DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to amendments and remarks filed by Applicant on 05/18/2026.
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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant presents amendments to independent claims 1, 8, and 15. All amendments have been fully considered.
Applicant’s amendments are sufficient to overcome the previous reference serving as the basis for the anticipation rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102. Therefore, a new search was conducted to identify the elements not taught by the previous reference. As a result, a new reference was found and asserted in combination with the previous reference to serve as the basis for an obviousness rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103. A complete mapping of the new rejections are provided below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant presents arguments with respect to independent claims 1, 8, and 15. All arguments have been fully considered.
The Examiner agrees that the previous reference, serving as the basis for the anticipation rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102, fails to teach the clarifying subject matter presented in the amendment. As mentioned above, a new search was conducted and new rejections are presented below.
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.
Claims 1, 3–4, 7–8, 10–11, 14–15, 17–18 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Difonzo (US 2022/0414228 A1, published Dec. 29, 2022) in view of Grady (US 2023/0045347 A1, published Feb. 9, 2023).
Regarding claims 1, 8, and 15, Difonzo discloses: a computer-implemented method comprising: receiving a security inventory of a cloud computing server system; generating a graph database based on the security inventory of the cloud computing server system (system data is user to generate graph databases that are organized with a focus on the relationships between data points, which are represented by nodes, edges, and their associated properties. Difonzo ¶¶ 31 and 73.); receiving a natural language description of a security vulnerability (user submits a natural language query “show me machines that talk to outside IPs, have critical vulnerabilities, and host network services”. Difonzo Figure 5 and ¶ 61.); generating from the natural language description of a security vulnerability, using a generative neural network, a graph query (the query is processed by the intent classification model to identify user intent and outputs the formal graph database query. Difonzo Figure 5 and ¶ 61.); detecting the security vulnerability in the cloud computing server system by running the graph query against the graph database (running the query against the graph database. Difonzo ¶ 48.); generating a report indicating the presence of the security vulnerability in the cloud computing server system (return data result from a security-focused query in a cloud environment. Difonzo ¶¶ 56 and 63.); and performing at least one action to remediate the security vulnerability in the cloud computing server system (provides visualization of the network and access the potential impact of a network vulnerability and attack. Difonzo ¶ 74.).
Difonzo does not disclose: storing the graph query; updating the graph database based on a change to the security inventory of the cloud computing server system; and running the stored graph query against the graph database after the updating of the graph database.
However, Grady does disclose: storing the graph query; updating the graph database based on a change to the security inventory of the cloud computing server system; and running the stored graph query against the graph database after the updating of the graph database (if updated graph data is detected, the unified graph query system re-runs the query to generate new features that include the updated feature data. Grady Figure 5, element 520 and ¶ 73.).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the translating of natural language user query into a graph database query and running the resulting query on a graph database in a cloud environment of Difonzo with maintaining the graph query and re-running the graph query after the graph database has been determined to have been updated based upon the teachings of Grady. The motivation being including updated features in the query results for comparison.
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 17, Difonzo in view of Grady discloses the limitations of claims 1, 8, and 15, respectively, wherein the security inventory comprises data on resources of the cloud computing server system, the resource comprising one or more of the virtual servers and instances provided by the cloud computing server system, storage buckets provided by the cloud computing server system, identity and access management (IAM) roles on the cloud computing server system, security policies of the cloud computing server system, virtual private cloud (VPC) configurations used by the cloud computing server system, and network interfaces of the cloud computing server system (Difonzo Figure 1 and ¶ 47.).
Regarding claims 4, 11, and 18, Difonzo in view of Grady discloses the limitations of claims 1, 8, and 15, respectively, wherein detecting the security vulnerability in the cloud computing server system by running the graph query against the graph database comprises determining the identity of resources of the security inventory that are responsive to the graph query based on a representation of the resources in the graph database (returns plaintext details resulting from the formal graph query of the cloud network-based graph database of identified nodes and displays in the panel. Difonzo Figures 1 and 6, and ¶¶ 64 (returned data from query), 63 (cloud environment), 61 (specific addresses of nodes).).
Regarding claims 7 and 14, Difonzo in view of Grady discloses the limitations of claims 1 and 8, respectively, wherein the nodes the graph database comprises data for nodes representing resources of security inventory and edges representing relationships and interactions between the resources in the security inventory (system data is user to generate graph databases that are organized with a focus on the relationships between data points, which are represented by nodes, edges, and their associated properties. Difonzo ¶¶ 31 and 73.).
Claims 2, 9, 16 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Difonzo in view of Grady in view of Majmudar (US 12,292,915 B1, issued May 6, 2025).
Regarding claims 2, 9, and 16, Difonzo in view of Grady discloses the limitations of claims 1, 8, and 15, respectively. Difonzo in view of Grady does not disclose: wherein generating from the natural language description of the security vulnerability, using the generative neural network, the graph query further comprises: receiving at least one item of additional data related to the security vulnerability from at least one external source; generating a prompt for input to the generative neural network based on the natural language description of the security vulnerability, a schema of the graph database, and the at least one item of additional data; and inputting the prompt to the generative neural network.
However, Majmudar does disclose: wherein generating from the natural language description of the security vulnerability, using the generative neural network, the graph query further comprises: receiving at least one item of additional data related to the security vulnerability from at least one external source (prompt generator 104 generates a natural language prompt from user input and contextual data retrieved from context data stores. Majmudar 8:56–67.); generating a prompt for input to the generative neural network based on the natural language description of the security vulnerability, a schema of the graph database, and the at least one item of additional data; and inputting the prompt to the generative neural network (a prompt is generated by the prompt generator 104 that is based upon a natural language request combined with contextual data and sends the generated prompt to the orchestrator 102. Majmudar Figure 1A and 8:36–9:11.).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the translating of natural language user query into a graph database query and running the resulting query on a graph database in a cloud environment of Difonzo with incorporating additional data from an external source into the generation of the natural language-based security query based upon the teachings of Majmudar. The motivation being to incorporate relevant context into the query as it is being generated from the user’s natural language input to make the query more effective. Majmudar 8:55–67.
Claims 5, 12, 19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Difonzo in view of Grady in view of Gupta ‘097 (US 2022/0067097 A1, published Mar. 3, 2022).
Regarding claims 5, 12, and 19, Difonzo in view of Grady discloses the limitations of claims 1, 8, and 15, respectively. Difonzo in view of Grady does not disclose: wherein performing at least one action to remediate the security vulnerability in the cloud computing server system comprises one or more of modifying, removing, adding resources in the security inventory of the cloud computing server system.
However, Gupta ‘097 does disclose: wherein performing at least one action to remediate the security vulnerability in the cloud computing server system comprises one or more of modifying, removing, adding resources in the security inventory of the cloud computing server system (employing policy actions such as blocking access of nodes based upon identification of risk by querying the graph database. Gupta ‘097 ¶ 50.).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the translating of natural language user query into a graph database query and running the resulting query on a graph database in a cloud environment of Difonzo with taking action of modifying or removing resources from the computing system based upon a discovered vulnerability based upon the teachings of Gupta. The motivation being to prevent threats proactively and mitigating risks in the user’s environment. Gupta ‘097 at ¶ 50.
Claims 6, 13, 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Difonzo in view of Grady in view of Gupta ‘763 (US 11,531,763 B1, issued Dec. 20, 2022).
Regarding claims 6, 13, and 20, Difonzo in view of Grady discloses the limitations of claims 1, 8, and 15, respectively. Difonzo in view of Grady does not disclose: wherein performing at least one action to remediate the security vulnerability in the cloud computing server system comprises generating, with the generative neural network, code to remediate the security vulnerability and deploying the code to the cloud computing server system.
However, Gupta ‘763 does disclose: wherein performing at least one action to remediate the security vulnerability in the cloud computing server system comprises generating, with the generative neural network, code to remediate the security vulnerability and deploying the code to the cloud computing server system (generating code packages based upon security templates that include security controls that mitigate or eliminate known security threats or vulnerabilities. Gupta ‘763 at 3:4–35.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Zhuang (US 2019/0121810, published Apr. 25, 2019), the system requests to re-run the graph query on the updated source data.
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 VANCE LITTLE whose telephone number is (571) 270-0408. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30am - 5:30pm.
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, Jung (Jay) Kim can be reached at (571) 272-3804. 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.
/VANCE M LITTLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2494
Prosecution Insights