DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Newman et al. (Publication No. 2025/0131015 filed October 24, 2023, hereinafter Newman); Fitts (Publication No. 2015/0095105 filed October 1, 2013)
Regarding Claims 1, 19, and 20, Newman teaches at least one memory ([0101] element 804, main memory); one or more hardware processing units coupled to the at least one memory ([0100] example computer system (element 800) includes at least one processor (element 802) (e.g., a central processing unit (CPU), a graphics processing unit (GPU) or both, processor cores, compute nodes, etc.), a main memory (element 804) and a static memory (element 806) which communicate with each other via a link (element 808); and one or more computer readable storage media storing computer-executable instructions that, when executed, cause the computing system to perform operations comprising ([0102] the machine-readable medium (element 822) is illustrated in an example embodiment to be a single medium, the term “machine-readable medium” may include a single medium or multiple media (e.g., a centralized or distributed Database, and/or associated cashes and servers that store the one or more instructions (element 824): receiving a plurality of properties (Abstract, receiving a set of tuple results in response to the executing identifying a set of entities and a set of relationships that connect the set of entities in the knowledge graph database.);
(The tuple is identified as generating triples a concept of one or more properties each property may have a value type based on a semantic ontology. The triple uses a subject-predicate-object to define relationships between the concept, see [0021]; based on a value of a classification property of an entity, such as property indicators (elements 636, 638, 640, and 642). Property indicator, element 636, may be based on service (element 612) having a “critical” classification, property indicator (element 638) may be based on service provider (element 614) having a “material” classification, property indicator (element 640)).
processing a plurality of electronic documents ([0017] document linkages between the associated entities; [0043] document details model) over a time period ([0069] periodically, e.g., daily, weekly, monthly)); document being processed includes the respective property ([0017] document linkages between the associated entities; [0043] document details model).
However, Newman does not expressly teach the process comprising incrementing.
Fitts teaches processing comprising incrementing respective counts of respective properties of the plurality of properties ([0060] increment a counter, utilize a property associated with a node representative of the company to store a value).
At least one property of the plurality of properties ([0022] Property 112 represents various forms of property owned or rented by company 100. [0027] A node representative of company 200 might comprise properties 204 and 206, while a node representative of company 202 might comprise property 208.), determining a total count for the at least one property over at least a portion of the time period ([0029] Properties may also be used in a similar manner. A count of related nodes and edges may provide insight into the capability of company 300 regarding technology 326. Obtaining such a count may involve traversing the graph to locate a node or edge that is indicative of the technology. For example, by traversing various edges leading from company 300, a count of distinct paths leading to technology 326 may be obtained.); comparing the total count to a threshold ([0045] include a count of the number and/or quality of promotions or other events in a determination of a capability score. Operation 604 depicts determining the number of promotions that an organization has undertaken, related to the capability for which the score is being determined. ); determining that the count satisfies the threshold ([0045] include a count of the number and/or quality of promotions or other events in a determination of a capability score. Operation 604 depicts determining the number of promotions that an organization has undertaken, related to the capability for which the score is being determined. ); changing a status of the at least one property based at least in part on the determining that the total count satisfies the threshold to provide an updated property status ([0053] Operation 710 depicts determining an industry score based on the factors described previously, potentially including or substituting alternate factors. Once determined, the score may be stored, as depicted by operation 712, within an industry graph topology, for example as a property associated with the corresponding company or in a node linked to the corresponding company.); processing an electronic document using an updated property ([0053] Operation 710 depicts determining an industry score based on the factors described previously, potentially including or substituting alternate factors. Once determined, the score may be stored, as depicted by operation 712, within an industry graph topology, for example as a property associated with the corresponding company or in a node linked to the corresponding company. [0036] The term documents may comprise a wide variety of physical or electronic documents processed by automated and/or manual processes.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the concept of Newman’s method with Fitts’s method because Newman’s method enables a set of tuple results identifying classification properties for entities but does not include the process comprising incrementing. Fitts’s method enables an industry graph topology being searched for a particular company to increment a counter or other stored value indicative of that company. Incorporating the method of Fitts with the method of Newman would improve Newman’s method to enable utilizing a property associated with a node representative of the node’s company to store the value and the value may be incremented in conjunction with the execution of a query.
Regarding Claim 2, Fitts teaches the changing the status of the at least one property comprises changing the status of the at least one property from an inactive status to an active status ([0029] Obtaining such a count may involve traversing the graph to locate a node or edge that is indicative of the technology. For example, by traversing various edges leading from company 300, a count of distinct paths leading to technology 326 may be obtained. The traversal may be attenuated by various factors such as passing through a separate organization).
Regarding Claim 3, Fitts teaches adding that at least one property to an ontology properties ([0060] increment a counter, utilize a property associated with a node representative of the company to store a value).
Regarding Claim 4, Newman teaches the plurality of properties are defined for a knowledge graph (Abstract, knowledge graph).
Regarding 5, Newman teaches receiving a query of the knowledge graph (Abstract, a knowledge graph database query to a knowledge graph database storing properties of entities); processing the query using the ontology ([0037] A user may use a device such as client device 304 for a variety of purposes with respect to knowledge graph application server 302. For example, a data scientist may use client device 304 to edit an ontology (e.g., add properties of concept types, add new concepts, etc.). Another user may use client device 304 to query production knowledge graph 330 for a service and see the cost impact on an enterprise.); and returning a query response, the query response comprising a property value of the at least one property in the knowledge graph, the property value being identified using the ontology ([0092] According to various examples, the method includes executing a knowledge graph database query to a knowledge graph database storing properties of entities according to a semantic ontology including service receiver entities, service provider entities, and component provider entities at operation 702.).
Regarding Claim 6, Fitts the changing the status of the at least one property from the inactive status to the active status comprises: providing a recommendation to a user on a user interface to change the at least one property to the active status; and receiving through the user interface user input changing the status of the at least one property to the active status ([0029] Obtaining such a count may involve traversing the graph to locate a node or edge that is indicative of the technology. For example, by traversing various edges leading from company 300, a count of distinct paths leading to technology 326 may be obtained. The traversal may be attenuated by various factors such as passing through a separate organization).
Regarding Claim 7, Fitts teaches the threshold is a first threshold, and the status of the at least one property is automatically changed from the inactive status to the active status in response to determining that the total count satisfies a second threshold, when the second threshold requires a higher total count than the first threshold ([0053] Operation 710 depicts determining an industry score based on the factors described previously, potentially including or substituting alternate factors. Once determined, the score may be stored, as depicted by operation 712, within an industry graph topology, for example as a property associated with the corresponding company or in a node linked to the corresponding company.).
Regarding Claim 8, Newman teaches the processing at least another electronic document using the updated property status comprises storing a value for the at least one property, wherein values for the at least one property for the plurality of electronic documents were not stored ([0017] document linkages between the associated entities; [0043] document details model) over a time period ([0069] periodically, e.g., daily, weekly, monthly)); document being processed includes the respective property ([0017] document linkages between the associated entities; [0043] document details model).
Regarding Claim 9, Fitts teaches changing the status of the at least one property comprises changing the status of the at least one property from the active status to the inactive status ([0029] Obtaining such a count may involve traversing the graph to locate a node or edge that is indicative of the technology. For example, by traversing various edges leading from company 300, a count of distinct paths leading to technology 326 may be obtained. The traversal may be attenuated by various factors such as passing through a separate organization).
Regarding Claim 10, Newman teaches the processing at least another electronic document comprises not storing a value for the at least one property (Abstract, a knowledge graph database query to a knowledge graph database storing properties of entities); processing the query using the ontology ([0037] A user may use a device such as client device 304 for a variety of purposes with respect to knowledge graph application server 302. For example, a data scientist may use client device 304 to edit an ontology (e.g., add properties of concept types, add new concepts, etc.). Another user may use client device 304 to query production knowledge graph 330 for a service and see the cost impact on an enterprise.).
Regarding Claim 11, Newman teaches the plurality of properties are defined for a knowledge graph and the operations further comprise: receiving a query of the knowledge graph, the query specifying that properties having the inactive status are responsive to the query; processing the query using the ontology; and returning a query response, the query response comprising a property value of the at least one property in the knowledge graph, the property value being identified using the ontology (Abstract, a knowledge graph database query to a knowledge graph database storing properties of entities); processing the query using the ontology ([0037] A user may use a device such as client device 304 for a variety of purposes with respect to knowledge graph application server 302. For example, a data scientist may use client device 304 to edit an ontology (e.g., add properties of concept types, add new concepts, etc.). Another user may use client device 304 to query production knowledge graph 330 for a service and see the cost impact on an enterprise.).
Regarding Claim 12, Newman teaches the plurality of properties are defined for a knowledge graph and the operations further comprise: receiving a query of the knowledge graph, the query not specifying that properties having an inactive status are responsive to the query; processing the query using the ontology; and returning a query response, the query response not comprising a property value of the at least one property in the knowledge graph (Abstract, a knowledge graph database query to a knowledge graph database storing properties of entities; [0037] A user may use a device such as client device 304 for a variety of purposes with respect to knowledge graph application server 302. For example, a data scientist may use client device 304 to edit an ontology (e.g., add properties of concept types, add new concepts, etc.). Another user may use client device 304 to query production knowledge graph 330 for a service and see the cost impact on an enterprise.).
Regarding Claim 13, Fitts teaches properties of the plurality of properties having an active status are included in an ontology ([0029] Obtaining such a count may involve traversing the graph to locate a node or edge that is indicative of the technology. For example, by traversing various edges leading from company 300, a count of distinct paths leading to technology 326 may be obtained. The traversal may be attenuated by various factors such as passing through a separate organization).
Regarding Claim 14, Newman teaches the operations further comprising: rendering a display of at least a portion of the ontology, where the display provides an indication of a degree of use of respective properties of the plurality of properties of the at least a portion of the ontology (see figure 6).
Regarding Claim 15, Fitts teaches the changing the status of the at least one property comprises changing the status from an inactive status to an active status, the operations further comprising: while processing the plurality of electronic documents, when a respective electronic document of the plurality of electronic documents comprises the at least one property, storing an association between the respective electronic document and the at least one property; and in response to the changing the status of the at least one property to the active status, reprocessing at least a portion of the plurality of electronic documents comprising the at least one property, the reprocessing comprising storing a respective value for the at least one property in association with a corresponding respective electronic document of the at least a portion of the plurality of electronic documents ([0029] Obtaining such a count may involve traversing the graph to locate a node or edge that is indicative of the technology. For example, by traversing various edges leading from company 300, a count of distinct paths leading to technology 326 may be obtained. The traversal may be attenuated by various factors such as passing through a separate organization).
Regarding Claim 16, Fitts teaches in response to determining that the total count satisfies the threshold, changing the status of the at least one property to a recommended status; providing a user an indication of the recommended status; and receiving user input to change the status of the at least one property to the recommended status, wherein the changing the status of the at least one property is performed in response to the user input ([0022] Property 112 represents various forms of property owned or rented by company 100. [0027] A node representative of company 200 might comprise properties 204 and 206, while a node representative of company 202 might comprise property 208. [0029] Properties may also be used in a similar manner. A count of related nodes and edges may provide insight into the capability of company 300 regarding technology 326. Obtaining such a count may involve traversing the graph to locate a node or edge that is indicative of the technology. For example, by traversing various edges leading from company 300, a count of distinct paths leading to technology 326 may be obtained.).
Regarding Claim 17, Fitts teaches the total count is determined for a plurality of clients, the operations further comprising: proposing a status change to a client of the plurality of clients based at least in part on the total count ([0022] Property 112 represents various forms of property owned or rented by company 100. [0027] A node representative of company 200 might comprise properties 204 and 206, while a node representative of company 202 might comprise property 208. [0029] Properties may also be used in a similar manner. A count of related nodes and edges may provide insight into the capability of company 300 regarding technology 326. Obtaining such a count may involve traversing the graph to locate a node or edge that is indicative of the technology. For example, by traversing various edges leading from company 300, a count of distinct paths leading to technology 326 may be obtained.).
Regarding Claim 18, Fitts teaches changing a status of the at least one property is based at least in part on a change in values of the at least one property during the time period compared with values of the at least one property during an earlier time period ([0022] Property 112 represents various forms of property owned or rented by company 100. [0027] A node representative of company 200 might comprise properties 204 and 206, while a node representative of company 202 might comprise property 208. [0029] Properties may also be used in a similar manner. A count of related nodes and edges may provide insight into the capability of company 300 regarding technology 326. Obtaining such a count may involve traversing the graph to locate a node or edge that is indicative of the technology. For example, by traversing various edges leading from company 300, a count of distinct paths leading to technology 326 may be obtained.).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHERYL R LEWIS whose telephone number is (571)272-4113. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, 8am-5pm, EST.
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, Sanjiv Shah can be reached at 571-272-4098. 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.
/CHERYL LEWIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2166 August 7, 2026
Prosecution Insights