Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The claims have been reviewed and considered under the new guidance pursuant to the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (PEG 2019) issued January 7, 2019.
3. This communication is in response to Applicant’s claims filed on 07 November 2024. Claims 1-20 remain pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The Information Disclosure Statements respectfully submitted on 07 November 2024, 05 May 2025, and 19 November 2025 have been considered by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
5. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
6. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gomez et al. (Pub No. 2012/0167225).
Referring to the rejection of claim 1, Gomez et al. discloses an electronic device comprising:
a display; (See Gomez et al., para. 82, i.e., to provide for interaction with a user, implementations may be implemented on a computer having a display device, for displaying information to the user)
memory storing instructions; (See Gomez et al., para. 51, i.e., computer readable storage medium, item 114B may include a first memory which is used to store program code)
and at least one processor comprising a processing circuitry, wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to execute the instructions and to cause the electronic device to: (See Gomez et al., para. 51, i.e., at least one processor, item 114A for executing the instructions from the computer readable storage medium, item 114B)
receive an input requesting to share data of the electronic device; (See Gomez et al., para. 29, i.e., The content inspector request that the user populate fields associated with such information, using the specific personal information associated with the user in question)
analyze shared data selected based on the input; (See Gomez et al., para. 30, i.e., the content inspector perform a scan of one or more computer memories associated with the user, and may execute an algorithm to extract personal information and inspect information sources and select names which are within a certain distance of predetermined words)
determine whether the shared data comprises personal information related to a user of the electronic device; (See Gomez et al., para. 30, i.e., the content inspector may be configured to extract information based on various semantic or syntactic characteristics which have been determined to be associated with personal information)
based on the shared data comprising the personal information, generate hint information related to the personal information so that information corresponding to the personal information is inferable by an external electronic device; (See Gomez et al., para. 26, i.e., personal information may be used to provide a hint to the user, so that the user may be facilitated in remembering or guessing a particular password, based on the hint. In other examples, one or more question/answer pairs may be established in relation to a particular password. Such question/answer pairs often may be referred to as "secret questions" and/or "secret answers.")
replace the personal information with the hint information in the shared data; and share the shared data comprising the hint information. (See Gomez et al., para. 38 and 58, i.e., the provider of the password based security in a particular context may require the user 102 to provide an email address in conjunction with a particular password and associated hint and/or secret question/answer pair. The user may seek to create or update a password, or associated hint or secret question/answer pair, wherein the comparator configure to compare the password related information associated with the creation, updating, or other management of one or more passwords, and thereafter perform a comparison thereof with provided personal information which is stored within one or both of the repositories as a result of previous scanning or other operations used to detect the provided personal information)
Referring to the rejection of claim 2, Gomez et al. discloses wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to cause the electronic device to determine the personal information from at least one piece of information of the shared data. (See Gomez et al., para. 44)
Referring to the rejection of claim 3, Gomez et al. discloses wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to cause the electronic device to: determine feature data from the personal information; and analyze a context of the personal information from the feature data, based on linguistic context analysis. (See Gomez et al., para. 31 and 35)
Referring to the rejection of claim 4, Gomez et al. discloses wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to cause the electronic device to generate hint information having a specific linguistic context from the feature data of the personal information, based on linguistic context analysis. (See Gomez et al., para. 44 and 55)
Referring to the rejection of claim 5, Gomez et al. discloses wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to cause the electronic device to: remove the personal information from the shared data; and add hint information, which has replaced the personal information, to the shared data and reconfigure the shared data. (See Gomez et al., para. 71)
Referring to the rejection of claim 6, Gomez et al. discloses wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to cause the electronic device to transmit the shared data to an external electronic device connected through designated communication to share the shared data of the electronic device with the external electronic device. (See Gomez et al., para. 25 and 48)
Referring to the rejection of claim 7, Gomez et al. discloses wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to cause the electronic device to: receive shared data from an external electronic device; (See Gomez et al., para. 29) analyze the shared data; (See Gomez et al., para. 30 )determine whether the shared data comprises hint information; (See Gomez et al., para. 30) based on the shared data comprising the hint information, generate personal information related to the hint information; (See Gomez et al., para. 26) replace the hint information with the personal information in the shared data; and generate data comprising the personal information. (See Gomez et al., para. 38 and 58)
Referring to the rejection of claim 8, Gomez et al. discloses wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to cause the electronic device to determine the hint information from at least one piece of information of the shared data. (See Gomez et al., para. 44-45)
Referring to the rejection of claim 9, Gomez et al. discloses wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to cause the electronic device to change an item corresponding to the hint information to personal information related to the user of the electronic device in the shared data. (See Gomez et al., para. 77)
Referring to the rejection of claim 10, Gomez et al. discloses wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to cause the electronic device to: determine feature data from the hint information; and analyze a context of the hint information from the feature data, based on linguistic context analysis. (See Gomez et al., para. 44 and 55)
Referring to the rejection of claim 11, Gomez et al. discloses wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to cause the electronic device to determine whether there is a function not supported by the electronic device, based on the hint information. (See Gomez et al., para. 60)
Referring to the rejection of claim 12, Gomez et al. discloses wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to cause the electronic device to: based on there being an unsupported function, determine replaceable function information and personal information of the unsupported function, based on the hint information; and change the personal information of the unsupported function, based on the replaceable function information. (See Gomez et al., para. 61)
Referring to the rejection of claim 13, Gomez et al. discloses wherein at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, is configured to cause the electronic device to store the data but not the shared data. (See Gomez et al., para. 57)
Referring to the rejection of claim 14, Gomez et al. discloses a method of operating an electronic device, the method comprising:
receiving an input requesting to share data of the electronic device; (See Gomez et al., para. 29, i.e., The content inspector request that the user populate fields associated with such information, using the specific personal information associated with the user in question)
analyzing shared data selected based on the input; (See Gomez et al., para. 30, i.e., the content inspector perform a scan of one or more computer memories associated with the user, and may execute an algorithm to extract personal information and inspect information sources and select names which are within a certain distance of predetermined words)
determining whether the shared data comprises personal information related to a user of the electronic device; (See Gomez et al., para. 30, i.e., the content inspector may be configured to extract information based on various semantic or syntactic characteristics which have been determined to be associated with personal information)
based on the shared data comprising the personal information, generating hint information related to the personal information so that information corresponding to the personal information is inferable by an external electronic device; (See Gomez et al., para. 26, i.e., personal information may be used to provide a hint to the user, so that the user may be facilitated in remembering or guessing a particular password, based on the hint. In other examples, one or more question/answer pairs may be established in relation to a particular password. Such question/answer pairs often may be referred to as "secret questions" and/or "secret answers.")
replacing the personal information with the hint information in the shared data; and sharing the shared data comprising the hint information. (See Gomez et al., para. 38 and 58, i.e., the provider of the password based security in a particular context may require the user 102 to provide an email address in conjunction with a particular password and associated hint and/or secret question/answer pair. The user may seek to create or update a password, or associated hint or secret question/answer pair, wherein the comparator configure to compare the password related information associated with the creation, updating, or other management of one or more passwords, and thereafter perform a comparison thereof with provided personal information which is stored within one or both of the repositories as a result of previous scanning or other operations used to detect the provided personal information)
Referring to the rejection of claim 15, Gomez et al. discloses wherein the generating of the hint information comprises: determining feature data from the personal information; and generating hint information having a specific linguistic context from the feature data, based on linguistic context analysis. (See Gomez et al., para. 44 and 55)
Referring to the rejection of claim 16, Gomez et al. discloses wherein the replacing comprises: removing the personal information from the shared data; and adding hint information, which has replaced the personal information, to the shared data and reconfiguring the shared data. (See Gomez et al., para. 71)
Referring to the rejection of claim 17, Gomez et al. discloses further comprising: receiving shared data from an external electronic device; (See Gomez et al., para. 29) analyzing the shared data; (See Gomez et al., para. 30) determining whether the shared data comprises hint information; (See Gomez et al., para. 30) based on the shared data comprising the hint information, generating personal information related to the hint information; (See Gomez et al., para. 26) replacing the hint information with the personal information in the shared data; and generating data comprising the personal information. (See Gomez et al., para. 38 and 58)
Referring to the rejection of claim 18, Gomez et al. discloses comprising: determining the hint information from at least one piece of information of the shared data; determining feature data from the hint information; analyzing a context of the hint information from the feature data, based on linguistic context analysis; and changing an item corresponding to the hint information to personal information related to the user of the electronic device in the shared data. (See Gomez et al., para. 77)
Referring to the rejection of claim 19, Gomez et al. discloses comprising: determining whether there is a function not supported by the electronic device, based on the hint information. based on there being an unsupported function, determining replaceable function information and personal information of the unsupported function, based on the hint information; and changing the personal information of the unsupported function, based on the replaceable function information. (See Gomez et al., para. 61)
Referring to the rejection of claim 20, Gomez et al. discloses a non-transitory computer-readable recording medium configured to store instructions which, when executed by at least one processor, comprising processing circuitry, individually and/or collectively, of an electronic device, causes the electronic device to perform operations comprising: (See Gomez et al., para. 51, i.e., computer readable storage medium, item 114B may include a first memory which is used to store program code and at least one processor, item 114A for executing the instructions from the computer readable storage medium, item 114B)
receiving an input requesting to share data of the electronic device; (See Gomez et al., para. 29, i.e., The content inspector request that the user populate fields associated with such information, using the specific personal information associated with the user in question)
analyzing shared data selected based on the input; (See Gomez et al., para. 30, i.e., the content inspector perform a scan of one or more computer memories associated with the user, and may execute an algorithm to extract personal information and inspect information sources and select names which are within a certain distance of predetermined words)
determining whether the shared data comprises personal information related to a user of the electronic device; (See Gomez et al., para. 30, i.e., the content inspector may be configured to extract information based on various semantic or syntactic characteristics which have been determined to be associated with personal information)
based on the shared data comprising the personal information, generating hint information related to the personal information so that information corresponding to the personal information is inferable by an external electronic device; (See Gomez et al., para. 26, i.e., personal information may be used to provide a hint to the user, so that the user may be facilitated in remembering or guessing a particular password, based on the hint. In other examples, one or more question/answer pairs may be established in relation to a particular password. Such question/answer pairs often may be referred to as "secret questions" and/or "secret answers.")
replacing the personal information with the hint information in the shared data; and sharing the shared data comprising the hint information. (See Gomez et al., para. 38 and 58, i.e., the provider of the password based security in a particular context may require the user 102 to provide an email address in conjunction with a particular password and associated hint and/or secret question/answer pair. The user may seek to create or update a password, or associated hint or secret question/answer pair, wherein the comparator configure to compare the password related information associated with the creation, updating, or other management of one or more passwords, and thereafter perform a comparison thereof with provided personal information which is stored within one or both of the repositories as a result of previous scanning or other operations used to detect the provided personal information)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY D FIELDS whose telephone number is (571)272-3871. The examiner can normally be reached IFP M-F 8am-4:30pm.
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, SHEWAYE GELAGAY can be reached at (571)272-4219. 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.
/COURTNEY D FIELDS/Examiner, Art Unit 2436 April 3, 2026
/SHEWAYE GELAGAY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2436
Prosecution Insights