Sinha, is maintained, based on the continued rejection of the base claim, and on the particular citations and analysis presented for each in this Office action.
Consider Applicant’s remarks with respect the rejection of claims 18 and 19 under 35 USC §103 over Aissi, Mahaffey and Nasle (US 2007/0213956 A1) [Remarks: page 11]: Applicant arguments with respect to these claims is, in summary, are that these claims are allowable, at least because the claims each depend from claim 1, alleged to be allowable, and that Nasle also fails to correct deficiencies in the rejection of that claim. The rejection of claims 18 and 19 under 35 USC §103 over Aissi, Mahaffey and Nasle, is maintained, based on the continued rejection of the base claim, and on the particular citations and analysis presented for each in this Office action.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure.
Berfeld, et al. (U.S. Patent # US 9,396,349 B1) disclosing a method and apparatus for sharing data from a secured environment.
Lang, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # US 2009/0077621 A1) disclosing a method and system for managing security policies.
Pham, et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication # US 2007/0174362 A1) disclosing a system and methods for secure digital data archiving and access auditing.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to STEPHEN R BURGDORF whose telephone number is (571)270-7328. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday and Friday at 11:00 AM to 8:00 PM EST/EDT.
If attempts to reach the Examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Quan-Zhen Wang can be reached at (571)272-3114. 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800)786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571)272-1000.
/STEPHEN R BURGDORF/ Examiner, Art Unit 2685
Prosecution Insights