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
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to a response filed March 18, 2026. Claims 1-20 are pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed March 18, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of the claim(s) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Chowdhury et al. (US 2025/0225328 A1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-11, and 14-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Chowdhury et al. (US 2025/0225328 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Chowdhury discloses a method, comprising:
generating a request to obtain information corresponding to a data sample (Abstract and [0067], receiving a prompt of a structure of an input structured data (data sample));
using, by a processing device, an artificial intelligence (AI) model to produce sample metadata based on the request (Abstract and [0019], fine-tuned AI computer model processes the prompt to generate semantically enhanced metadata for the structure of the input structures data structure), wherein the artificial AI model is trained to analyze the data sample and generate the sample metadata (Abstract and [0019], fine-tuned AI computer model processes the prompt to generate semantically enhanced metadata for the structure of the input structures data structure); and
enriching the data sample, based on the sample metadata, to produce an enriched data sample (Abstract and [0019], fine-tuned AI computer model processes the prompt to generate semantically enhanced metadata for the structure of the input structures data structure).
With respect to claim 2, Chowdhury discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the data sample corresponds to a malicious data sample detected by a cybersecurity system and the sample metadata comprises at least one of a MITRE Tactic, Technique, or Procedure ([0019]).
With respect to claim 3, Chowdhury discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising:
validating the sample metadata to produce a validated sample metadata ([0025]-[0026]); and
storing the validated sample metadata in a storage area ([0026]).
With respect to claim 6, Chowdhury discloses the method of claim 3, further comprising: training the AI model utilizing the validated sample metadata ([0026]).
With respect to claim 7, Chowdhury discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the enriching the data sample further comprises: translating the sample metadata into tags ([0024], associating samples with categories); and linking the tags to the data sample ([0061]).
With respect to claim 8, Chowdhury discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the sample metadata comprises structured data in tabular form ([0014]).
With respect to claim(s) 9-11, and 14-19, the system and non-transitory medium of claim(s) 9-11, and 14-19 does/do not limit or further define over the method of claim(s) 1-3 and 6-8. The limitations of claim(s) 9-11, and 14-19 is/are essentially similar to the limitations of claim(s) 1-3 and 6-8. Therefore, claim(s) 9-11, and 14-19 is/are rejected for the same reasons as claim(s) 1-3 and 6-8. Please see rejection above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 4-5, 12-13, and 20 is/are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ESTHER B. HENDERSON whose telephone number is (571)270-3807. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6a-2p ET.
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, Umar Cheema can be reached at 571-270-3037. 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.
/ESTHER B. HENDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458 June 2, 2026
Prosecution Insights