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 communication filed on June 30, 2026 in response to the first office action on merit.
Remarks
Pending claims for reconsideration are claims 1-20. Applicant has
Amended claims 1, 13, and 18.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on June 30, 2026 was filed after the mailing date of the application 18/912872 on October 11, 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
In response to argument- Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims filed on June 30, 2026 have been considered but they are deemed moot in view of the new grounds of rejection (see 103 rejections 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 of this title, 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No.: US 2024/0214385 Al / or “Wang” hereinafter [provided by the applicant]) in view of Shashank Mohan Jain (U.S. Patent Publication No.: US 11,748,441 B1 / or “Jain” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses “A method comprising” (Abstract: discloses methods, systems and computer storage medium for distribution of digital content):
“forming, by a processing device, a query for processing by a database based, at least in part, on a probabilistic data structure [estimating a frequency of elements in a dataset]” (Fig. 3: Step 310-320; and Para 0095: a query is received; and Para 0045: disclose probabilistic data structure can be related to digital component determined with Bloom filter or cuckoo filter);
“receiving, by the processing device, a probabilistic result from the database to the query, the query involving a first sketch (i.e., sketch is defined as using of Bloom filter (see applicant specification [0031]) from a first entity and a second sketch from a second entity maintained in a shared environment” (Fig. 3: Step 310; and Para 0090:a request with a probabilistic data structure is received; and Para 0044: The request can include membership probabilistic data structure determined using Bloom filter i.e., a “first sketch” and Para 0013, 0016 and 0066: a probabilistic data structure can be related to digital component determined with Bloom filter or cuckoo filter i.e., a “second sketch” and Fig. 3: Step 330 and Para 0100);
“resolving, by the processing device, confidential information associated with the first entity in a first protected environment based on a mapping of the confidential information to the first sketch” (Para 0085, the query is resolved);
“exposing, by the processing device, the probabilistic result and the confidential information to the first entity” (Para 0085-0086: the query validated based on the probabilistic data structures);
“configuring, by the processing device, activation data by the first entity, the activation data usable by the second entity to resolve one or more members associated with confidential information from the second entity in a second protected environment” (Para 0087: the trusted server select the digital components);
“and communicating, by the processing device, the activation data to control digital content output by the second entity to the one or more members associated with the confidential information by the second entity” (Para 0088: provides the selected digital components to the client).
But Wang fails to specially disclose a probabilistic data structure that estimates a frequency of elements in a dataset.
However, Jain discloses a probabilistic data structure that estimates the frequency of elements in a dataset (Jain, Col 7: lines 2-13, utilized probabilistic data structure Count-Min sketch that estimates the frequency of events in a stream of data).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the teachings of probabilistic data structure that serve as a frequency table (or sketch) of events in a stream of data of Jain to the system of Wang to create a system where the sketch can be quired for the frequency of a particular event in multitude of events and the ordinary person skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine to return an estimate of this frequency using the sketch (Jain, Col 7: lines 13-17).
Regarding claim 2, in view of claim 1, Wang discloses “wherein the first sketch and the second sketch employ a probabilistic data structure” (Fig. 3: Step 310; and Para 0090:a request with a probabilistic data structure is received; and Para 0044: The request can include membership probabilistic data structure determined using Bloom filter i.e., a “first sketch” and Para 0013, 0016 and 0066: a probabilistic data structure can be related to digital component determined with Bloom filter or cuckoo filter i.e., a “second sketch” and Fig. 3: Step 330 and Para 0100).
Regarding claim 3, in view of claim 1, Wang discloses “wherein the first protected environment is inaccessible by the second entity and the second protected environment is inaccessible by the first entity” (Fig. 1: Trust Boundary; and Para 0043).
Regarding claim 4, in view of claim 1, Wang discloses “wherein the first and second protected environments are configured as a sandbox, container, isolated execution environment, or emulator” (Fig. 1: Trust Boundary; and Para 0043).
Regarding claim 5, in view of claim 1, Wang discloses “wherein the digital content is an email, a webpage, or an electronic message” (Para 0037, Website).
Regarding claim 6, in view of claim 1, Wang discloses “wherein the sketch, as stored in the database within the protected environment, does not support direct identification of the confidential information via the database” (Fig. 1: Trust Boundary; and Para 0043; and Para 0039).
Regarding claim 7, in view of claim 1, Wang discloses “wherein the sketch is stored independent of row-level data having the confidential information” (Para 0025).
Regarding claim 8, in view of claim 1, Wang discloses “wherein the mapping is configured to resolve the sketch as included in the probabilistic result to the confidential information” (Para 0014, and Para 0061).
Regarding claim 9, in view of claim 1, Wang discloses “wherein the confidential information is a membership identifier (ID) of a respective entity associated with an attribute for an identity key of a dataset record” (Para 0057: group identifier).
Regarding claim 10, in view of claim 1, Wang discloses “wherein the database includes one or more tables, each said table having one or more columns that are represented, respectively, using a respective said sketch that corresponds to a respective identity key” (Para 0066: one more column with values for one more respective probabilistic data structures for the digital content).
Regarding claim 11, in view of claim 1, Wang discloses “wherein the first entity is associated with a first service provider system and the second entity is associated with a second service provider system” (Fig. 1; and Para 0026).
Regarding claim 12, in view of claim 1, Wang discloses “wherein the second entity is configured to control digital content output of digital content received from the first entity” (Para 0026: the trusted server controls digital content).
Regarding claim 13, Wang discloses “A collaboration system comprising: a processing device; and a computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that, responsive to execution by the processing device, causes the processing device to perform operations including” (Abstract: discloses methods, systems and computer storage medium for distribution of digital content):
“receiving intake data from an entity, the intake data referencing a network source via which a dataset is accessible and how the dataset is to be accessed” (Fig. 3: Step 310-320; and Para 0095: a query is received);
“collecting the dataset within a protected environment, the dataset including a dataset record including an identity key, a respective attribute, and confidential information” (Fig. 2A: Step 212; Para 0056);
“generating a sketch as a probabilistic data structure based on the identity key and the attribute and independent of the confidential information, the probabilistic data structure [estimating a number of distinct elements in the dataset]” (Fig. 2A: Step 214; Para 0058: utilized probabilistic data structure);
“forming a mapping of the confidential information to the sketch, the mapping and the confidential information maintained within the protected environment” (Fig. 2A: Step 222; Para 0065);
“and communicating the sketch to be stored in a database implemented in a shared environment that is accessible by a plurality of said entities, the database supporting a probabilistic result to a query operation” (Fig. 2A: Step 224; Para 0065, and 0085).
But Wang fails to specially disclose a probabilistic data structure that estimates number of distinct elements in the dataset.
However, Jain discloses a probabilistic data structure that estimates number of distinct elements in the dataset (Jain, Col 5: lines 65-67 to Col 6: lines 1-9, utilized probabilistic data structure HypeLogLog sketch that estimates the number of distinct elements in a stream of data).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the teachings of probabilistic data structure that estimates number of distinct elements in the dataset of Jain to the system of Wang to create a system where the probabilistic data structure HypeLogLog provides cardinality estimation and the ordinary person skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine to approximating the number of unique items in a set (Jain, Col 6: lines 22-23).
Regarding claim 14, in view of claim 13, Wang discloses “wherein the network source is specified using a network address and the how the dataset is to be accessed specifies when access is to occur and one or more login credentials” (Para 0057: access based on login data, device configuration data etc.).
Regarding claim 15, in view of claim 13, Wang discloses “wherein the probabilistic data structure is a Bloom filter, Theta Sketch, or MinHash” (Para 0044: The request can include membership probabilistic data structure determined using Bloom filter).
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 is directed to a system corresponding to the method recited in claim 4. Claim 16 is similar in scope to claim 4, and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 17, in view of claim 13, Wang discloses “further comprising configuring a dataset manager module to access the dataset via the network source based on how the dataset is to be accessed, the dataset manager module executable within the protected environment” (Para 0026: the trusted server controls digital content).
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Rhodes et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No.: US 8,819,038 B1 / or “Rhodes” hereinafter).
Regarding claim 18, Wang discloses “One or more computer-readable storage media storing instructions that, responsive to execution by a processing device, causes the processing device to perform operations including” (Abstract: discloses methods, systems and computer storage medium for distribution of digital content):
“receiving, by a processing device, a dataset record that includes an identity key, a respective attribute, and confidential information having a membership identifier (ID)” (Fig. 3: Step 310-320; and Para 0095: a query is received);
“generating, by the processing device, a sketch as a probabilistic data structure based on the identity key and the attribute within a protected environment, the sketch generated independent of the confidential information [and by approximating one or more distinct counting and set operations using the probabilistic data structure]” (Fig. 2A: Step 212-214; Para 0056-0058);
“filtering, by the processing device, the confidential information from the dataset record within the protected environment” (Para 0036);
“forming, by the processing device, a mapping of the filtered confidential information to the sketch, the mapping maintained in the protected environment” (Fig. 2A: Step 222; Para 0065);
“and communicating, by the processing device, the sketch to be stored in a database implemented in a shared environment that is accessible by a plurality of entities, the database supporting a probabilistic result to a query operation” (Fig. 2A: Step 224; Para 0065, and 0085).
But Wang fails to specially disclose a probabilistic data structure that approximates one or more distinct counting and set operations.
However, Rhodes discloses probabilistic data structure that approximates one or more distinct counting and set operations (Rhodes, Abstract: utilized probabilistic data structure theta sketch that approximates one or more distinct counting and set operations).
It would have been obvious to an ordinary person skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ the teachings of probabilistic data structure that approximates one or more distinct counting and set operations of Rhodes to the system of Wang to create a system where the a resulting theta sketch “…is a product of the desired set operation on the operated theta sketches…” (Rhodes, Col 14: lines 11-13) and the ordinary person skilled in the art would have been motivated to combine to “…improving the speed and accuracy of analytics on big data using theta sketches, by converting fixed-size sketches to theta sketches, and by performing set operations on sketches” (Rhodes, Abstract).
Regarding claim 19, in view of claim 18, Wang discloses “wherein the protected environment is configured as a sandbox, container, isolated execution environment, or emulator” (Fig. 1: Trust Boundary; and Para 0043).
Regarding claim 20, in view of claim 18, Wang discloses “wherein the probabilistic data structure is a Bloom filter, Theta Sketch, or MinHash” (Para 0044: The request can include membership probabilistic data structure determined using Bloom filter).
Relevant Prior Arts
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Heddes et al. (US 20250258817 A1) discloses “…the popular Bloom Filter is widely used for membership testing, while the Count-Min sketch is commonly used for frequency estimation. Both of these methods are examples of sketches. Besides their supported queries, various factors differentiate sketching methods, including sketch size, sketch initialization time, update time, and inference time (further details are provided in the following sections). These characteristics serve as catalysts for diverse research avenues and are crucial to consider when utilizing or developing a sketching method that is tailored to a specific use case” (Para 0048).
Meng et al. (US 20200286011 A1) discloses:
[0044] Embodiments may overcome the first challenge by relying on a count-min sketch as opposed to keeping track of the exact counts of samples generated for each QCS combination. A count-min sketch is a memory-efficient data structure that uses hashing to approximate the frequency of events in a data stream. Count-min sketches may overestimate the true frequency of an event, but they will never underestimate the counts.
Conclusion
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 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 date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDULLAH ALMAMUN whose telephone number is (571) 270-3392. The examiner can normally be reached on 8 AM - 5 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.
/ABDULLAH ALMAMUN/Examiner, Art Unit 2431
/JEREMIAH L AVERY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2431
Prosecution Insights