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 . 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 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.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-5, 7, 9, 10-11, 14-15, 17, 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12113785. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter claimed in the claim(s) of the instant application is fully disclosed and covered by the claims in U.S Patent No, 12113785.
US Patent 12113785
Current Application
Claim 1. A method comprising:
establishing, by a first executable resource in a network device having joined a secure peer-to-peer data network, a registry providing a mapping between one or more network entities having been associated with a tag object by an identified user entity, each network entity represented by one of a federation identifier of a user entity or a corresponding data object, the tag object and each data object each having an enforceable lifetime, a corresponding unique identifier, and the federation identifier identifying a corresponding owner;
receiving, by the first executable resource, a search request for one or more identified network entities having been tagged with the tag object, and in response generating a search result based on identifying the identified network entities having been mapped relative to the tag object, the search result identifying one or more of an identified federation identifier or an identified unique identifier for the respective identified network entities;
and providing the search result by the first executable resource, the search result causing an endpoint device to attract the identified network entities for presentation by the endpoint device;
wherein the causing an endpoint device to attract attracting includes the endpoint device attracting the identified network entities based on selectively retrieving the identified network entities, from the secure peer-to-peer data network, based on a secure retrieval with at least a second network device having a two-way trusted relationship with the endpoint device.
1. (ORIGINAL) A method comprising:
establishing, by a first executable resource in a network device having joined a secure peer-to-peer data network, a registry providing a mapping between one or more network entities having been associated with a tag object by an identified user entity, each network entity represented by one of a federation identifier of a user entity or a corresponding data object, the tag object and each data object each having an enforceable lifetime, a corresponding unique identifier, and the federation identifier identifying a corresponding owner;
receiving, by the first executable resource, a search request for one or more identified network entities having been tagged with the tag object, and in response generating a search result based on identifying the identified network entities having been mapped relative to tag object, the search result identifying one or more of an identified federation identifier or an identified unique identifier for the respective identified network entities;
and providing the search result by the first executable resource, the search result causing an endpoint device to attract the identified network entities for presentation by the endpoint device;
wherein the causing an endpoint device to attract includes the endpoint device executing a secure retrieval of the identified network entities from one or more trusted peer network devices, in the secure peer-to-peer data network, having respective two-way trusted relationships with the endpoint device
Claim 2. The method of claim 1, wherein:
the first executable resource is a directory server executed by the network device within the secure peer-to-peer data network;
the method further comprising the directory server enforcing exclusive assignment of each tag object of the first tag object type for the corresponding enforceable lifetime, including assigning the tag object, having the first tag object type, to the identified user entity;
the assigning granting the identified user entity an exclusive authority in the secure peer-to-peer data network to tag the one or more of the network entities with the tag object, for establishing the authoritative association between the one or more network entities and the identified user entity.
Claim 2, The method of claim 1, wherein:
the first executable resource is a directory server executed by the network device within the secure peer-to-peer data network;
the method further comprising the directory server enforcing exclusive assignment of each tag object of a first tag object type for the corresponding enforceable lifetime, including assigning the tag object, having the first tag object type, to the identified user entity;
the assigning granting the identified user entity an exclusive authority in the secure peer-to-peer data network to tag the one or more of the network entities with the tag object, for establishing an authoritative association between the one or more network entities and the identified user entity.
Claim 3. The method of claim 2, wherein the enforcing exclusive assignment comprises:
revoking the exclusive authority from the identified user entity upon expiration of the enforceable lifetime of the tag object;
and zeroizing the tag object from the registry based on detecting expiration of all the one or more network entities tagged with the tag object.
Claim 3. The method of claim 2, wherein the enforcing exclusive assignment comprises:
revoking the exclusive authority from the identified user entity upon expiration of the enforceable lifetime of the tag object;
and zeroizing the tag object from the registry based on detecting expiration of all the one or more network entities tagged with the tag object.
Claim 4. The method of claim 2, further comprising:
establishing, by the directory server, the second registry providing the mapping between the any network entity having been associated with the second tag object by one or more user entities,
wherein the second tag object is of the second tag object type that is owned by the directory server for unrestricted use by any user entity in the secure peer-to-peer data network;
the enforceable lifetime of each tag object of the second tag object type based on a corresponding last use relative to the respective enforceable lifetimes of network entities associated with the corresponding tag object of the second tag object type.
Claim 4. The method of claim 2, further comprising: establishing, by the directory server, a second registry providing a mapping between network entities having been associated with a second tag object by one or more user entities,
wherein the second tag object is of a second tag object type that is owned by the directory server for unrestricted use by any user entity in the secure peer-to-peer data network;
the enforceable lifetime of each tag object of the second tag object type based on a corresponding last use relative to the respective enforceable lifetimes of network entities associated with the corresponding tag object of the second tag object type.
Claim 5. The method of claim 4, wherein the establishing the second registry comprises:
moving the second tag object from the second registry to a least-recently-used cache based on determining the second tag object has an oldest use relative to other tag objects of the second tag object type that are stored in the second registry;
and zeroizing the second tag object based on detecting expiration of all the network entities associated with the second tag object, according to the respective enforceable lifetimes.
Claim 5. The method of claim 4, wherein the establishing the second registry comprises:
moving the second tag object from the second registry to a least-recently-used cache based on determining the second tag object has an oldest use relative to other tag objects of the second tag object type that are stored in the second registry;
and zeroizing the second tag object based on detecting expiration of all the network entities associated with the second tag object, according to the respective enforceable lifetimes.
Claim 7. The method of claim 1,
wherein the search request further specifies the identified network entities are of a prescribed entity type,
the generating further comprising identifying the identified network entities belonging to the first referenced network entities and the second referenced network entities and having the prescribed entity type.
Claim 7, The method of claim 6,
wherein the search request further specifies the identified network entities are of a prescribed entity type,
the generating further comprising identifying the identified network entities belonging to the first referenced network entities and the second referenced network entities and having the prescribed entity type.
Claim 9. A method comprising:
the network device executing the first executable resource is the endpoint device attracting the identified network entities based on the search result;
the tag object by the identified user entity is of a first tag object type that restricts usage and search scope to a federation scope comprising at least the endpoint device having been allocated the corresponding federation identifier of the identified user;
the method further comprises a second executable resource in the endpoint device causing the attracting of at least a portion of the identified network entities, based on the second executable resource detecting creation of a conversation identified by a conversation object that references the tag object,
and sending a secure invitation for joining the conversation to one of the identified network entities having a two-way trusted relationship with the identified user.
Claim 9. The method of claim 1, wherein:
the network device executing the first executable resource is the endpoint device attracting the identified network entities based on the search result;
the tag object by the identified user entity is of a first tag object type that restricts usage and search scope to a federation scope comprising at least the endpoint device having been allocated the corresponding federation identifier of the identified user;
the method further comprises a second executable resource in the endpoint device causing the attracting of at least a portion of the identified network entities, based on the second executable resource detecting creation of a conversation identified by a conversation object that references the tag object,
and sending a secure invitation for joining the conversation to one of the identified network entities having a two-way trusted relationship with the identified user.
Claim 10. The method of claim 9, further comprising: generating, by the second executable resource in the endpoint device, the search request in response to detecting the tag object referenced in the conversation object;
the attracting further includes the second executable resource aggregating the search result with successive search results for additional identified network entities associated with the tag object for up to an identified deadline
Claim 10. The method of claim 9, further comprising: generating, by the second executable resource in the endpoint device, the search request in response to detecting the tag object referenced in the conversation object;
the attracting further includes the second executable resource aggregating the search result with successive search results for additional identified network entities associated with the tag object for up to an identified deadline
Claim 11. The method of claim 9, further comprising: generating, by a third executable resource in the endpoint device, the presentation for the identified user entity of the endpoint device based on selectively obtaining hypercontent elements identified by any one or of the tag object, the conversation object, or any of the identified network entities attracted to the conversation,
and further based on the identified user entity having acquired rights for obtaining each of the hypercontent elements according to a two-way trusted relationship.
Claim 11. The method of claim 9, further comprising: generating, by a third executable resource in the endpoint device, the presentation for the identified user entity of the endpoint device based on selectively obtaining hypercontent elements identified by any one or more of the tag object, the conversation object, or any of the identified network entities attracted to the conversation,
and further based on the identified user entity having acquired rights for obtaining each of the hypercontent elements according to a two-way trusted relationship.
Claim 14. One or more non-transitory tangible media encoded with logic for execution by a machine and when executed by the machine operable for:
establishing, by a first executable resource in the machine implemented as a network device having joined a secure peer-to-peer data network,
a registry providing a mapping between one or more network entities having been associated with a tag object by an identified user entity, each network entity represented by one of a federation identifier of a user entity or a corresponding data object, the tag object and each data object each having an enforceable lifetime, a corresponding unique identifier, and the federation identifier identifying a corresponding owner;
receiving, by the first executable resource, a search request for one or more identified network entities having been tagged with the tag object,
and in response generating a search result based on identifying the identified network entities having been mapped relative to the tag object, the search result identifying one or more of an identified federation identifier or an identified unique identifier for the respective identified network entities;
and providing the search result by the first executable resource, the search result causing an endpoint device to attract the identified network entities for presentation by the endpoint device;
wherein the causing an endpoint device to attract attracting includes the endpoint device attracting the identified network entities based on selectively retrieving the identified network entities, from the secure peer-to-peer data network, based on a secure retrieval with at least a second network device having a two-way trusted relationship with the endpoint device.
Claim 14. One or more non-transitory tangible media encoded with logic for execution by a machine and when executed by the machine operable for:
establishing, by a first executable resource in the machine implemented as a network device having joined a secure peer-to-peer data network,
a registry providing a mapping between one or more network entities having been associated with a tag object by an identified user entity, each network entity represented by one of a federation identifier of a user entity or a corresponding data object, the tag object and each data object each having an enforceable lifetime, a corresponding unique identifier, and the federation identifier identifying a corresponding owner;
receiving, by the first executable resource, a search request for one or more identified network entities having been tagged with the tag object,
and in response generating a search result based on identifying the identified network entities having been mapped relative to tag object, the search result identifying one or more of an identified federation identifier or an identified unique identifier for the respective identified network entities;
and providing the search result by the first executable resource, the search result causing an endpoint device to attract the identified network entities for presentation by the endpoint device;
wherein the causing an endpoint device to attract includes the endpoint device executing a secure retrieval of the identified network entities from one or more trusted peer network devices, in the secure peer-to-peer data network, having respective two-way trusted relationships with the endpoint device.
Claim 15. The one or more non-transitory tangible media of claim 14, wherein:
the first executable resource is a directory server executed by the network device within the secure peer-to-peer data network;
the one or more non-transitory tangible media further operable for enforcing exclusive assignment of each tag object of the first tag object type for the corresponding enforceable lifetime, including assigning the tag object, having the first tag object type, to the identified user entity;
the assigning granting the identified user entity an exclusive authority in the secure peer-to-peer data network to tag the one or more of the network entities with the tag object, for establishing the authoritative association between the one or more network entities and the identified user entity.
Claim 15. The one or more non-transitory tangible media of claim 14, wherein:
the first executable resource is a directory server executed by the network device within the secure peer-to-peer data network;
the one or more non-transitory tangible media further operable for enforcing exclusive assignment of each tag object of a first tag object type for the corresponding enforceable lifetime, including assigning the tag object, having the first tag object type, to the identified user entity;
the assigning granting the identified user entity an exclusive authority in the secure peer-to-peer data network to tag the one or more of the network entities with the tag object, for establishing an authoritative association between the one or more network entities and the identified user entity.
Claim 17. One or more non-transitory tangible media encoded with logic for execution by a machine and when executed by the machine operable for:
wherein: the network device executing the first executable resource is the endpoint device attracting the identified network entities based on the search result;
the tag object by the identified user entity is of a first tag object type that restricts usage and search scope to a federation scope comprising at least the endpoint device having been allocated the corresponding federation identifier of the identified user;
the one or more non-transitory tangible media further operable for a second executable resource in the endpoint device causing the attracting of at least a portion of the identified network entities, based on the second executable resource detecting creation of a conversation identified by a conversation object that references the tag object,
and sending a secure invitation for joining the conversation to one of the identified network entities having a two-way trusted relationship with the identified user.
Claim 17. The one or more non-transitory tangible media of claim 14,
wherein: the network device executing the first executable resource is the endpoint device attracting the identified network entities based on the search result;
the tag object by the identified user entity is of a first tag object type that restricts usage and search scope to a federation scope comprising at least the endpoint device having been allocated the corresponding federation identifier of the identified user;
the one or more non-transitory tangible media further operable for a second executable resource in the endpoint device causing the attracting of at least a portion of the identified network entities, based on the second executable resource detecting creation of a conversation identified by a conversation object that references the tag object,
and sending a secure invitation for joining the conversation to one of the identified network entities having a two-way trusted relationship with the identified user.
Claim 20. An apparatus implemented as a physical machine, the apparatus comprising: non-transitory machine readable media configured for storing executable machine readable code; a device interface circuit; and a processor circuit configured for executing the machine readable code, and when executing the machine readable code operable for:
establishing, by the apparatus implemented as a network device having joined a secure peer-to-peer data network,
a registry providing a mapping between one or more network entities having been associated with a tag object by an identified user entity, each network entity represented by one of a federation identifier of a user entity or a corresponding data object, the tag object and each data object each having an enforceable lifetime, a corresponding unique identifier, and the federation identifier identifying a corresponding owner;
receiving a search request for one or more identified network entities having been tagged with the tag object, and in response generating a search result based on identifying the identified network entities having been mapped relative to the tag object,
the search result identifying one or more of an identified federation identifier or an identified unique identifier for the respective identified network entities;
and providing the search result for an endpoint device, the search result causing the endpoint device to attract the identified network entities for presentation by the endpoint device;
wherein the causing an endpoint device to attract attracting includes the endpoint device attracting the identified network entities based on selectively retrieving the identified network entities, from the secure peer-to-peer data network, based on a secure retrieval with at least a second network device having a two-way trusted relationship with the endpoint device.
Claim 20. An apparatus implemented as a physical machine, the apparatus comprising: non-transitory machine readable media configured for storing executable machine readable code; a device interface circuit;
and a processor circuit configured for executing the machine readable code, and when executing the machine readable code operable for:
establishing, by the apparatus implemented as a network device having joined a secure peer-to-peer data network,
a registry providing a mapping between one or more network entities having been associated with a tag object by an identified user entity, each network entity represented by one of a federation identifier of a user entity or a corresponding data object, the tag object and each data object each having an enforceable lifetime, a corresponding unique identifier, and the federation identifier identifying a corresponding owner;
receiving a search request for one or more identified network entities having been tagged with the tag object, and in response generating a search result based on identifying the identified network entities having been mapped relative to tag object,
the search result identifying one or more of an identified federation identifier or an identified unique identifier for the respective identified network entities;
and providing the search result for an endpoint device, the search result causing the endpoint device to attract the identified network entities for presentation by the endpoint device;
wherein the causing an endpoint device to attract includes the endpoint device executing a secure retrieval of the identified network entities from one or more trusted peer network devices, in the secure peer-to-peer data network, having respective two-way trusted relationships with the endpoint device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-13 and 16-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 but would be allowable if claims 4-13 and 16-19 will overcome with 35 U.S.C. 101 and if dependent claims 9 roll up into the base claim 1 and claim 17 into independent claim 14.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 14 and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1, 14 and 20 recites “…each data object each having an enforceable lifetime…”. The word “each” using twice which does not make sense to the claims. To make better clarity one of the word (Bolded) “each” should be removed”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Additionally,
Claims 1, 14 and 20 recites “in response generating a search result based on identifying the identified network entities having been mapped relative to tag object”. Claim missing “the” before “tag object” because “tag object” is introduced in previous step of claim 1.
Therefore examiner suggesting to amend the claim as below:
the claim citation should be “in response generating a search result based on identifying the identified network entities having been mapped relative to “the” tag object”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1 Statutory category
Claim 1 is directed to a “method” and therefore recites a process. Claims 15 recite “One or more non-transitory tangible media” comprising at least one processor, which fall within manufacture category. Claim 20 recites “a physical machine”, therefore , is an apparatus category. Thus, the claims fall within one of the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A Prong I Judicial exception
Under the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, each independent claim is evaluated to determine whether it recites a judicial exception, including abstract ideas such as mathematical concept, which have been recognized as abstract idea. Thus, the analysis moves towards step 2A, Prong II.
For this analysis, generic references to “a network device” (Claims 1, 2, 9, 12, 13, 14, 17-20), “one or more network entities” (Claims 1-20), “endpoint device” (Claims 1, 9-10, 11-14, 17-20), “a first executable resource” (Claims 1, 2, 9, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18), “a second executable resource” (Claims 9, 10, 17,), “One or more non-transitory tangible media” (Claim 14), “physical machine” (claim 20) and “a device” (claim 20) are disregarded, and the focus is on the remaining substantive language.
For claim 1, 14 and 20, once the generic computer implementation language is removed, the method recites that it:
“establishing….a secure peer-to-peer data network,…”
“a registry providing a mapping between one or more network entities…”;
“receiving… a search request…”;
“…generating a search result…”;
“…identifying one or more of an identified federation identifier…”;
“providing the search result…;”
“executing a secure retrieval of the identified network entities…”;
Accordingly, under Step 2A Prong I of the 2019 Guidance, independent claims 1, 8 and 15 each recite an abstract idea in the form of mental process and organizing human activity even when generic references to electronic or computer implementation are disregarded.
Step 2A Prong II Integration into a practical application:
Under Step 2A Prong II, the claims are evaluated to determine whether any additional elements, viewed individually and in combination, integrate the identified abstract idea into a practical application.
In claim 1, the elements beyond the abstract idea of mathematical concept grouping are that the method steps are implemented. Claim 1 is further analyzed in step 2A prong 2, to evaluate whether the claim as a whole integrates the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception. This evaluation is performed by identifying whether there are any additional elements recited in the claim beyond the judicial exception, and evaluating those additional elements individually and in combination to determine whether the claim as a whole integrates the exception into a practical application. However, each of the remaining limitation “a network device” (Claims 1, 2, 9, 12, 13, 14, 17-20), “one or more network entities” (Claims 1-20), “endpoint device” (Claims 1, 9-10, 11-14, 17-20), “a first executable resource” (Claims 1, 2, 9, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18), “a second executable resource” (Claims 9, 10, 17,), “One or more non-transitory tangible media” (Claim 14), “physical machine” (claim 20) and “a device” (claim 20) appears to be generic computer functions which do not constitute meaningful limitations that would amount to significantly more than the abstract idea.
The combination of these additional element is no more than generic computer functions. Thus, even in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limitations on practicing the abstract idea.
Independent claims 1, 14 and 20 therefore do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application under Step 2A Prong II.
Step 2B Inventive concept:
Under Step 2B, the claims are analyzed to determine whether any additional element, or combination of elements, amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea itself, that is, whether there is an inventive concept. As discussed above, the additional elements in the independent claims consist of generic computer components such as processors, non-transitory computer readable media, and a computer device, natural language processing as well as the statement that the abstract scheme is used in an anonymous credential system. The specification describes these components at a high level as conventional computing devices suitable for executing instructions. Implementing the recited abstract operations of “establishing….a secure peer-to-peer data network,…”; “a registry providing a mapping between one or more network entities…”; “receiving… a search request…”; “…generating a search result…”; “…identifying one or more of an identified federation identifier…”; “providing the search result…;” “executing a secure retrieval of the identified network entities…” merely performing establishing , mapping, receiving information, identifying result, providing result are mental process and organizing human activity.
Independent claims 1, 14 and 20 therefore do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application under Step 2B.
Regarding Claims 2, 15 further recites: “enforcing exclusive assignment…”, “assigning granting the identified user entity an exclusive authority…”, “establishing an authoritative association…”. No additional elements are introduced in claim 2 that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. As a whole, claim 2 fails to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application is found non‐statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101 with the addition of the abstract idea.
Regarding Claims 3 recites: the additional abstract idea of “enforcing exclusive assignment…”, “revoking the exclusive authority…”, “zeroizing the tag object…”, “detecting expiration of all the one or more network entities…”. No additional elements are introduced in claim 3 that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. As a whole, claim 3 fails to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application is found non‐statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101 with the addition of the abstract idea.
Regarding Claim 4 recites: the additional abstract idea of “establishing, by the directory server, a second registry…”, “mapping between network entities…”. No additional elements are introduced in claim 4 that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. As a whole, claim 4 fails to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application is found non‐statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101 with the addition of the abstract idea.
Regarding Claims 5 recites: the additional abstract idea of “establishing, by the directory server, a second registry…”, “mapping between network entities…”. No additional elements are introduced in claim 5 that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. As a whole, claim 5 fails to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application is found non‐statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101 with the addition of the abstract idea.
Regarding Claims 6 recites: the additional abstract idea of “accessing a reference in the registry”, “accessing a corresponding reference…”, “identifying the identified network entities…”.
No additional elements are introduced in claim 6 that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. As a whole, claim 6 fails to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application is found non‐statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101 with the addition of the abstract idea.
Regarding Claim 7 recites: the additional abstract idea of “generating further comprising identifying the identified network entities”. No additional elements are introduced in claim 7 that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. As a whole, claim 7 fails to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application is found non‐statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101 with the addition of the abstract idea.
Regarding Claims 8 and 16 recites: the additional abstract idea of “accessing a reference in the registry…”, “accessing a corresponding reference…”, “providing a mapping between tag objects…”, “identifying the identified network entities…”. No additional elements are introduced in claims 8 and 16 that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. As a whole, claims 8 and 16 fails to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application is found non‐statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101 with the addition of the abstract idea.
Regarding Claims 9 and 17 recites: the additional abstract idea of “the endpoint device attracting the identified network entities…”, “…the endpoint device causing the attracting of at least a portion of the identified network entities…”, “…detecting creation of a conversation…”, “sending a secure invitation for joining the conversation to one of the identified network entities…”. No additional elements are introduced in claims 9 and 17 that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. As a whole, claims 9 and 17 fails to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application is found non‐statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101 with the addition of the abstract idea.
Regarding Claim 10 recites: the additional abstract idea of “generating….the search request…”, “mapping between network entities…”, “attracting further includes…aggregating the search result…”. No additional elements are introduced in claim 10 that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. As a whole, claim 10 fails to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application is found non‐statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101 with the addition of the abstract idea.
Regarding Claim 11 recites: the additional abstract idea of “generating…the presentation…”, “obtaining hypercontent elements…”. No additional elements are introduced in claim 11 that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. As a whole, claim 11 fails to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application is found non‐statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101 with the addition of the abstract idea.
Regarding Claims 12 and 18 recites: the additional abstract idea of “…the endpoint device attracting the identified network entities…”. No additional elements are introduced in claims 12 and 18 that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. As a whole, claims 12 and 18 fails to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application is found non‐statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101 with the addition of the abstract idea.
Regarding Claims 13 and 19 recites: the additional abstract idea of “sending…an invitation…”. No additional elements are introduced in claims 13 and 19 that would integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. As a whole, claims 13 and 19 fails to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application is found non‐statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101 with the addition of the abstract idea.
Accordingly, independent claims 1, 14 and 20 and dependent claims 2-13, and 15-19 that stand with them, do not recite an inventive concept sufficient to transform the abstract idea into a patent eligible application. The claims are therefore directed to an abstract idea and fail to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 14 and 20 recites the limitation “receiving, by the first executable resource, a search request" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear that from which entity or actor “a search request” is coming from?. Requires appropriate corrections.
Dependent Claims 2-13, 15-19, are rejected, in addition to the rejection mentioned above for the individual claims 1, 14 and 20, also in light of their dependency on claims 1, 14 and 20 and not overcoming the ground of rejection applicated 1, 14 and 20.
Additionally,
Claims 1, 14 and 20 recites the limitation “in response generating a search result" in line 9. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear that “in response” to what? the system will “generate a search result”. Requires appropriate corrections.
Dependent Claims 2-13, 15-19, are rejected, in addition to the rejection mentioned above for the individual claims 1, 14 and 20, also in light of their dependency on claims 1, 14 and 20 and not overcoming the ground of rejection applicated 1, 14 and 20.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 14 and 20 recites “the search result causing an endpoint device to attract the identified network entities for presentation by the endpoint device” and “the endpoint device executing a secure retrieval of the identified network entities”. Specification fails to provide written description of “how” citated claim limitation is happening? How “the search result causing a user device to retrieve the identified data object. Also how “the user device executes a secure retrieval of the identified network entities”? Appropriate changes are required.
Dependent Claims 2-13, 15-19, are rejected, in addition to the rejection mentioned above for the individual claims 1, 14 and 20, also in light of their dependency on claims 1, 14 and 20 and not overcoming the ground of rejection applicated 1, 14 and 20.
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, 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 14-15, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pabla et al. (U. S. Pat. No. 7,206,934 B2) (hereinafter “Pabla”), and further in view of Chhabra et al. (U. S. 2021/0014172 A1) (hereinafter “Chhabra”).
Regarding Claim 1, Pabla teaches:
establishing, by a first executable resource in a network device having joined a secure peer-to-peer data network (Pabla: [Col 18, lines 54-57], 113) The peer-to-peer platform provide mechanisms through which peers may discover each other, communicate with each other, and cooperate with each other to form peer groups. [Col 25, lines 30-35], Using the peer-to-peer platform, these devices may be able to interact with each other, without extra networking interfaces except those needed by the devices themselves, using the peer-to-peer platform as the common layer of communication and data exchange),
receiving, by the first executable resource, a search request for one or more identified network entities having been tagged with the tag object (Pabla: [Col 74, lines 25-28], Peer A issues a discovery request specifying the type (peer, peer group, pipe, service) of advertisements it is looking for. To initiate the Discovery, peer A sends a discovery request message as a single propagate packet to all its available endpoints)
and in response generating a search result based on identifying the identified network entities having been mapped relative to tag object (Pabla: [Col 78, lines 28-30], a discovery response message may be used to send a discovery response message (=search result) to answer a discovery query message),
the search result identifying one or more of an identified federation identifier or an identified unique identifier for the respective identified network entities (Pabla: [Col 30, lines 9-13], , every peer in the peer-to-peer network may have a unique peer identifier (e.g. UUID). Other peer-to-peer network resources may also have unique identifiers, including peer groups, services, applications, pipes, endpoints, content and resource advertisements [Col 30, line 30], (170) Peers may be identified by their unique identifier (UUID)…[Col30, lines 42-43], a peer identifier may be bound to a network address (e.g. IP address, URI, URN or URL) of the peer);
and providing the search result by the first executable resource (Pabla: [Col 53, lines 58-59], peer 200B sending a response message that may contain advertisement 808 to the other peer. [Col 66, lines 2], receive a response (or multiple responses) to the query), the search result causing an endpoint device to attract the identified network entities for presentation by the endpoint device (Pabla: [Col 53, lines 60-67], (307) Peer 200A may broadcast discovery query message 820. Discovery query message 820 may include criteria specifying a particular type of resource in which the peer is interested. [Col 54, lines 8-10], After receiving the resource advertisements, peer 200A may access the corresponding resource);
wherein the causing an endpoint device to attract includes the endpoint device executing a secure retrieval of the identified network entities (Pabla: [Col 54, lines 4-13],Peer 200A may also receive one or more response messages from one or more other peers. Each of these response messages may include advertisements for resources for resources also matching the criteria in the discovery query message. After receiving the resource advertisements, peer 200A may access the corresponding resource. In one embodiment, each resource advertisement may include information describing how to access the particular resource corresponding to the resource advertisement) from one or more trusted peer network devices (Pabla: [Col 70, lines 36-37], (383) In some embodiments of a peer-to-peer platform, the discovery service may rely on trusted peers), in the secure peer-to-peer data network having respective two-way trusted relationships with the endpoint device (Pabla: [Col 25, lines 30-35], Using the peer-to-peer platform, these devices may be able to interact with each other, without extra networking interfaces except those needed by the devices themselves, using the peer-to-peer platform as the common layer of communication and data exchange).
Pabla does not explicitly disclose below claim limitations, however, in an analogous art, Chabbra disclose:
a registry providing a mapping between one or more network entities having been associated with a tag object by an identified user entity (Chabbra: [0025], . The users 112(1)-(N) may be associated with tags and tag values, which may be stored and retrieved from the user profiles 106. Likewise, the resources 114(1)-(M) may be associated with tags and tag values, which may be stored and retrieved from the resource profiles 106), each network entity represented by (Chhabra: [0072], In various embodiments, the principal (e.g., the user, the role, etc.) may be given a token or other certificate to access the resource after determining that an access condition is satisfied. The access may expire (=enforceable lifetime) after usage and/or a predetermined duration of time. In some embodiments, the predetermined duration of time may of any duration (e.g., 30 minutes, 24 hours, one week, one month, one year, etc.) be determined by the administrator or some other entity),
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Pabla’s method of establishing peer-to-peer communication between peers and/or peer groups, access the corresponding resource by searching identity information in peer-to peer network, receiving discovery request and generating discovery response by applying Chabbra’s method of assigning tags to the users, to resources or both, in order to provide access to the resources by users based on tags associated with users (Chhabra: [Abstract]).
Regarding Claim 2, Pabla in view of Chhabra teaches:
(ORIGINAL) The method of claim 1, wherein:
the first executable resource is a directory server executed by the network device within the secure peer-to-peer data network (Chhabra: [0039] The tagging module 206 may enable creation, modification, and/or removal of tags to users and/or resources. For example, the tagging module 206 may enable an administrator or a different individual to create tags for a user, which may be stored in the user profile 106 of the user. The tagging module 106 may enable adding a role to a user, such as using a “AssumeRole” command to give a user specific tags on a temporary or permanent basis. The tagging module 106 may enable adding tags to resources, which may be stored in the resource profile 108…);
the method further comprising the directory server enforcing exclusive assignment of each tag object of a first tag object type for the corresponding enforceable lifetime, including assigning the tag object, having the first tag object type, to the identified user entity (Chhabra: [0095] The systems and processes described herein generate, maintain, and/or update an infrastructure for the service 104 to facilitate the tagging of users and/or resources. In some embodiments, the service 104 may provide new APIs to tag and untag users and/or roles (e.g., TagUser, TagRole, UntagUser, UntagRole, ListUserTags, ListRoleTags, etc.). In order to facilitate authorization of access to various users, resources, etc. based on user tags and/or resource tags, the authorization techniques associated with the service 104 that treat user and/or role as a resource may be updated to include tags in the resource context);
the assigning granting the identified user entity an exclusive authority in the secure peer-to-peer data network to tag the one or more of the network entities with the tag object, for establishing an authoritative association between the one or more network entities and the identified user entity (Chhabra: [0031] As discussed above, user tags 118 may be granted to users by administrators or other authorized users. For example, an administrator may create a new user and add tags to that new user. An administrator may also remove tags, modify tags or tag values, and/or add tags to an existing user. In some embodiments, a user may assume a role, and may be provided tags for the role on a temporary or permanent basis. For example, a user may be placed on a project for a short time and may require access for that project, via a new role, for that time period).
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Pabla’s method of establishing peer-to-peer communication between peers and/or peer groups, access the corresponding resource by searching identity information in peer-to peer network, receiving discovery request and generating discovery response by applying Chabbra’s method of assigning tags to the users, to resources or both, in order to provide access to the resources by users based on tags associated with users (Chhabra: [Abstract]).
Regarding Claim 3, Pabla in view of Chhabra teaches:
(ORIGINAL) The method of claim 2,
wherein the enforcing exclusive assignment comprises: revoking the exclusive authority from the identified user entity upon expiration of the enforceable lifetime of the tag object (Chhabra: [0031], An administrator may also remove tags, modify tags or tag values, and/or add tags to an existing user. In some embodiments, a user may assume a role, and may be provided tags for the role on a temporary or permanent basis. For example, a user may be placed on a project for a short time and may require access for that project, via a new role, for that time period. [0062], provided that the principal is, or is associated with, a role, a time duration of the role or other conditions may be determined (e.g., expiration of the role, triggering event, etc.), which may determine a termination of the role. The role may be associated with predetermined tag(s). [0072], The access may expire after usage and/or a predetermined duration of time. In some embodiments, the predetermined duration of time may of any duration (e.g., 30 minutes, 24 hours, one week, one month, one year, etc.) be determined by the administrator or some other entity);
and zeroizing the tag object from the registry based on detecting expiration of all the one or more network entities tagged with the tag object (Chhabra: [0031], An administrator may also remove tags (=zeroing), modify tags or tag values…to an existing user. [0039] The tagging module 206 may enable creation, modification, and/or removal of tags to users and/or resources. [0084], provides for the customers may desire to specify which tags a user may apply to a resource, modify, or delete (=Zeroizing) from a resource).
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Pabla’s method of establishing peer-to-peer communication between peers and/or peer groups, access the corresponding resource by searching identity information in peer-to peer network, receiving discovery request and generating discovery response by applying Chabbra’s method of revoking the access of the resources after predetermined duration time and deleting the tag from the database, in order to save space, improve efficiency, quality and minimize waiting time to get the search results by organizing tags.
Regarding claim 14 and 20, this claim contains identical limitations found within that of claim 1 above albeit directed to a different statutory category (non-transitory medium). For this reason, the same grounds of rejection are applied to claim 14 and 20.
Regarding claim 15, this claim contains identical limitations found within that of claim 2 above albeit directed to a different statutory category (non-transitory medium). For this reason, the same grounds of rejection are applied to claim 15.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUPALI DHAKAD whose telephone number is (571)270-3743. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:30.
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, Alexander Lagor can be reached at 5712705143. 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.
/R.D./Examiner, Art Unit 2437
/ALEXANDER LAGOR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2437
Prosecution Insights