Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/779,911

TECHNIQUES FOR VIRTUAL PRIVATE CLOUD FLOW LOGS AGGREGATION

Final Rejection §102
Filed
Jul 22, 2024
Examiner
RIAD, AMINE
Art Unit
2113
Tech Center
2100 — Computer Architecture & Software
Assignee
Wiz Inc.
OA Round
4 (Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
5-6
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
691 granted / 789 resolved
+32.6% vs TC avg
Moderate +6% lift
Without
With
+6.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
13 currently pending
Career history
802
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
16.2%
-23.8% vs TC avg
§103
14.3%
-25.7% vs TC avg
§102
45.8%
+5.8% vs TC avg
§112
12.8%
-27.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 789 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 . Detailed Action Claims 1-19 have been submitted for examination. Claim 20 has been newly added. Claims 1-20 have been rejected. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)1 as being anticipated by Kishikawa United States Patent Application 2022/ 0337494 hereinafter 494. In regard to claims 1 10 11 494 discloses (Currently Amended) A method for generating and storing an aggregated flow log comprising: accessing a plurality of flow log (Examiner considers the different collection points of Figure 5 with different log record as a flow log) records in a flow log repository; detecting a plurality of flow log records in the flow log repository, wherein each flow log record includes a plurality of data fields; detecting a first flow log record of the plurality of flow log records having a first data field value in common with a second flow log record; detecting in the first flow log record a second data field having a second value; PNG media_image1.png 177 285 media_image1.png Greyscale (Step 301 compares the field contents) detecting in the second flow log record the second data field having a third value different from the second value; Examiner states that once the flows in the context of S301 above are not identical it means that a difference is present. generating a merged record based on: the first data field value and including at least the second value and the third value; The first column of Figure 5 is the merged data version PNG media_image2.png 130 246 media_image2.png Greyscale generating an aggregated flow log based on the merged record, wherein the aggregated flow log includes a plurality of merged records; and storing the aggregated flow log in an aggregated flow log repository. Figure 10 PNG media_image3.png 656 946 media_image3.png Greyscale Consideration for the mapping: PNG media_image4.png 458 920 media_image4.png Greyscale Examiner considers for the purpose of claim language mapping the log record as being collection point source IP address Destination IP address Source port Destination port Transport protocol Number of messages. All of Figure 5 is the data log repository. The data field is where 300a 300d is at, and the same is for 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2. This mapping is for explication only and not limitation or any interpretation. In regard to claims 2 12 494 discloses (Original) The method of claim 1, further comprising: matching a data record value of the first flow log record to a corresponding data record value of another flow log record to detect a common data field value. PNG media_image5.png 88 770 media_image5.png Greyscale Both collection point 300a and 300d have the same Source IP In regard to claims 3 13 494 discloses 3. (Original) The method of claim 1, further comprising: generating a merged record in response to detecting at least one common data record value between a plurality of flow log records from the flow log repository. PNG media_image5.png 88 770 media_image5.png Greyscale Both collection point 300a and 300d have been merged In regard to claims 4 14 494 discloses (Original) The method of claim 1, further comprising: generating an aggregated flow log that includes common data record values from the merged records. PNG media_image6.png 189 790 media_image6.png Greyscale In regard to claims 5 15 494 discloses 5. (Previously Presented) The method of claim 1, wherein the first data field includes any one of: an account identifier, a source address, a protocol, a destination address, a source port, a destination port, a network interface, an instance identification log status, an indicator of whether a network traffic was accepted or rejected, a subnet identifier, and any combination thereof. PNG media_image7.png 344 814 media_image7.png Greyscale In regard to claims 6 16 494 discloses 6. (Original) The method of claim 1, further comprising: detecting a flow log record that is based on any one of: a data record, a network traffic event, a message, an action in a virtual private cloud environment, and any combination thereof. (Paragraph 94) In regard to claims 7 17 494 discloses 7. (Original) The method of claim 1, further comprising: generating the aggregated flow log based on a plurality of merged records, wherein a first merged record is generated from a first flow log and a second merged record is generated from a second flow log. (Paragraph 159) In regard to claims 8 18 494 discloses 8. (Original) The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining that a first data field value is common in response to detecting at least a partial match between a value of the first flow log record and a value of the second flow log record. (Paragraph 171-172) In regard to claims 9 19 494 discloses 9. (Original) The method of claim 1, further comprising: filtering out a portion of records of the plurality of data records based on a value of a data field; and generating the aggregated flow log based on the merged record without the filtered portion of records. PNG media_image8.png 613 974 media_image8.png Greyscale Number of previous messages is filtered to 100 30 500 In regard to claim 20 494 discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the aggregated flow log includes only the plurality of merged records (Figure 9 S302 END) Response to Applicant Argument and remarks Applicants’ argument and remarks have been fully considered and are not persuasive. In regard the argument which states; “ PNG media_image9.png 521 859 media_image9.png Greyscale ” Examiner respectfully disagrees. Kishikawa hereinafter Ki never defined aggregation as loss of data in favor of decreased granularity. Applicants explains Ki aggregation using the help.tableau.com is irrelevant because the Ki reference never referred to help.tableau.com to explain what is the Ki aggregation, instead it precisely goes after how the aggregation works in Figure 9. PNG media_image10.png 655 597 media_image10.png Greyscale Examiner will explain Figure 9 with an example following the Logic of the steps S301 S302 S303. For the explication there is at least 2 collections point A and B Collection point A Collection point B 1 1 2 2 3 4 4 4 According to the logic 1 and 1 are the same, and aggregate is 1. According to the logic 2 and 2 are the same, and aggregate is 1 2. According to the logic 3 and 4 are different, and aggregate is 1 2. According to the logic 4 and 4 are the same, and aggregate is 1 2 4. It is clear from this explication that 2 and 4 are different values, whereas the merged data is 1 2 4. It is also clear following the logic of Figure 9 the second value and the third value have to be different for the aggregation to happen. Thus, the claim language and the limitations are met clearly, and the argument advanced is not correct. THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 mailing date of this final action. Contact Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMINE RIAD whose telephone number is (571)272-8185. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Bonzo Bryce can be reached 571-272-3655. 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. /Amine Riad/ Primary Examiner
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 22, 2024
Application Filed
Sep 30, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Feb 28, 2025
Response Filed
Mar 29, 2025
Final Rejection — §102
Jun 30, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 08, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 20, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Dec 23, 2025
Response Filed
Feb 12, 2026
Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12579045
DATA COMMUNICATION USING OPTICAL UART LINKS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12579036
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR RECOVERING DATA ASSOCIATED WITH ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CALCULATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12579018
INTELLIGENT ALERT AUTOMATION (IAA)
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12561436
STORAGE SYSTEM WITH CLOUD ASSISTED RECOVERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Patent 12554572
INTER-INTEGRATED CIRCUIT (I2C) DEVICE WITH INTERNAL BUS STUCK RECOVERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 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

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+6.5%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 789 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