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 .
Foreign Priority
Priority application number PCT/JP2021/022417, filing date 06-11-2021. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-patentable subject matter. The claimed invention is directed to one or more abstract ideas without significantly more. The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than judicial exception. The eligibility analysis in support of these findings is provided below.
Step 1:
The claimed method (claims 6, 13-17), device (claims 1-5 and 8-12), and computer readable non-transitory recording medium (claims 7, 18-20) are directed to one of the eligible categories of subject matter and therefore satisfies step 1.
Step 2A, Prong One:
Independent claim 1 (6 and 7) recites the following limitations that can be practically performed in the mind and/or with a pen and a piece of paper:
receiving log events;
estimating a determination criterion for determining identity of the log events on a basis of an attribute value of a log included in the log events; and
determining identity for a log event to be processed on a basis of the determination criterion.
Step 2A, Prong Two:
The additional elements are:
A processor
Recording medium
These additional elements are using generic computer functions as a tool to perform.
Step 2B:
For Step 2B, the additional elements, taken individually and in combination, do not result in the claim, as a whole, amounting to significantly more than the identified judicial exception. MPEP 2106.07(a)(III)(B) identifies the list of cases in MPEP 2106. 05(d)(II) as available bases. Taking these aforementioned additional elements as an ordered combination, these additional elements add nothing that is not already present when the elements are considered separately.
As per dependent claims:
Step 2A, Prong One:
Claim 2 (13 and 18): wherein the receiving further comprises receiving, as the log events, images of operation events associated with each other by a user as identical operations among images of a plurality of operation events, the estimating further comprises estimating the determination criterion by extracting the attribute value common of an operation log as the log, and the determining further comprises determining identity for an operation event to be processed by using the attribute value extracted.
Claim 3 (14 and 20): wherein the receiving further comprises receiving, among captured images of the plurality of operation events displayed in chronological order, a combination of the captured images associated with each other by the user as identical operations,
the estimating further comprises estimating a first determination criterion in a set of the operation events associated with each other as identical operations by extracting a character string or a numerical range commonly included in attribute elements in accordance with a condition set for each of the attribute elements, and
the determining further comprises determining identity for the operation event to be processed by matching an operation event including the character string or an operation event satisfying the numerical range by using the first determination criterion.
Claim 4 (15): wherein the estimating further comprises estimating second determination criterion between sets of the operation events associated with each other as identical operations by performing comparison of the first determination criterion, and the determining further comprises determining determines identity for the operation event to be processed by matching a result of adoption of the condition set for each of the attribute elements by using the second determination criterion.
Claim 5 (16): wherein the determining further comprises determining identity for the operation event to be processed by presenting a determination result obtained by determining identity to the user and outputting the determination result approved by the user.
Claim 8: wherein the determination criterion is based on an exact match of character strings of attribute values of logs in the log events.
Claim 9: wherein the determination criterion is based on a partial match of the character strings of attribute values of the logs in the log events.
Claim 10: wherein the determination criterion is based on numerical ranges of attribute values of the logs in the log events.
Claim 11: wherein the determination criterion is based on not to use attribute values of the logs in the log events.
Claim 12: wherein the estimating the determination criterion uses a predetermined mapping between an attribute element of the log in the log events and the determination criterion.
Claim 17 and 19 share the similar scope of claims 8-11.
The aforementioned limitations can be practically performed in the mind and/or with a pen and a piece of paper.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mahaffey (US Pub. 2017/0103215).
Regarding claim 1, Mahaffey discloses a determination device comprising a processor configured to execute operations comprising:
receiving log events (¶¶ [0142]; [0148], The security component produces an event log that is stored and updated as new events are detected);
estimating a determination criterion for determining identity of the log events on a basis of an attribute value of a log included in the log events (¶ [0142], identify security events including: a protocol length mismatch, a protocol value violation, a value violation for a protocol in a given state); and
determining identity for a log event to be processed on a basis of the determination criterion (¶¶ [0142, [0331], verify the identity of mobile communications device).
Regarding claim 2, Mahaffey discloses the determination device according to claim 1, wherein the receiving further comprises receiving, as the log events, images of operation events associated with each other by a user as identical operations among images of a plurality of operation events, the estimating further comprises estimating the determination criterion by extracting the attribute value common of an operation log as the log, and the determining further comprises determining identity for an operation event to be processed by using the attribute value extracted (¶ [0743], the extracted data may include words, phrases, numbers, characters, symbols, images, video, graphics, pictures, or combinations of these).
Regarding claim 3, Mahaffey discloses the determination device according to claim 2, wherein the receiving further comprises receiving, among captured images of the plurality of operation events displayed in chronological order, a combination of the captured images associated with each other by the user as identical operations (¶ [0765], the date-ordered listing is a chronologically ordered listing of the application)
the estimating further comprises estimating a first determination criterion in a set of the operation events associated with each other as identical operations by extracting a character string or a numerical range commonly included in attribute elements in accordance with a condition set for each of the attribute elements (¶ [0766]), and
the determining further comprises determining identity for the operation event to be processed by matching an operation event including the character string or an operation event satisfying the numerical range by using the first determination criterion (¶ [0766]).
Regarding claim 4, Mahaffey discloses the determination device according to claim 3, wherein the estimating further comprises estimating second determination criterion between sets of the operation events associated with each other as identical operations by performing comparison of the first determination criterion, and the determining further comprises determining determines identity for the operation event to be processed by matching a result of adoption of the condition set for each of the attribute elements by using the second determination criterion (¶ [0053]; a degree of similarity between first metadata describing a first mobile application program and second metadata describing a second mobile application program. If the degree of similarity is within a threshold degree of similarity).
Regarding claim 5, Mahaffey discloses the determination device according to claim 4, wherein the determining further comprises determining identity for the operation event to be processed by presenting a determination result obtained by determining identity to the user and outputting the determination result approved by the user (¶ [0885], allow an approval from the user).
Regarding claim 8, Mahaffey discloses the determination device according to claim 1, wherein the determination criterion is based on an exact match of character strings of attribute values of logs in the log events (¶ [0279]).
Regarding claim 9, Mahaffey discloses the determination device according to claim 1, wherein the determination criterion is based on a partial match of the character strings of attribute values of the logs in the log events (¶ [0256]).
Regarding claim 10, Mahaffey discloses the determination device according to claim 1, wherein the determination criterion is based on numerical ranges of attribute values of the logs in the log events (¶ [0670], a range of 1-10).
Regarding claim 11, Mahaffey discloses the determination device according to claim 1, wherein the determination criterion is based on not to use attribute values of the logs in the log events (¶ [0847).
Regarding claim 12, Mahaffey discloses the determination device according to claim 1, wherein the estimating the determination criterion uses a predetermined mapping between an attribute element of the log in the log events and the determination criterion.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, see discussion of claim 1 above for the same reason of rejection.
Regarding claims 13-16, see discussion of claims 2-5 above for the same reason of rejection.
Regarding claims 17 and 19, see discussion of claims 8-11 for the same reason of rejection.
Regarding claims 18 and 20, see discussion of claims 2 and 3 for the same reason of rejection.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUANKHANH D PHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-3047. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri, 10:00am-18:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Boris Gorney can be reached on 571-270-5626. 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 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 or 571-272-1000.
/TUANKHANH D PHAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2154