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 . The present office action is responsive to communication received 4/10/2026.
Claims 1-2, 13, and 17 have been amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 1/29/2026, 2/3/2026, and 3/30/2026 were filed after the mailing date of the application no. 18/896,047 on 09/25/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments in the instant Amendment, filed on 4/6/2026, with respect to limitations listed below, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claim 1 applicant argues reference Helmick fails to explicitly disclose “based on successfully decrypting the ABE ciphertext using a respective one of the plural different ABE decryption keys, providing, by the processor set, the user with access to second telemetry data stored in a respective one of plural storage partitions associated with the respective one of the plural different ABE decryption keys, wherein the second telemetry data stored in the respective one of plural storage partitions includes the first telemetry data requested by the user”.
The examiner respectfully disagrees, the examiner believes reference Helmick [0072] discloses the decrypting relevant portions of the telemetry message and that data being returned for use. This can be interpreted as decrypting cyphertext and providing the user with access to the data. The returning of data mention in [0072] is being interpreted as the providing of access to the data. Later in [0064] of Helmick we can see disclosed that we can see that there are keys that are used to decrypt portions of the telemetry message. These portions of telemetry message can be interpreted to be the “second” telemetry data as they are a part of the first telemetry data requested by the user. Each key decrypts and grants access to that specific portion of the overall encrypted telemetry message (first telemetry message). The second represents the portion of that message that is decrypted using its specific key.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Bastos et al. (US 20220353247) in view of Helmick et al. (US 20220200968) and in further view of Bongiovanni et al. (US 20250165649).
Regarding claim 1
Bastos discloses A computer-implemented method, comprising:
receiving, by a processor set, a request for first telemetry data, the request including an attribute-based encryption (ABE) ciphertext associated with the user;
[ At step 5069 the broker 5110 forwards the encrypted ciphertext to the subscriber 512. Finally, at step 5070 the subscriber 5125 decrypts the encrypted ciphertext. (Bastos et al., paragraph 238, receiving by the subscriber and decrypting by the subscriber)]
[encrypting the data can be performed according to an attribute-based encryption (ABE) method (Bastos et al., paragraph 81)]
[The encrypted data can comprise ciphertext and a hash signature (Bastos et al., paragraph 79)]
attempting to decrypt the ABE ciphertext, by the processor set, using [plural different ABE] decryption key[s];
[this function takes as input the ciphertext (c), the public key (PublicK) and the decryption key (DecryptK). It decrypts the ciphertext (c) to output the message (m) (Bastos et al., paragraph 276)]
[the subscriber 8125 decrypts the ciphertext (c) received from the broker 8110, using the public key (PublicK) and the secret decryption key (DecryptK) previously received from the broker 8110 (Bastos et al., paragraph 297)]
Bastos fails to explicitly disclose based on successfully decrypting the ABE ciphertext using a respective one of the plural different ABE decryption keys, providing, by the processor set, the user with access to second telemetry data stored in a respective one of plural storage partitions associated with the respective one of the plural different ABE decryption key, and wherein the second telemetry data stored in the respective one of the plural storage partitions includes the first telemetry data requested by the user.
However in an analogous art Helmick discloses
and based on successfully decrypting the ABE ciphertext using a respective one of the plural different ABE decryption keys, providing, by the processor set, the user with access to second telemetry data stored in a respective one of plural storage partitions associated with the respective one of the plural different ABE decryption key
[For example, message processor 556 may receive an encrypted telemetry message from a telemetry command received by telemetry data receiver 552, process the encrypted telemetry message by decrypting relevant portions, and return telemetry data for use by telemetry data manager 550. (Helmick et al., paragraph 72, return for use is interpreted to provide access,)]
[secure data section 322.1 may be a data section including telemetry data authorized for access by all authorized entities (Helmick et al., paragraph 47)]
[For example, authorized entities may have respective public-private key pairs for use in selectively decrypting portions of the telemetry message and the public keys may be stored by key manager 534.8 in public key data 520.3 for use by encryption/decryption engine 540. (Helmick et al., paragraph 64, each key pair decrypts and allows for access portions of the telemetry message, keys that are used to decrypt portions of the telemetry message the decrypted portions of the telemetry data can be interpreted to be the “second” telemetry data as only portions art decrypted based off each key separately, each key decrypts its own portion of the telemetry data)]
and wherein the second telemetry data stored in the respective one of the plural storage partitions includes the first telemetry data requested by the user.
[At block 634, the telemetry data may be stored. For example, the telemetry data manager may store the decrypted telemetry data for future use by the host or client. (Helmick et al., paragraph 91, please refer to fig 6. After being decrypted the telemetry data is stored)]
Bastos and Helmick are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of encryption/decryption of data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the instant application effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Bastos to incorporate the teachings of Helmick et al. to include receiving, by a processor set, based on successfully decrypting the ABE ciphertext using a respective one of the plural different ABE decryption keys, providing, by the processor set, the user with access to second telemetry data stored in a respective one of plural storage partitions associated with the respective one of the plural different ABE decryption key, and wherein the second telemetry data stored in the respective one of the plural storage partitions includes the first telemetry data requested by the user , in order to improve the security of telemetry data by using multi-layer encryption for formatting telemetry messages for access by multiple parties. (Helmick et al., paragraph 12)]
Bastos in view of Helmick fails to explicitly disclose decrypting using a plurality of different ABE decryption keys.
However in an analogous art Bongiovanni discloses attempting to decrypt the ABE ciphertext, by the processor set, using plural different ABE decryption keys;
[After generating the necessary keys, the Cryptographic Engine may return a Decryption Key Response(s) to the Document Security Manager. This response may include multiple keys if different portions of the document require separate decryption keys based on varying access policies. In some cases, the keys may be time-limited or incorporate usage restrictions to enhance security. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 257)]
[Matching the received decryption keys with the appropriate encrypted sections (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 261)]
[Applying the decryption algorithm to reveal the authorized content (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 262)]
Bastos, Helmick, and Bongiovanni are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of encryption/decryption of data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the instant application effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Bastos and Helmick to incorporate the teachings of Bongiovanni et al. to include decrypting using a plurality of different ABE decryption keys, in order to include multiple keys if different portions of the document require separate decryption keys based on varying access policies to help enhance security. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 257)]
Regarding claim 13,
Bastos discloses a computer program product comprising one or more computer readable storage media having program instructions collectively stored on the one or more computer readable storage media,
[The methods described herein may be encoded as executable instructions embodied in a computer readable medium, including, without limitation, non-transitory computer-readable storage, a storage device, and/or a memory device. Such instructions, when executed by a processor (or one or more computers, processors, and/or other devices) cause the processor (the one or more computers, processors, and/or other devices) to perform at least a portion of the methods described herein. (Bastos et al., paragraph 196)]
The claim recites substantially the same content as claim 1 and is rejected with the rationales set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 17,
Bastos discloses a system comprising: a processor set, one or more computer readable storage media, and program instructions collectively stored on the one or more computer readable storage media, the program instructions executable to
[The methods described herein may be encoded as executable instructions embodied in a computer readable medium, including, without limitation, non-transitory computer-readable storage, a storage device, and/or a memory device. Such instructions, when executed by a processor (or one or more computers, processors, and/or other devices) cause the processor (the one or more computers, processors, and/or other devices) to perform at least a portion of the methods described herein. (Bastos et al., paragraph 196)]
The claim recites substantially the same content as claim 1 and is rejected with the rationales set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 2,
Bastos in view of Helmick and in further view of Bongiovanni discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 1,
wherein: the request is received via a user interface of a telemetry backend; and the user is provided access to the second telemetry data stored in the respective one of the plural storage partitions via the telemetry backend.
[client system 118 is a user device configured with one or more applications and/or configured to access one or more applications on host system 102. For example, host 102 may be configured to gather and store telemetry data from storage devices 120 and client 118 may include a telemetry data manager 118.1 configured to access, analyze, and display the aggregate telemetry data collected by host 102. (Helmick et al., paragraph 31, the backend being the telemetry data manager)]
Bastos, Helmick, and Bongiovanni are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of encryption/decryption of data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the instant application effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Bastos and Bongiovanni to incorporate the teachings of Helmick et al. to include wherein: the request is received via a user interface of a telemetry backend; and the user is provided access to the telemetry data stored in the respective one of plural storage partitions via the telemetry backend, in order to improve the security of telemetry data by using multi-layer encryption for formatting telemetry messages for access by multiple parties. (Helmick et al., paragraph 12)]
Regarding claim 3,
Bastos in view of Helmick and in further view of Bongiovanni discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein the telemetry backend is associated with a telemetry pipeline.
[client system 118 is a user device configured with one or more applications and/or configured to access one or more applications on host system 102. For example, host 102 may be configured to gather and store telemetry data from storage devices 120 and client 118 may include a telemetry data manager 118.1 configured to access, analyze, and display the aggregate telemetry data collected by host 102. (Helmick et al., paragraph 31, the manager is involved in the telemetry pipeline as it is configured to access analyze and disclose the telemetry data)]
Bastos, Helmick, and Bongiovanni are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of encryption/decryption of data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the instant application effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Bastos and Bongiovanni to incorporate the teachings of Helmick et al. to include wherein the telemetry backend is associated with a telemetry pipeline, in order to improve the security of telemetry data by using multi-layer encryption for formatting telemetry messages for access by multiple parties. (Helmick et al., paragraph 12)]
Regarding claim 4,
Bastos in view of Helmick and in further view of Bongiovanni discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 3, wherein the telemetry backend is configured to:
receive encrypted telemetry data from the telemetry pipeline;
[message processor 556 may receive an encrypted telemetry message from a telemetry command received by telemetry data receiver 552 (Helmick et al., paragraph 72)]
attempt to decrypt the encrypted telemetry data using the plural different ABE decryption keys;
[After generating the necessary keys, the Cryptographic Engine may return a Decryption Key Response(s) to the Document Security Manager. This response may include multiple keys if different portions of the document require separate decryption keys based on varying access policies. In some cases, the keys may be time-limited or incorporate usage restrictions to enhance security. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 257)]
[Matching the received decryption keys with the appropriate encrypted sections (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 261)]
[Applying the decryption algorithm to reveal the authorized content (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 262)]
and based on successfully decrypting the encrypted telemetry data using the respective one of the plural different ABE decryption keys, store the decrypted telemetry data in the respective one of the plural storage partitions.
[For example, the telemetry data manager may store the decrypted telemetry data for future use by the host or client. (Helmick et al., paragraph 91)]
Bastos, Helmick, and Bongiovanni are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of encryption/decryption of data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the instant application effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Bastos and Helmick to incorporate the teachings of Bongiovanni et al. to include attempt to decrypt the encrypted telemetry data using the plural different ABE decryption keys, in order to include multiple keys if different portions of the document require separate decryption keys based on varying access policies to help enhance security. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 257)]
Regarding claim 5,
Bastos in view of Helmick and in further view of Bongiovanni discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 4,
wherein the telemetry pipeline is configured to create the encrypted telemetry data by encrypting extracted telemetry data using one of plural different ABE encryption keys.
[Telemetry message handler 534 may support encryption of one or more portions of the telemetry message. For example, message formatter 534.3 may be configured to invoke encryption logic 534.6 for encrypting the telemetry data set, portions thereof, table of contents, and/or headers. (Helmick et al., paragraph 63, the message handler being a part of the data manager which is interpreted to be a part of the pipeline)]
Bastos, Helmick, and Bongiovanni are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of encryption/decryption of data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the instant application effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Bastos and Bongiovanni to incorporate the teachings of Helmick et al. to include wherein the telemetry pipeline is configured to create the encrypted telemetry data by encrypting extracted telemetry data using one of plural different ABE encryption keys, in order to improve the security of telemetry data by using multi-layer encryption for formatting telemetry messages for access by multiple parties. (Helmick et al., paragraph 12)]
Regarding claim 6,
Bastos in view of Helmick and in further view of Bongiovanni discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 5, wherein:
an ABE authority service creates the ABE ciphertext and provides the ABE ciphertext to the user;
[The Cryptographic Engine may process this request, applying attribute-based encryption to the specified portions of text. In some cases, the encryption process may involve generating ciphertexts that can only be decrypted by users possessing the required attributes. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 234)]
the ABE authority service creates the plural different ABE decryption keys and provides the plural different ABE decryption keys to the telemetry backend;
[The Cryptographic Engine may generate one or more decryption keys based on the outcome of this evaluation. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 256)]
and the ABE authority service creates the plural different ABE encryption keys and provides the plural different ABE encryption keys to the telemetry pipeline.
[For example, symmetric key generator 230 may be configured to generate the symmetric encryption key 232 for use by encryption engine 234 when encrypting the telemetry data. In some embodiments, symmetric key generator 230 may be configured to generate a random encryption key for each telemetry message. For example, a new offload encryption key may be generated for each telemetry message such that each telemetry message uses a different symmetric encryption key 232. (Helmick et al., paragraph 41)]
Bastos, Helmick, and Bongiovanni are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of encryption/decryption of data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the instant application effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Bastos and Helmick to incorporate the teachings of Bongiovanni et al. to include an ABE authority service creates the ABE ciphertext and provides the ABE ciphertext to the user and the ABE authority service creates the plural different ABE decryption keys and provides the plural different ABE decryption keys to the telemetry backend, in order to include multiple keys if different portions of the document require separate decryption keys based on varying access policies to help enhance security. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 257)]
Regarding claim 7,
Bastos in view of Helmick and in further view of Bongiovanni discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 6, wherein the ABE authority service is separate from the telemetry backend and the telemetry pipeline.
[The Cryptographic Engine may generate one or more decryption keys based on the outcome of this evaluation. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 256)]
Bastos, Helmick, and Bongiovanni are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of encryption/decryption of data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the instant application effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Bastos and Helmick to incorporate the teachings of Bongiovanni et al. to include wherein the ABE authority service is separate from the telemetry backend and the telemetry pipeline, in order to include multiple keys if different portions of the document require separate decryption keys based on varying access policies to help enhance security. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 257)]
Regarding claim 8,
Bastos in view of Helmick and in further view of Bongiovanni discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 5,
wherein the telemetry pipeline is configured to encrypt the extracted telemetry data using ciphertext-policy attribute-based encryption.
[the attribute-based encryption scheme may utilize a ciphertext-policy attribute-based encryption (CP-ABE) algorithm. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 54)]
Bastos, Helmick, and Bongiovanni are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of encryption/decryption of data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the instant application effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Bastos and Helmick to incorporate the teachings of Bongiovanni et al. to include wherein the telemetry pipeline is configured to encrypt the extracted telemetry data using ciphertext-policy attribute-based encryption, in order to allow for the creation of complex access polices that determine who can access specific portions of encrypted documents. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 182)]
Regarding claim 9,
Bastos in view of Helmick and in further view of Bongiovanni discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 5,
wherein the telemetry pipeline is configured to encrypt the extracted telemetry data using key-policy attribute-based encryption.
[it is important to note that other forms of attribute-based encryption may be employed in various implementations of the system. These alternative forms of ABE may include key-policy attribute-based encryption (KP-ABE) (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 336)]
Bastos, Helmick, and Bongiovanni are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of encryption/decryption of data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the instant application effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Bastos and Helmick to incorporate the teachings of Bongiovanni et al. to include wherein the telemetry pipeline is configured to encrypt the extracted telemetry data using key-policy attribute-based encryption, in order to offer more flexibility in associating access policy needs with the users private key rather than ciphertext. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 336)]
Regarding claim 10,
Bastos in view of Helmick and in further view of Bongiovanni discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 5,
wherein the telemetry pipeline is configured to encrypt the extracted telemetry data using the one of the plural different ABE encryption keys based on identifying a classification of the extracted telemetry data.
[The processing of original image content may involve segmenting the image into multiple regions using a convolutional neural network, extracting feature vectors for each segmented region using a pre-trained deep learning model, classifying the sensitivity level of each region based on the extracted features, and generating encryption attributes for each region based on its classified sensitivity level and content type. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 55)]
Bastos, Helmick, and Bongiovanni are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of encryption/decryption of data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the instant application effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Bastos and Helmick to incorporate the teachings of Bongiovanni et al. to include wherein the telemetry pipeline is configured to encrypt the extracted telemetry data using the one of the plural different ABE encryption keys based on identifying a classification of the extracted telemetry data, in order to include multiple keys if different portions of the document require separate decryption keys based on varying access policies to help enhance security. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 257)]
Regarding claim 11 and 14,
Bastos in view of Helmick and in further view of Bongiovanni discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 1 and the computer program product of claim 13,
wherein each of the plural different ABE decryption keys contains a respective one of plural classifications of telemetry data.
[the system may generate a decryption key request based on authenticated user attributes, transmit the decryption key request to a key management server, receive a decryption key from the key management server, selectively decrypt portions of the document using the received decryption key, and render a partially decrypted version of the document with authorized content visible and unauthorized content remaining obfuscated. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 56)]
Bastos, Helmick, and Bongiovanni are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of encryption/decryption of data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the instant application effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Bastos and Helmick to incorporate the teachings of Bongiovanni et al. to include wherein each of the plural different ABE decryption keys contains a respective one of plural classifications of telemetry data, in order to include multiple keys if different portions of the document require separate decryption keys based on varying access policies to help enhance security. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 257)]
Regarding claim 12, 16, and 20,
Bastos in view of Helmick and in further view of Bongiovanni discloses the computer-implemented method of claim 1, the computer program product of claim 13, and the system of claim 17,
wherein the ABE ciphertext associated with the user contains an authorization policy defined for the user in terms of attributes associated with the user.
[the encryption attributes for text portions may include access policy expressions defining combinations of user attributes required for decryption. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 224)]
Bastos, Helmick, and Bongiovanni are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of encryption/decryption of data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the instant application effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Bastos and Helmick to incorporate the teachings of Bongiovanni et al. to include wherein the ABE ciphertext associated with the user contains an authorization policy defined for the user in terms of attributes associated with the user, in order to include multiple keys if different portions of the document require separate decryption keys based on varying access policies to help enhance security. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 257)]
Regarding claim 15
Bastos in view of Helmick and in further view of Bongiovanni discloses the computer program product of claim 14,
wherein the telemetry pipeline is configured to encrypt the extracted telemetry data using the one of the plural different ABE encryption keys based on identifying a classification of the extracted telemetry data.
[The processing of original image content may involve segmenting the image into multiple regions using a convolutional neural network, extracting feature vectors for each segmented region using a pre-trained deep learning model, classifying the sensitivity level of each region based on the extracted features, and generating encryption attributes for each region based on its classified sensitivity level and content type. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 55)]
Bastos, Helmick, and Bongiovanni are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of encryption/decryption of data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the instant application effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Bastos and Helmick to incorporate the teachings of Bongiovanni et al. to include wherein the telemetry pipeline is configured to encrypt the extracted telemetry data using the one of the plural different ABE encryption keys based on identifying a classification of the extracted telemetry data, in order to include multiple keys if different portions of the document require separate decryption keys based on varying access policies to help enhance security. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 257)]
Regarding claim 18,
Bastos in view of Helmick and in further view of Bongiovanni discloses and the system of claim 17,
wherein each of the plural different ABE decryption keys contains a respective one of plural classifications of telemetry data.
[the system may generate a decryption key request based on authenticated user attributes, transmit the decryption key request to a key management server, receive a decryption key from the key management server, selectively decrypt portions of the document using the received decryption key, and render a partially decrypted version of the document with authorized content visible and unauthorized content remaining obfuscated. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 56)]
Bastos, Helmick, and Bongiovanni are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of encryption/decryption of data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the instant application effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Bastos and Helmick to incorporate the teachings of Bongiovanni et al. to include wherein each of the plural different ABE decryption keys contains a respective one of plural classifications of telemetry data, in order to include multiple keys if different portions of the document require separate decryption keys based on varying access policies to help enhance security. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 257)]
Regarding claim 19,
Bastos in view of Helmick and in further view of Bongiovanni discloses the system of claim 18,
wherein the telemetry pipeline is configured to encrypt the extracted telemetry data using the one of the plural different ABE encryption keys based on identifying a classification of the extracted telemetry data.
[The processing of original image content may involve segmenting the image into multiple regions using a convolutional neural network, extracting feature vectors for each segmented region using a pre-trained deep learning model, classifying the sensitivity level of each region based on the extracted features, and generating encryption attributes for each region based on its classified sensitivity level and content type. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 55)]
Bastos, Helmick, and Bongiovanni are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of encryption/decryption of data. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the instant application effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Bastos and Helmick to incorporate the teachings of Bongiovanni et al. to include wherein the telemetry pipeline is configured to encrypt the extracted telemetry data using the one of the plural different ABE encryption keys based on identifying a classification of the extracted telemetry data, in order to include multiple keys if different portions of the document require separate decryption keys based on varying access policies to help enhance security. (Bongiovanni et al., paragraph 257)]
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ronen et al. (US 20260039635) discloses receiving first data in a first format; identifying a cipher capable of processing the first data in the first format, thus defining an identified cipher; decoding the first data in the first format using the identified cipher to generate first decoded data in the first format; and converting the first decoded data from the first format to a common format, thus defining common format first data.
Applicant’s amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL ELAHIAN whose telephone number is (703) 756-1284. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday from 7:30am to 5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Catherine Thiaw can be reached at telephone number 571-270-1138. 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 Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/D.E./DANIEL ELAHIAN, Examiner, Art Unit 2407
/Catherine Thiaw/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2407 7/23/2026
