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 .
Claims 1-20 have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Levay et al. U.S. 2024/0354433 (hereinafter Levay) in view of Shmukler et al. U.S. 12,197,483 (hereinafter Shmukler).
As per claim 1, 11 and 17, Levay discloses a system/method/CRM, comprising: a processor; a memory including instructions, which when executed, cause the processor to perform operations including:
receiving a file (Levay: [0005] and [0035]: receive file user that uploaded a file);
categorizing contents of the file into one or more components (Levay: [0063]-[0067]: determine if the documents has any text and requires processing using OCR service to convert into text to allow extraction of pages);
extracting a machine-readable arrangement from the one or more components (Levay: [0005]; [0035]: extract pages from the file and identify specific field or format for redaction);
detecting target information from the machine-readable arrangement (Levay: [0005]; [0035]: detect confidential data using pattern matching algorithms);
modifying the target information (Levay: [0005]: redaction process to generate redacted pages); and
assembling an output file including the modified target information to the file in real-time (Levay: [0005]: provide the redacted pages for transmission or storage; [0062]: the redaction is provided...to the user in real-time through the user interface).
Levay discloses auto-detect specific fields or format in a file to identify target information (Levay: [0035]). Levay does not explicitly disclose detecting target information via a text snippet (i) extracted from the file and (ii) containing the target information, modifying the target information within the text snippet; and returning the extracted text snippet containing the modified target information to the file in real time. However, Shmukler discloses extracting a textual snippet from a particular document, wherein the textual snippets surrounds PII data-item; detecting PII data-items in documents using various matching algorithms; and redact or modify the detected PII data (Shmukler: Figs. 1A; col. 1 lines 24-38: extract textual snippets to detect PII; col. 17 line 51 – col. 18 line 8: perform redaction or hiding or replacement of PII data-items). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to detect target information by extracting text snippets in documents to identify or detect PII information because use of text snippets for customized/personalized data entry is well known in the art.
As per claim 2, 12 and 18, Levay discloses the limitations of claims 1, 11 and 17 respectively. Levay further discloses wherein the operations further include detecting a file type of the file (Levay: [0099]-[0101]: receive various file types and detect file type and associate file type with a container specific to the file type).
As per claim 3, Levay discloses the system of claim 1. Levay further discloses wherein detecting the target information includes executing, by the processor, an optical characterization (OCR) module (Levay: [0035] and [0103]: OCR process to detect and identify target information).
As per claim 4, 13 and 19, Levay discloses the limitations of claims 1, 11 and 17 respectively. Levay further discloses wherein detecting the target information includes executing, by the processor, an artificial intelligence (AI)-based module (Levay: [0004]; [0035]).
As per claim 5, 14 and 20, Levay discloses the limitations of claims 4, 13 and 18 respectively. Levay further discloses wherein the AI-based module is a large language model (LLM) (Levay: [0035]).
As per claim 6, Levay discloses the system of claim 1. Levay further discloses wherein the operations further include obstructing a portion of a text component in the target information (Levay: [0080]: redact text associated with specific formatted fields).
As per claim 7, Levay discloses the system of claim 1. Levay further discloses wherein the operations further including obstructing a portion of an image component in the target information (Levay: [0104]-[0105]: obscuring image containing sensitive information).
As per claim 8, Levay discloses the system of claim 1. Levay further discloses wherein the target information is personally identifiable information (PII) (Levay: [0104]-[0105]).
As per claim 9, Levay discloses the system of claim 1. Levay further discloses wherein the operations further include returning position information (Levay: [0104]-[0106]).
As per claim 10, Levay discloses the system of claim 9. Levay further discloses returning a position of the target information in the file (Levay: [0104]-[0106]: return location of the target information).
As per claim 15, Levay disclose the method of claim 11. Levay further discloses the machine-readable arrangement includes at least one of a picture and a portion of text (Levay: [0088]; [0099]; [0104]-[0105]: various types of file).
As per claim 16, Levay discloses the method of claim 11. Levay further discloses obstructing a portion of the machine-readable arrangement (Levay: [0104]-[0105]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim et al. U.S. 2025/0094600 discloses machine-learning based filtering of false positive pattern matches for personally identifiable information extracted using text snippets.
Robinson U.S. 2003/0140306 discloses method for remotely entering and verifying data capture by dividing data entry into individual data fields or snippets.
Jindal et al. U.S. 2018/0113849 discloses method for check image data masking using image snippets for sensitive data fields.
Segalovich et al. U.S. 2016/0371389 discloses method of presenting information using interactive snippet fields.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIN HON (ERIC) CHEN whose telephone number is (571)272-3789. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 9am- 7pm.
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, Lynn Feild can be reached at 571-272-2092. 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.
/SHIN-HON (ERIC) CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2431
Prosecution Insights