Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/890,719

DATA SECURITY MANAGEMENT CONTROL SYSTEM AND METHOD

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Sep 19, 2024
Examiner
LAKHIA, VIRAL S
Art Unit
2431
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Hangzhou Laibu Technology Co. Ltd.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
88%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 11m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 88% — above average
88%
Career Allow Rate
518 granted / 591 resolved
+29.6% vs TC avg
Strong +20% interview lift
Without
With
+19.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 11m
Avg Prosecution
14 currently pending
Career history
605
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.6%
-27.4% vs TC avg
§103
56.0%
+16.0% vs TC avg
§102
11.9%
-28.1% vs TC avg
§112
8.2%
-31.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 591 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 This action is in response to the communication filed on 9/19/2024. Claims 1-10 are examined. Claims 1-6, 8-10 are rejected. Claim 7 is objected. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/19/2024. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 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 1-6, 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by U.S. Publication 2024/020339 to Fitzgerald et al. (hereinafter known as “Fitzgerald”) and in view of U.S. Patent 10,936,714 to McIntosh et al. (hereinafter known as “McIntosh”). As per claim 1 Fitzgerald teaches, a data security management control system, comprising at least two user terminals, wherein the user terminals are installed with a file management system; the file management system of one of the user terminals receives file management information corresponding to an original file, and encapsulates the original file and the file management information into a composite file according to a preset file format (Fitzgerald para 19 teaches the PE file format is a data structure that encapsulates executable code with the information necessary for an operating system (OS) to manage the encapsulated or wrapped executable code); the file management system of at least one of the other user terminals reads the file management information in the composite file, and (Fitzgerald para 32-33 teaches where the first FPS 102, the second FPS 104, and the third FPS 106 can be instances of each other, where one(s) of the first FPS 102, the second FPS 104, and/or the third FPS 106 are different from one or more of the FPS 102, 104, 106). Fitzgerald does not teach McIntosh teaches, uses the original file according to the file management information (McIntosh col 10 lines 45-65 teaches where original file formats such as .text, .init, .fini are utilized for file management which covers claimed limitation). Fitzgerald-McIntosh are analogous art because they are from secure executable file function in network. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to combine the teachings of Fitzgerald of detection of malware in executable files by analyzing file attributes (abstract) with teachings of McIntosh with analyzing of security tag in executable file (abstract). The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to prevent security breach by securing source code (McIntosh col 3 lines 26-35). As per claim 2 combination of Fitzgerald – McIntosh teaches, the data security management control system according to claim 1, wherein the file management system of the user terminal stores the file management information in the composite file in the form of a file header; the file management system of the user terminal obtains the file management information by reading the file header of the composite file (Fitzgerald para 36, 39-40 teaches where PE (portable executable) files 124, 126 includes executable header, Compatible EXE header and section headers). As per claim 3 combination of Fitzgerald – McIntosh teaches, the data security management control system according to claim 2, wherein the file header of the composite file comprises an information identification bit corresponding to file management information; the file management system of the user terminal identifies the information identification bit in the composite file, and reads the file management information corresponding to the information identification bit (Fitzgerald para 36, 39-40 teaches the PE files 124, 126 includes optional header magic number where the PE files 124, 126 are images and/or PE32 or PE32+ executable includes a header with PE32 format). As per claim 4 combination of Fitzgerald – McIntosh teaches, the data security management control system according to claim 1, wherein the file management information is file use permission information, and the file management system of the user terminal uses the original file within a permission range corresponding to the file use permission information (Fitzgerald para 20, 41-42 teaches where PE files execute the related functions based on permission(s) based on detection models). As per claim 5 combination of Fitzgerald – McIntosh teaches, the data security management control system according to claim 1, wherein the system further comprises a server and the server is communicatively connected to each of the user terminals; the server is configured to manage the user account corresponding to the file management system, the file management information, and the composite file (Fitzgerald para 27, 82-83 teaches servers are virtualizations of physical hardware servers with combination of physical hardware server(s) and/or virtualization(s) of the physical hardware server(s)). Claim 6, Claim 6 is rejected in accordance with claim 1. Claim 8, Claim 8 is rejected in accordance with claim 3. Claim 9, Claim 9 is rejected in accordance with claim 4. As per claim 10 combination of Fitzgerald – McIntosh teaches, the data security management control method according to claim 9, wherein the file using permission information comprises at least one of a file viewing permission, a file editing permission, a file deleting permission, a file destroying permission, a file authorizing permission, and a file copying permission (Fitzgerald para 33 teaches first endpoint device 110 includes the OS 114 to access, execute, and/or instantiate files, such as the first file 120 and/or the second file 122, to perform and/or carry out operations ) . Prior Art The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Fitzgerald et al US Publication 20240202339 McIntosh et al US Patent 10936714 Stuntebeck et al US Patent 9813241 Tegegne et al US Publication 20170300702 Lyadvinsky et al US Patent 10181054 Panchapakesan et al US Patent 10108809 Salem et al US Patent 10762200 Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIRAL S LAKHIA whose telephone number is (571)270-3363. The examiner can normally be reached on 8 am - 6 pm. 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 on 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 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. /VIRAL S LAKHIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2431
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 19, 2024
Application Filed
Nov 29, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12604190
TECHNIQUES FOR ENABLING COMMUNICATION BETWEEN A PLURALITY OF DISPARATE NETWORKS AND DEVICES UTIILZING VARIOUS CONNECTION TECHNOLOGIES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596850
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR GENERATING TRUST SCORES AND RELATED RECOMMENDATIONS USING SPDM-ENABLED DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12596773
COMMUNICATION CONFIDENTIALITY METHOD FOR APPLICATIONS IN COMMUNICATION CONFIDENTIALITY SYSTEMS AND COMMUNICATION SERVERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591673
DETECTION OF CYBER ATTACKS DRIVEN BY COMPROMISED LARGE LANGUAGE MODEL APPLICATIONS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12579326
LEVEL SENSOR FOR ACTIVATING AND DEACTIVATING A SAFE OPERATING STATE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 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

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
88%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+19.9%)
2y 11m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 591 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