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 .
Double Patenting
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 obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims 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 Omum, 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 conflicting 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. Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of Patent No. 11,288,246 B1. Although the conflicting is not patentably distinct from each other because since the claims of the Patent No. 11,288,246 B1 contains every element of the claims of the instant application, and as such, anticipate the claims of the instant application. (see table below).
Instant Application claim 1
Patent No. 11,288,246 claim 1
A method for determining a confidence factor for a sensitive type, comprising:
applying a set of matching procedures to cells in a structured data set, the structured data set comprising columns and/or rows;
counting a hit count for the cells, the hit count corresponding to successful matches;
counting a null count for the cells, the null count corresponding to cells having null or invalid values;
counting a mishit count for the cells, the mishit count corresponding to cells that are not null and do not result in a match; and
calculating the confidence factor based on the hit count, the null count, and the mishit count, the confidence factor providing an effective probability that any cell in the structured data set is of the sensitive type.
A method for automated evaluation and encryption of a column of data in a structured data set, said method including:
receiving, at a computer, a structured electronic data set including at least one column of data cells;
receiving, at said computer, a set of electronic identifiers of at least one sensitive data type;
comparing said set of electronic identifiers to said data cells of said at least one column of data cells;
electronically determining a hit count for said at least one column of data cells wherein said hit count corresponds to the number of data cells matching said at least one sensitive data type; electronically determining a null count for said at least one column of data cells wherein said null count corresponds to the number of data cells having null or invalid values;
electronically determining a mishit count for said at least one column of data cells wherein said mishit count corresponds to the number of data cells that are not null and do not match said at least one sensitive data type;
electronically determining a confidence factor based on the hit count, the null count, and the mishit count, wherein said confidence factor is based on the probability that any data cell in said structured data set matches said at least one sensitive data type;
retrieving a predetermined, stored confidence factor threshold from a memory; and
encrypting said at least one column of data cells when said confidence factor is at least equal to said confidence factor threshold
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of Patent No. 12/204514B1. Although the conflicting is not patentably distinct from each other because since the claims of the Patent No. 12,204514 B1 contains every element of the claims of the instant application, and as such, anticipate the claims of the instant application. (see table below).
Instant Application claim 1
Patent No. 12204514 claim 1
A method for determining a confidence factor for a sensitive type, comprising:
applying a set of matching procedures to cells in a structured data set, the structured data set comprising columns and/or rows;
counting a hit count for the cells, the hit count corresponding to successful matches;
counting a null count for the cells, the null count corresponding to cells having null or invalid values;
counting a mishit count for the cells, the mishit count corresponding to cells that are not null and do not result in a match; and
calculating the confidence factor based on the hit count, the null count, and the mishit count, the confidence factor providing an effective probability that any cell in the structured data set is of the sensitive type.
A method for automated evaluation and encryption of a column of data in a structured data set, said method including:
receiving, at a computer, a structured electronic data set including at least one column of data cells, wherein said at least one column of data cells includes a header;
receiving, at said computer, a set of electronic identifiers of at least one sensitive data type;
comparing said set of electronic identifiers to said data cells of said at least one column of data cells;
electronically determining a hit count for said at least one column of data cells wherein said hit count corresponds to the number of data cells matching said at least one sensitive data type; electronically determining a null count for said at least one column of data cells wherein said null count corresponds to the number of data cells having null or invalid values;
electronically determining a mishit count for said at least one column of data cells wherein said mishit count corresponds to the number of data cells that are not null and do not match said at least one sensitive data type;
electronically determining a confidence factor based on the hit count, the null count, and the mishit count, the wherein said confidence factor is based on the probability that any data cell in said structured data set matches said at least one sensitive data type;
when said column header matches said at least one sensitive data type, retrieving a predetermined, stored header weight from a memory; electronically determining a weighted confidence factor based on said confidence factor and said header weight;
retrieving a predetermined, stored weighted confidence factor threshold from said memory; and
encrypting said at least one column of data cells when said weighted confidence factor is at least equal to said weighted confidence factor threshold.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 of Patent No. 11,762,824 B1. Although the conflicting is not patentably distinct from each other because since the claims of the Patent No. 11,762,824 B1 contains every element of the claims of the instant application, and as such, anticipate the claims of the instant application. (see table below).
Instant Application claim 1
Patent No. 11,762,824 claim 1
A method for determining a confidence factor for a sensitive type, comprising:
applying a set of matching procedures to cells in a structured data set, the structured data set comprising columns and/or rows;
counting a hit count for the cells, the hit count corresponding to successful matches;
counting a null count for the cells, the null count corresponding to cells having null or invalid values;
counting a mishit count for the cells, the mishit count corresponding to cells that are not null and do not result in a match; and
calculating the confidence factor based on the hit count, the null count, and the mishit count, the confidence factor providing an effective probability that any cell in the structured data set is of the sensitive type.
A method for automated evaluation and encryption of a column of data in a structured data set, said method including:
receiving, at a computer, a structured electronic data set including at least one column of data cells, wherein said at least one column of data cells includes a header;
receiving, at said computer, a set of electronic identifiers of at least one sensitive data type;
comparing said set of electronic identifiers to said data cells of said at least one column of data cells; electronically determining a hit count for said at least one column of data cells wherein said hit count corresponds to the number of data cells matching said at least one sensitive data type; electronically determining a null count for said at least one column of data cells wherein said null count corresponds to the number of data cells having null or invalid values;
electronically determining a mishit count for said at least one column of data cells wherein said mishit count corresponds to the number of data cells that are not null and do not match said at least one sensitive data type;
electronically determining a confidence factor based on the hit count, the null count, the column header, and the mishit count, wherein said confidence factor is based on the probability that any data cell in said structured data set matches said at least one sensitive data type;
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because:
At step 1:
Claims 1-20 is directed to a “Ascribing a confidence factor for identifying a given column in a structure dataset belonging to a particular sensitive type” and thus directed to a statutory category.
At step 2A, Prong One:
The claims 1, 9 and 17 recites the following limitation directed to an abstract ideas:
“applying a set of matching procedures to cells in a structured data set, the structured data set comprising columns and/or rows” recites a mental process as applying a set of matching procedures to cells in a structured data set, the structured data set comprising columns and/or rows.
“counting a hit count for the cells, the hit count corresponding to successful matches” recites a mental process as counting a hit count for the cells, the hit count corresponding to successful matches.
“counting a null count for the cells, the null count corresponding to cells having null or invalid values” recites the mental process counting a null count for the cells, the null count corresponding to cells having null or invalid values.
“counting a mishit count for the cells, the mishit count corresponding to cells that are not null and do not result in a match” recites the mental process counting a mishit count for the cells, the mishit count corresponding to cells that are not null and do not result in a match.
“calculating the confidence factor based on the hit count, the null count, and the mishit count, the confidence factor providing an effective probability that any cell in the structured data set is of the sensitive type” recites the mental process calculating the confidence factor based on the hit count, the null count, and the mishit count, the confidence factor providing an effective probability that any cell in the structured data set is of the sensitive type.
Claims 2 and 10 recite the following limitation directed to an abstract ideas such as at least one of regular expression matches, algorithmic calculations, or a lookup list and can be mental process.
Claims 3, 11 and 19 recite the following limitation directed to an abstract ideas such as receiving a set of configurable parameters the set of configurable parameters comprising at least one of an expression strength, header match, header weightage,
PNG
media_image1.png
7
4
media_image1.png
Greyscale
header mismatch weightage, null count weightage, mishit count weightage, null count decay rate, mishit decay rate, attribute sensitivity, or a mishit severity versus null parameter. Its mental process.
Claims 4 12 and 20 recite the following limitation directed to an abstract ideas such as receiving user feedback through a remediation workflow to automatically have the user feedback reflected in the confidence factor. It is mental process.
Claims 5 and 13 recite the following limitation directed to an abstract ideas such as the user feedback comprises instructions to modify or ignore the confidence factor for a specific column, columns within a scope, and/or columns with specific data characteristics. Its mental process .
Claims 6 and 14 recite the following limitation directed to an abstract ideas such as comprising calculating a sensitivity affected confidence parameter that decreases the hit count for determining a minimum confidence factor as a scaled sensitivity increases. It is mental process.
Claims 7 and 15 recite the following limitation directed to an abstract ideas such as calculating a header decay factor from an expression comprising the null count, the mishit count, corresponding decay rates, and mishit severity versus null parameter. It is mental process.
Claims 8 and 16 recite the following limitation directed to an abstract ideas such as comprising performing a soft-split of a decayed mishit count and a decayed null count confidence factor in proportion to a mishit severity versus null parameter. It is mental process.
At step 2A, Prong Two:
The claims recite the following additional elements:
That the content management system includes “server” “resource”, which are high level recitation of generic computer component s and functions and represent mere instruction to apply to a computer as in MPEP 2106.05 (f) which does not provide integration into a practical application.
At step 2B
The conclusions for the mere implementation using a generic computer and mere field of use are carried over and to not provide significantly more.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowed. (if rewritten to overcome the rejection under 35 USC § 101, double patenting and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims)
The following is a statement of reason for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to claims 1-20, Pelletier (U.S. Pub. 2003/0110130) discloses a method for determining a confidence factor for a sensitive type, comprising:
applying a set of matching procedures to cells in a structured data set, the structured data set comprising columns and/or rows (i.e. “The database results are checked against the traceroute results. Matches are looked for and the confidence from each matching country code is used to determine a final confidence. After assembling a list of matched country codes, the pair with the highest confidence is returned”(0483)); counting a hit count for the cells, the hit count corresponding to successful matches (i.e., “Determine Confidence--ComputeConfidence is called twice, passing the database results first and the traceroute results on the second call. If neither returned any results, an INDETERMINABLE_CC_ERROR is returned. If only one of the modes was selected (DB_only or TR_only) or only one returned results then the successful mode's weight is pushed to 100 percent and the highest result (plus any ties) is returned”(0499); counting a null count for the cells, the null count corresponding to cells having null or invalid values (0956-0957 discloses run test for IP address and if the having null count or invalid such as “it should be run last and only if absolutely required. Ok = false AddressPassed = false IPPassed = false If Verify == none Ok = true Else if (verify == any) if (addressCountryCode != NULL && addressCountryCode in markets) Address Passed = true”) further, Pelletier disclose confidence based on the matching (i.e. “The database results are checked against the traceroute results. Matches are looked for and the confidence from each matching country code is used to determine a final confidence. After assembling a list of matched country codes, the pair with the highest confidence is returned” (0483)); but Pelletier does not disclose counting a mishit count for the cells, the mishit count corresponding to cells that are not null and do not result in a match; and calculating the confidence factor based on the hit count, the null count, and the mishit count, the confidence factor providing an effective probability that any cell in the structured data set is of the sensitive type.
Citation of Pertinent References
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The patent to Tang et al.. discloses Full Text Query And Search Systems and Method of use, U.S. Pub. No. 2011/0055192 A1.
The patent to Chmil et al. discloses Database Methodology for Searching encrypted data records, U.S. Pat. 10.528.556 B1
The Pub. To Attaluri et al. disclose Efficient Handling of Sort Payload in a Column organized Relational Database, U.S. Pub. 2017/0293469 A1.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNG T VY whose telephone number is (571)272-1954. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8-5.
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, Tony Mahmoudi can be reached on (571)272-4078. 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.
/HUNG T VY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2163 November 27, 2025