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 .
This action is in response to the application filed on September 25, 2024. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1-20 represent ENCRYPTED INFORMATION RETRIEVAL.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
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 claims at issue 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this 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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/forms/. The 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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
18896152
12,135,811
1. A method, comprising: generating a partitioned database in which a database is partitioned into shards each having a shard identifier that logically distinguishes each shard from other shards, and database entries in each shard are partitioned into buckets having a bucket identifier that logically distinguishes each bucket in the shard from other buckets in the shard; receiving, by a server including one or more processors and from a client device, a batch of client-encrypted queries; processing, by the server, the batch of client-encrypted queries using a set of server-encrypted data stored in a database to obtain a set of server-encrypted results to the batch of client-encrypted queries; determining, by the server, that the batch of client-encrypted queries includes fake queries and real queries; and transmitting, by the server and to the client device, server-encrypted results for the real queries rather than the fake queries.
1. A method, comprising: generating a partitioned database in which a database is partitioned into shards each having a shard identifier that logically distinguishes each shard from other shards, and database entries in each shard are partitioned into buckets having a bucket identifier that logically distinguishes each bucket in the shard from other buckets in the shard; receiving, by a server including one or more processors and from a client device, a batch of client-encrypted queries, wherein the batch of client-encrypted queries includes two or more queries that have each been encrypted by the client device and specify a shard identifier for the client-encrypted query; processing, by the server, the batch of client-encrypted queries using a set of server-encrypted data stored in a database, wherein each database entry is server-encrypted and is capable of being decrypted by a corresponding decryption key, wherein the processing includes: grouping, by the server, the client-encrypted queries according to shard identifiers of the client-encrypted queries, wherein each group of client-encrypted queries includes multiple queries; executing, by the server and for each shard, the multiple queries in the group of client-encrypted queries for the shard together in a batch execution process; and generating, by the server and for each shard, multiple server-encrypted results to the multiple queries in the group of client-encrypted queries; and transmitting, by the server, the multiple server-encrypted results for each shard to the client device.
2. Claims 1-20 of the instant application are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No(s). 12,135,811, issued to Fox-Epstein. Although the conflicting set of claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because a comparison between the two set of claims shows that the instant claims 1-20 are anticipated by claims 1-20 of ‘811.
Conclusion
3. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EL HADJI SALL whose telephone number is (571)272-4010. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:00-8:30 (flexible).
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, Ario Etienne can be reached on 5712724001. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/EL HADJI M SALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2457