Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/589,084

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR INFORMATION RETRIEVAL FROM GRAPH-BASED MODELS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 27, 2024
Examiner
CONYERS, DAWAUNE A
Art Unit
2152
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Infosys Limited
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
3y 10m
To Grant
84%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% — above average
65%
Career Allow Rate
341 granted / 522 resolved
+10.3% vs TC avg
Strong +19% interview lift
Without
With
+19.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
21 currently pending
Career history
543
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
24.3%
-15.7% vs TC avg
§103
58.4%
+18.4% vs TC avg
§102
4.5%
-35.5% vs TC avg
§112
10.4%
-29.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 522 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on November 11, 2025 has been entered. Status of Claims Claims 1, 6, 15, 19, and 20 have been amended. Claims 1-20 are pending and rejected are rejected in the application. Response to Arguments Applicant Argues The Office Action has rejected claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is allegedly directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Office Action at 7. However, the Office fails to present a prima facie basis for rejecting the claims under § 101. Applicant respectfully disagrees and traverses the rejection for at least the following reasons…etc. Examiner Responds: Applicant's 35 USC § 101 arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered and are persuasive. Thus, the 35 USC § 101 rejection has been withdrawn. Applicant Argues The Applicant submits that the combination of Kellner and Ghafourifar fails to teach, suggest, or render obvious at least, for example, the subject matter of “the plurality of context node types comprise: a data context node type, a reference context node type, a shared context node type, a shared data context node type, and a shared reference context node type, and the plurality of context node types are functionally extendable with first processing logic via an overlay that provides, at run-time, the ability to process data associated with the plurality of data nodes:...determine one or more traversal paths by iterative traversal of the hierarchical structure of nodes within the graph-based model until a first entity node is reached, wherein the one or more traversal paths are determined based on the plurality of context nodes corresponding to the context associated with the query,” as recited in amended independent claim 1 (emphases added). Examiner Responds: Applicant’s 35 USC § 103 arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection. Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103 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 of this title, 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. Claims 1-5, 10-13, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kellner et al. U.S. Patent Publication (2023/0090050; hereinafter: Kellner) in view of Ghafourifar U.S. Patent Publication (2024/0394072; hereinafter: Ghafourifar) and further in view of Oattes U.S. Patent Publication (2023/0185797; hereinafter: Oattes) Claims 1, 19, and 20 As to claims 1, 19, and 20, Kellner discloses a system for querying a dataset, the system comprising: a memory storing a graph-based model derived from the dataset, the graph-based model comprising (paragraph[0079], the reference describes storing hierarchical structure objects.): a plurality of entity nodes indicative of a plurality of entities within the dataset (Figure 4C, paragraph[0079], the reference describes nodes representing objects in a data set.); and a hierarchical structure of nodes including: a plurality of data nodes indicative of a plurality of data values associated with the plurality of entities (Figure 4C, paragraph[0104], the reference describes hierarchical tree with values associated with the objects (i.e., entities, as claimed).); and a plurality of context nodes coupled between the plurality of entity nodes and the plurality of data nodes, wherein the plurality of context nodes define contextual relationships between the plurality of entity nodes and the plurality of data nodes (Figure 4c, paragraph[0111], the reference describes having objects with context (e.g., manager object) that are used to described relationships of the data and entity nodes.); and processing circuitry coupled to the memory and configured to: receive a query comprising a query value (paragraph[0112], the reference describes querying the graph data.); identify a node within the hierarchical structure of nodes based on the query value (paragraph[0113], the reference describes identifying the nodes to search.); Kellner does not appear to explicitly disclose the plurality of context nodes define contextual relationships between the plurality of entity nodes and the plurality of data nodes, a structure of each of the plurality of context nodes is indicative of a context node type of a plurality of context nodes types, the context node type of each of the plurality of context nodes is indicative of the contextual relationship defined by the corresponding context node, the plurality of context nodes types comprise: a data context node type, a reference context node type, a shared context node type, a shared data context node type, and a shared reference context node type, and the plurality of context node types are functionally extendable with first processing logic via an overlay that provides, at run-time, the ability to process data associated with the plurality of data nodes; determine one or more traversal paths by iterative traversal of the hierarchical structure of nodes within the graph-based model until a first entity node is reached, wherein the one or more traversal paths are determined based on the plurality of context nodes corresponding to the context associated with the query; and generate a response to the query based on the one or more traversal paths. However, Ghafourifar discloses the plurality of context nodes define contextual relationships between the plurality of entity nodes and the plurality of data nodes (Figure 7A, paragraph[0085], the reference describes a context graph which includes nodes and relationships.), a structure of each of the plurality of context nodes is indicative of a context node type of a plurality of context nodes types (Figure 7A, paragraph[0085]-paragraph[0086], the reference describes a context graph which includes relationship context types.), the context node type of each of the plurality of context nodes is indicative of the contextual relationship defined by the corresponding context node (Figure 7A, paragraph[0085]-paragraph[0086], the reference describes a context graph which includes relationship context types.), and generate a response to the query based on the one or more traversal paths (paragraph[0072], the reference describes processing a user request and generating results by traversal of the context graph.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains to have modified the teachings of Kellner with the teachings of Ghafourifar to traverse query paths which would result in the claim invention. The skilled artisan would have been motivated to improve the teachings of Kellner with the teachings of Ghafourifar to efficiently have an interface that can receive multiple user requests for context information in a graph (Ghafourifar: paragraph[0003]). The combination of Kellner and Ghafourifar do not appear to explicitly discloses the plurality of context nodes types comprise: a data context node type, a reference context node type, a shared context node type, a shared data context node type, and a shared reference context node type, and the plurality of context node types are functionally extendable with first processing logic via an overlay that provides, at run-time, the ability to process data associated with the plurality of data nodes; determine one or more traversal paths by iterative traversal of the hierarchical structure of nodes within the graph-based model until a first entity node is reached, wherein the one or more traversal paths are determined based on the plurality of context nodes corresponding to the context associated with the query; However, Oattes discloses the plurality of context nodes types comprise: a data context node type, a reference context node type, a shared context node type, a shared data context node type, and a shared reference context node type (paragraph[0025], the reference describes different type of nodes.), and the plurality of context node types are functionally extendable with first processing logic via an overlay that provides, at run-time, the ability to process data associated with the plurality of data nodes (Figure 3, paragraph[0025]-paragraph[0027], the reference describes using an overlay to traverse graph data structure.); determine one or more traversal paths by iterative traversal of the hierarchical structure of nodes within the graph-based model until a first entity node is reached, wherein the one or more traversal paths are determined based on the plurality of context nodes corresponding to the context associated with the query (Figure 3, paragraph[0045], the user is able to determine the traversal path by looking at the interface layout.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains to have modified the teachings of Kellner with the teachings of Ghafourifar and Oattes to determine overlays and paths which would result in the claim invention. The skilled artisan would have been motivated to improve the teachings of Kellner with the teachings of Ghafourifar and Oattes to efficiently display the query in the identified collections of semantic classes (Oattes: paragraph[0008]). Claim 2 As to claim 2, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, and Oattes discloses all the elements in claim 1, as noted above, and Ghafourifar further disclose wherein the query further comprises a context associated with the query value (paragraph[0072], the reference describes processing a user request and generating results by traversal of the context graph.). Claim 3 As to claim 3, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, and Oattes discloses all the elements in claim 2, as noted above, and Ghafourifar further disclose wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to determine the one or more traversal paths based on the context associated with the query value(paragraph[0073], the reference describes traversing the context graph and choosing different node and edges to traverse based on the user’s request (i.e., query value, as claimed).). Claim 4 As to claim 4, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, and Oattes discloses all the elements in claim 1, as noted above, and Kellner further disclose wherein the graph-based model is an executable graph-based model comprising one or more nodes that are dynamically generated at run-time by one or more modules of the system (paragraph[0118], the reference describes the nodes being part of an overlay network.). Claim 5 As to claim 5, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, and Oattes discloses all the elements in claim 4, as noted above, and Kellner further disclose wherein the overlay is usable to process a stimulus received from a source external to the system (paragraph[0118], the reference describes implementing the logic in the overlay network.). Claim 10 As to claim 10, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, and Oattes discloses all the elements in claim 1, as noted above, and Kellner further disclose wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to identify the node within the hierarchical structure of nodes, based on an index structure associated with the hierarchical structure of nodes (paragraph[0046], the reference describes using index to store node data within the index.). Claim 11 As to claim 11, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, and Oattes discloses all the elements in claim 10, as noted above, and Kellner further disclose wherein the memory further stores the index structure (paragraph[0044], the reference describes storing the index.). Claim 12 As to claim 12, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, and Oattes discloses all the elements in claim 1, as noted above, and Kellner further disclose wherein the plurality of data nodes include a first data node having a data value and the plurality of context nodes include a first context node associated with the first data node, and wherein the first context node contextually defines the data value of the first data node at a first level of detail (figure 4C, paragraph[0107], the reference displays the context nodes (Manger X, as claimed) associated with Human Resources employees (i.e., data values of the first data node, as claimed).). Claim 13 As to claim 13, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, and Oattes discloses all the elements in claim 12, as noted above, and Kellner further disclose wherein the first context node is coupled to a single entity node of the plurality of entity nodes (figure 4C, paragraph[0107], the reference displays the context nodes (Manger X, as claimed) associated with Human Resources nodes (i.e., plurality of entity nodes, as claimed).). Claims 6-9 and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kellner et al. U.S. Patent Publication (2023/0090050; hereinafter: Kellner) in view of Ghafourifar U.S. Patent Publication (2024/0394072; hereinafter: Ghafourifar) and further in view of Oattes U.S. Patent Publication (2023/0185797; hereinafter: Oattes) and Venema et al. U.S. Patent Publication (2021/0365457; hereinafter: Venema) Claim 6 As to claim 6, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, and Oattes discloses all the elements in claim 1, as noted above, and but do not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the graph-based model further comprises an edge node coupled to the first entity node of the plurality of entity nodes and defines a first connective relationship between the edge node and the first entity node. However, Venema discloses wherein the graph-based model further comprises an edge node coupled to the first entity node of the plurality of entity nodes and defines a first connective relationship between the edge node and the first entity node (Figures 9, paragraph[0048], the reference describes a node graph that defines the edges (i.e., connective relationship, as claimed).). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains to have modified the teachings of Kellner with the teachings of Ghafourifar, Oattes, and Venema to define edges on a graph which would result in the claim invention. The skilled artisan would have been motivated to improve the teachings of Kellner with the teachings of Ghafourifar, Oattes, and Venema to efficiently associate user defined and developer defined functions with node and relationship entities stored within the graph database (Venema: paragraph[0004]). Claim 7 As to claim 7, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, Oattes, and Venema discloses all the elements in claim 6, as noted above, and Venema further disclose wherein the edge node is coupled to the first entity node via a first role node which defines at least one of a set of attributes or second processing logic associated with the first connective relationship (Figure 9, paragraph[0048], the reference describes a node graph that defines the edges (i.e., connective relationship, as claimed). The edges are relationships between the nodes (i.e., first relationship, as claimed).). Claim 8 As to claim 8, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, Oattes, and Venema discloses all the elements in claim 6, as noted above, and Venema further disclose wherein the edge node is further coupled to a first context node of the plurality of context nodes and defines a second connective relationship between the edge node and the first context node of the plurality of context nodes(Figure 9, paragraph[0048], the reference describes a node graph that defines the edges (i.e., connective relationship, as claimed). The edges are relationships between the nodes (i.e., second relationship, as claimed).). Claim 9 As to claim 9, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, Oattes, and Venema discloses all the elements in claim 8, as noted above, and Venema further disclose wherein the edge node is coupled to the first context node via a second role node which defines at least one of attributes or second processing logic associated with the second connective relationship(Figure 9, paragraph[0048], the reference describes a node graph that defines the edges (i.e., connective relationship, as claimed). The edges are relationships between the nodes (i.e., second relationship, as claimed). Figure 9 shows the nodes are in relation to the edges.). Claim 14 As to claim 14, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, and Oattes discloses all the elements in claim 12, as noted above, and but do not appear to explicitly disclose wherein the first context node is coupled to two or more entity nodes of the plurality of entity nodes and shares the data value of the first data node across the two or more entity nodes. However, Venema discloses wherein the first context node is coupled to two or more entity nodes of the plurality of entity nodes and shares the data value of the first data node across the two or more entity nodes. (Figures 9, paragraph[0048], the reference describes a node graph that defines employ nodes that share the data value employee.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains to have modified the teachings of Kellner with the teachings of Ghafourifar, Oattes, and Venema to define edges on a graph which would result in the claim invention. The skilled artisan would have been motivated to improve the teachings of Kellner with the teachings of Ghafourifar, Oattes, and Venema to efficiently associate user defined and developer defined functions with node and relationship entities stored within the graph database (Venema: paragraph[0004]). Claim 15 As to claim 15, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, Oattes, and Venema discloses all the elements in claim 14, as noted above, and Venema further disclose wherein the first context node is coupled to the first entity node of the two or more entity nodes via a first intermediate context node (Figure 9, paragraph[0048], the organization node (i.e., context node, as claimed) is connected to facilities (i.e., first entity node, as claimed) and employees (two or more entity nodes, as claimed).). Claim 16 As to claim 16, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, Oattes, and Venema discloses all the elements in claim 15, as noted above, and Venema further disclose wherein the first context node is coupled to a second entity node of the two or more entity nodes via a second intermediate context node(Figure 9, paragraph[0048], the organization node (i.e., context node, as claimed) is connected to facilities (i.e., second entity node, as claimed) and employees (two or more entity nodes, as claimed). The Examiner interpret the right side of the graph the second entity node.). Claim 17 As to claim 17, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, Oattes, and Venema discloses all the elements in claim 16, as noted above, and Venema further disclose wherein the first intermediate context node and the second intermediate context node contextually define the data value of the first data node at a second level of detail greater than the first level of detail (Figure 9, paragraph[0048], the reference describes in figure 9 the nodes in greater detail as it traverses downward (i.e., employees in the facility).). Claim 18 As to claim 18, the combination of Kellner, Ghafourifar, Oattes, and Venema discloses all the elements in claim 16, as noted above, and Venema further disclose wherein the first intermediate context node and the second intermediate context node define different contexts of the data value of the first data node (Figure 9, paragraph[0048], the reference describes in figure 9 the nodes in greater detail as it traverses downward (i.e., employees in the facility). The nodes represent different employees.). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAWAUNE A CONYERS whose telephone number is (571)270-3552. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8:00am-4:30pm EST. EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Neveen Abel-Jalil can be reached on (571) 270-0474. 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. /DAWAUNE A CONYERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2152 November 29, 2025 /DAWAUNE A CONYERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2152 February 24, 2024
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 27, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 28, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 02, 2025
Response Filed
Aug 09, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Nov 11, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Nov 17, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Nov 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 07, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 07, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602263
TRANSPARENT DATA TRANSFORMATION AND ACCESS FOR WORKLOADS IN CLOUD ENVIRONMENTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12602437
INFORMATION PROCESSING METHOD, INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, AND NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596718
PREDICTIVE MULTIDIMENSIONAL SEARCH AND SELECTION TOOL
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591857
MAINTENANCE HISTORY VISUALIZER TO FACILITATE SOLVING INTERMITTENT PROBLEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12579134
DATABASE QUERY GENERATION AND AUTOMATED SEQUENCING OF QUERY RESULTS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
65%
Grant Probability
84%
With Interview (+19.1%)
3y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 522 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month