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 .
Claim Interpretation
The features of “substantially transparent” and “substantially visible” are understood in light of [0051] of the originally filed specifications. Specifically, an element that is substantially transparent is less than 100% transparency, and substantial visibility of an element is based on another element’s transparency in a multi-layer implementation. See also [0046] & [0050].
The features of “substantially matching” is understood in light of [0020] and [0046]-[0048] of the originally filed specifications. Specifically, the matching is directed to the formatting of media content, such as background color (RGB values), opacity, CSS values, etc.
Claim Objections
Claims 9, 17, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 9, 17, and 20 are missing an article in the limitation: “a second user interface element”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 12, and 20 recite “a browser module” twice. It is unclear if there are two distinct browser modules or a single browser module. If the former, distinguishing indicators should be applied (e.g., a first browser module, a second browser module, etc.). Claims 2-11 and 13-19 are dependent on claims 1, 12, and 20 and are similarly rejected. For example, dependent claims 10 and 18 recite “the browser module”. It is unclear which browser module is referenced in their respective parent claims.
Claim 3 recites: “causing to output the first alert via the first”. The context of this limitation is unclear to what “the first” is referencing.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The claimed invention is directed to protecting sensitive information from digital extraction, such as screenshotting, screen capturing, screensharing, etc. A multi-layer security measure is disclosed such that the layers are visible or transparent according to detected digital extraction events and indication of sensitive information. See [0027]-[0030] of the originally filed specification.
There have been known solutions for preventing and/or mitigating digital extraction of sensitive data via screenshotting, screensharing, or the like. For example, US 2024/0012930, US 2021/0312080, US 2021/0200886, US 2017/0068829, US 2015/0278534, and IPCOM000257227D – “System to detect unauthorized viewers” (2019) are all directed to various solutions for real-time protection of sensitive data when a screen capturing event is detected.
The most relevant prior arts are US 2021/0200886 (RAMAMURTHY) and US 2015/0278534 (THIYAGARAJAN). RAMAMURTHY discloses overlaying an obstruction layer to mask sensitive information when an initiation of a screen capture event is detected (i.e., “determining…digital extraction is indicated”). Data fields of sensitive data are custom coded to include functions for generating an obstruction layer to obfuscate the data field. See [0022] & [0026]. THIYAGARAJAN discloses obfuscating sensitive information of a shared screen with a browser application of a support agent. A support session interface comprising of a UI layer 310 and a support layer 320 (i.e., a “first” and “second” layer). The UI layer comprises one or more interfaces of software applications running on a user computer. The support layer is transparent, such that some graphical elements are partially transparent to enable content in the UI layer below to be opaque and block said content (which are sensitive) to the support agent. See [0029], [0040]-[0041] & Fig. 3.
However, both RAMAMURTHY and THIYAGARAJAN fail to disclose: “upon determining digital extraction is indicated, modifying the first layer such that the first layer and the associated first security element are substantially transparent; and causing to output, via a first graphical user interface (“GUI”), the at least two layered security elements with the modified first layer, such that the second layer and the associated second security element are substantially visible” as recited in independent claims 1, 12, and 20.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2016/0234564: A compositing technique of changing an opacity or transparency of overlay content in a window to permit an onscreen display to be at least partially visible through the overlay content. See [0076].
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT B LEUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-1453. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thurs: 10am-7pm 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, JUNG 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.
/ROBERT B LEUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2494
Prosecution Insights