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 .
Priority
Applicant's claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on May 4, 2026, was filed after the mailing date of the non-final rejection on January 7, 2026. 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 Amendment
Applicant’s Amendment, filed May 4, 2026, has been fully considered and entered. Accordingly, Claims 1-20 are pending in this application. Claims 1 and 13 are Indepednent Claims and have been amended.
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, 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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-11, 13-16, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshikawa (PG Pub. No. 2018/0190386 A1) and further in view of King (PG Pub. No. 2009/0094193 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Yoshikawa discloses a computer-implemented method, comprising:
storing linked first and second data objects associated with corresponding first and second pluralities of properties (see Yoshikawa, paragraph [0027], where Fig. 11 shows an example in which a number of objects are interconnected through links on their interfaces, allowing a user to explore relevant information); and
based on a user limitation, automatically deriving a conclusion object comprising a third plurality of properties derived from a subset of one or more of the first or second pluralities of properties, wherein the conclusion object comprises metadata associated with the third plurality of properties (see Yoshikawa, paragraph [0007], for an analysis module configured to display identification of a data set for which an analysis was made, and an analysis summary or figure that represents a result of the analysis).
Yoshikawa does not disclose:
wherein the metadata indicates a first subset of properties of a third plurality of properties is available to users associated with a first access level but not a second access level, and wherein the metadata indicates a second subset of properties of the third plurality of properties is available to users associated with the second access level;
receiving a request to access the conclusion object, the request comprises a user credential;
determining the user credential is associated with the second access level;
based on the user credential and the metadata, generating a response object comprising the second subset of the third plurality of properties; and
transmitting the response object.
King discloses:
wherein the metadata indicates a first subset of properties of a third plurality of properties is available to users associated with a first access level but not a second access level, and wherein the metadata indicates a second subset of properties of the third plurality of properties is available to users associated with the second access level (see King, paragraph [0027], where in the employee table, an employee would be represented by a particular row that includes a ‘salary’ column; at the entity level, an attribute-level security policy may be defined as follows: only employees belonging to the Human Resources department are allowed to view the salary attribute of other employees … If the user has permissions to access at least some data in the employee table, the database server retrieves the set of data that is requested in the received query. Then, according to the techniques described herein, the database server or a component thereof evaluates the above security policy for each row in the retrieved set of rows. If the user is associated with the user group identified by group ID “100”, then the set of rows is returned to the client for presenting to the user; otherwise, the database server or the component thereof replaces with security-NULL values the data values in the “salary” column of the returned set of rows, and the resulting set of rows is then sent back to the client);
receiving a request to access the conclusion object (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises receiving from a client a request for data that is stored at least in part in a particular column of a table in a database management by the database server), wherein the request comprises a user credential (see King, Claim 3, wherein the permissions for accessing the one or more data values are associated with one or more roles that are assigned to one or more users of the database);
determining the user credential is associated with the second access level (see King, paragraph [0027], where in the employee table, an employee would be represented by a particular row that includes a ‘salary’ column; at the entity level, an attribute-level security policy may be defined as follows: only employees belonging to the Human Resources department are allowed to view the salary attribute of other employees … If the user has permissions to access at least some data in the employee table, the database server retrieves the set of data that is requested in the received query. Then, according to the techniques described herein, the database server or a component thereof evaluates the above security policy for each row in the retrieved set of rows. If the user is associated with the user group identified by group ID “100”, then the set of rows is returned to the client for presenting to the user; otherwise, the database server or the component thereof replaces with security-NULL values the data values in the “salary” column of the returned set of rows, and the resulting set of rows is then sent back to the client);
based on the user credential and the metadata, generating a response object comprising a subset of the third plurality of properties (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises processing the request and retrieving a set of rows from the database, wherein each row of the set of rows includes the particular column of the table and after retrieving the set of rows and before sending a result set of rows to the client, at the database server modifying the set of rows into the result set of rows by applying the security policy to said each row of the set of rows, wherein applying the security policy to said each row comprises determining whether the security policy is satisfied for the particular column of said each row; see also paragraph [0027], where in the employee table, an employee would be represented by a particular row that includes a ‘salary’ column; at the entity level, an attribute-level security policy may be defined as follows: only employees belonging to the Human Resources department are allowed to view the salary attribute of other employees … If the user has permissions to access at least some data in the employee table, the database server retrieves the set of data that is requested in the received query. Then, according to the techniques described herein, the database server or a component thereof evaluates the above security policy for each row in the retrieved set of rows. If the user is associated with the user group identified by group ID “100”, then the set of rows is returned to the client for presenting to the user; otherwise, the database server or the component thereof replaces with security-NULL values the data values in the “salary” column of the returned set of rows, and the resulting set of rows is then sent back to the client); and
transmitting the response object (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises after modifying the set of rows into the result set of rows, at the database server returning the result set of rows to the client).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Yoshikawa with King for the benefit of enforcing column or attribute level security (see King, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 2, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein the user limitation comprises a property type, and wherein said automatically deriving is based on the user limitation including the property type (see Yoshikawa, paragraph [0064], where objects representing physical samples: sample [‘sample name’, <type>], e.g., sample [‘nearest neighbor strand 4’, ‘DNA’] encapsulates information involving that sample such as materials involved in its creation, dates, an experimental results from production experience involved, attributes of the sample, such as its volume, pH, concentration, and its physical location in the lab).
Regarding Claim 3, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the method of Claim 1, further comprising receiving a second user limitation associated with at least one of the first or second pluralities of properties, wherein said automatically deriving is further based on the second user limitation (see Yoshikawa, paragraph [0091], where the recommended value for a parameter is not a fixed value but rather a formula or function that takes input from another experiment or another portion of the same experiment; see also paragraph [0035], where the system can include a variety of laboratory instruments that are connected or interconnected with one or more computers [it is the position of the Examiner that obtaining information from another experiment constitutes a second user limitation]).
Regarding Claim 4, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the method of Claim 3, wherein the second user limitation comprises a property type (see Yoshikawa, paragraph [0064], where objects representing physical samples: sample [‘sample name’, <type>], e.g., sample [‘nearest neighbor strand 4’, ‘DNA’] encapsulates information involving that sample such as materials involved in its creation, dates, an experimental results from production experience involved, attributes of the sample, such as its volume, pH, concentration, and its physical location in the lab).
Regarding Claim 5, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the method of Claim 1, further comprising receiving, via one or more sensors, sensor data, wherein the first plurality of properties are based, at least in part, on the sensor data (see Yoshikawa, paragraph [0067], where linkage of the generated instruction with the experiment parameters, physical sample inputs, environmental sensors, and other contextual information).
Regarding Claim 7, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein:
Yoshikawa does not disclose the response object comprises second metadata associated with the subset of the third plurality of properties, and wherein the second metadata comprises a portion of the metadata. King discloses the response object comprises second metadata associated with the subset of the third plurality of properties, and wherein the second metadata comprises a portion of the metadata (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises processing the request and retrieving a set of rows from the database, wherein each row of the set of rows includes the particular column of the table and after retrieving the set of rows and before sending a result set of rows to the client, at the database server modifying the set of rows into the result set of rows by applying the security policy to said each row of the set of rows, wherein applying the security policy to said each row comprises determining whether the security policy is satisfied for the particular column of said each row).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Yoshikawa with King for the benefit of enforcing column or attribute level security (see King, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 8, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the method of Claim 7, further comprising:
Yoshikawa does not disclose based on the user credential, selecting the portion of the metadata to generate the second metadata. King discloses based on the user credential, selecting the portion of the metadata to generate the second metadata (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises processing the request and retrieving a set of rows from the database, wherein each row of the set of rows includes the particular column of the table and after retrieving the set of rows and before sending a result set of rows to the client, at the database server modifying the set of rows into the result set of rows by applying the security policy to said each row of the set of rows, wherein applying the security policy to said each row comprises determining whether the security policy is satisfied for the particular column of said each row).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Yoshikawa with King for the benefit of enforcing column or attribute level security (see King, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 9, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the method of Claim 1, further comprising:
Yoshikawa does not disclose:
receiving a second request to access the conclusion object, the second request comprises a second user credential;
based on the second user credential generating a second response object comprises a second subset of the third plurality of properties; and
transmitting the second response object.
King discloses:
receiving a second request to access the conclusion object (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises receiving from a client a request for data that is stored at least in part in a particular column of a table in a database management by the database server), wherein the second request comprises a second user credential (see King, Claim 3, wherein the permissions for accessing the one or more data values are associated with one or more roles that are assigned to one or more users of the database);
based on the second user credential generating a second response object comprises a second subset of the third plurality of properties (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises processing the request and retrieving a set of rows from the database, wherein each row of the set of rows includes the particular column of the table and after retrieving the set of rows and before sending a result set of rows to the client, at the database server modifying the set of rows into the result set of rows by applying the security policy to said each row of the set of rows, wherein applying the security policy to said each row comprises determining whether the security policy is satisfied for the particular column of said each row); and
transmitting the second response object (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises after modifying the set of rows into the result set of rows, at the database server returning the result set of rows to the client).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Yoshikawa with King for the benefit of enforcing column or attribute level security (see King, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 10, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the method of Claim 9, wherein:
Yoshikawa does not disclose the second user credential is different from the user credential, and wherein the second subset is different from the subset. King discloses the second user credential is different from the user credential, and wherein the second subset is different from the subset (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises replacing, in the result set of rows, a second data value in the second column of said each row with the security-NULL value when the second security policy is not satisfied for the second column of each said row).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Yoshikawa with King for the benefit of enforcing column or attribute level security (see King, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 11, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the method of Claim 9, wherein:
Yoshikawa does not disclose the second response object comprises an indication a second user has been prevented from accessing the conclusion object. King discloses the second response object comprises an indication a second user has been prevented from accessing the conclusion object (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises replacing, in the result set of rows, a second data value in the second column of said each row with the security-NULL value when the second security policy is not satisfied for the second column of each said row).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Yoshikawa with King for the benefit of enforcing column or attribute level security (see King, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 13, Yoshikawa discloses a computing system comprising:
one or more computer-readable storage mediums storing program instructions; and
one or more processors configured to execute the program instructions to cause the computing system to perform a method comprising:
storing linked first and second data objects associated with corresponding first and second pluralities of properties (see Yoshikawa, paragraph [0027], where Fig. 11 shows an example in which a number of objects are interconnected through links on their interfaces, allowing a user to explore relevant information); and
based on a user limitation, automatically deriving a conclusion object comprising a third plurality of properties derived from a subset of one or more of the first or second pluralities of properties, wherein the conclusion object comprises metadata associated with the third plurality of properties (see Yoshikawa, paragraph [0007], for an analysis module configured to display identification of a data set for which an analysis was made, and an analysis summary or figure that represents a result of the analysis).
Yoshikawa does not disclose:
wherein the metadata indicates a first subset of properties of a third plurality of properties is available to users associated with a first access level but not a second access level, and wherein the metadata indicates a second subset of properties of the third plurality of properties is available to users associated with the second access level;
receiving a request to access the conclusion object, the request comprises a user credential;
determining the user credential is associated with the second access level;
based on the user credential and the metadata, generating a response object comprising the second subset of the third plurality of properties; and
transmitting the response object.
King discloses:
wherein the metadata indicates a first subset of properties of a third plurality of properties is available to users associated with a first access level but not a second access level, and wherein the metadata indicates a second subset of properties of the third plurality of properties is available to users associated with the second access level (see King, paragraph [0027], where in the employee table, an employee would be represented by a particular row that includes a ‘salary’ column; at the entity level, an attribute-level security policy may be defined as follows: only employees belonging to the Human Resources department are allowed to view the salary attribute of other employees … If the user has permissions to access at least some data in the employee table, the database server retrieves the set of data that is requested in the received query. Then, according to the techniques described herein, the database server or a component thereof evaluates the above security policy for each row in the retrieved set of rows. If the user is associated with the user group identified by group ID “100”, then the set of rows is returned to the client for presenting to the user; otherwise, the database server or the component thereof replaces with security-NULL values the data values in the “salary” column of the returned set of rows, and the resulting set of rows is then sent back to the client);
receiving a request to access the conclusion object (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises receiving from a client a request for data that is stored at least in part in a particular column of a table in a database management by the database server), wherein the request comprises a user credential (see King, Claim 3, wherein the permissions for accessing the one or more data values are associated with one or more roles that are assigned to one or more users of the database);
determining the user credential is associated with the second access level (see King, paragraph [0027], where in the employee table, an employee would be represented by a particular row that includes a ‘salary’ column; at the entity level, an attribute-level security policy may be defined as follows: only employees belonging to the Human Resources department are allowed to view the salary attribute of other employees … If the user has permissions to access at least some data in the employee table, the database server retrieves the set of data that is requested in the received query. Then, according to the techniques described herein, the database server or a component thereof evaluates the above security policy for each row in the retrieved set of rows. If the user is associated with the user group identified by group ID “100”, then the set of rows is returned to the client for presenting to the user; otherwise, the database server or the component thereof replaces with security-NULL values the data values in the “salary” column of the returned set of rows, and the resulting set of rows is then sent back to the client);
based on the user credential and the metadata, generating a response object comprising a subset of the third plurality of properties (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises processing the request and retrieving a set of rows from the database, wherein each row of the set of rows includes the particular column of the table and after retrieving the set of rows and before sending a result set of rows to the client, at the database server modifying the set of rows into the result set of rows by applying the security policy to said each row of the set of rows, wherein applying the security policy to said each row comprises determining whether the security policy is satisfied for the particular column of said each row; see also paragraph [0027], where in the employee table, an employee would be represented by a particular row that includes a ‘salary’ column; at the entity level, an attribute-level security policy may be defined as follows: only employees belonging to the Human Resources department are allowed to view the salary attribute of other employees … If the user has permissions to access at least some data in the employee table, the database server retrieves the set of data that is requested in the received query. Then, according to the techniques described herein, the database server or a component thereof evaluates the above security policy for each row in the retrieved set of rows. If the user is associated with the user group identified by group ID “100”, then the set of rows is returned to the client for presenting to the user; otherwise, the database server or the component thereof replaces with security-NULL values the data values in the “salary” column of the returned set of rows, and the resulting set of rows is then sent back to the client); and
transmitting the response object (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises after modifying the set of rows into the result set of rows, at the database server returning the result set of rows to the client).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Yoshikawa with King for the benefit of enforcing column or attribute level security (see King, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 14, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the computing system of Claim 13, further comprising:
Yoshikawa does not disclose:
receiving a second request to access the conclusion object, the second request comprises a second user credential;
based on the second user credential generating a second response object comprises a second subset of the third plurality of properties; and
transmitting the second response object.
King discloses:
receiving a second request to access the conclusion object (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises receiving from a client a request for data that is stored at least in part in a particular column of a table in a database management by the database server), wherein the second request comprises a second user credential (see King, Claim 3, wherein the permissions for accessing the one or more data values are associated with one or more roles that are assigned to one or more users of the database);
based on the second user credential generating a second response object comprises a second subset of the third plurality of properties (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises processing the request and retrieving a set of rows from the database, wherein each row of the set of rows includes the particular column of the table and after retrieving the set of rows and before sending a result set of rows to the client, at the database server modifying the set of rows into the result set of rows by applying the security policy to said each row of the set of rows, wherein applying the security policy to said each row comprises determining whether the security policy is satisfied for the particular column of said each row); and
transmitting the second response object (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises after modifying the set of rows into the result set of rows, at the database server returning the result set of rows to the client).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Yoshikawa with King for the benefit of enforcing column or attribute level security (see King, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 15, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the computing system of Claim 14, wherein:
Yoshikawa does not disclose the second user credential is different from the user credential, and wherein the second subset is different from the subset. King discloses the second user credential is different from the user credential, and wherein the second subset is different from the subset (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises replacing, in the result set of rows, a second data value in the second column of said each row with the security-NULL value when the second security policy is not satisfied for the second column of each said row).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Yoshikawa with King for the benefit of enforcing column or attribute level security (see King, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 16, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the computing system of Claim 14, wherein:
Yoshikawa does not disclose the second response object comprises an indication a second user has been prevented from accessing the conclusion object. King discloses the second response object comprises an indication a second user has been prevented from accessing the conclusion object (see King, Claim 1, where the computer-implemented method comprises replacing, in the result set of rows, a second data value in the second column of said each row with the security-NULL value when the second security policy is not satisfied for the second column of each said row).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Yoshikawa with King for the benefit of enforcing column or attribute level security (see King, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 19, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the computing system of Claim 13, wherein the user limitation comprises a property type, and wherein said automatically deriving is based on the user limitation including the property type (see Yoshikawa, paragraph [0064], where objects representing physical samples: sample [‘sample name’, <type>], e.g., sample [‘nearest neighbor strand 4’, ‘DNA’] encapsulates information involving that sample such as materials involved in its creation, dates, an experimental results from production experience involved, attributes of the sample, such as its volume, pH, concentration, and its physical location in the lab).
Regarding Claim 20, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the computing system of Claim 13, further comprising receiving, via one or more sensors, sensor data, wherein the first plurality of properties are based, at least in part, on the sensor data (see Yoshikawa, paragraph [0067], where linkage of the generated instruction with the experiment parameters, physical sample inputs, environmental sensors, and other contextual information).
Claims 6 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshikawa and King as applied to Claims 1-5, 7-11, 13-16, 19, and 20 above, and further in view of Szeto (PG Pub. No. 2019/0286832 A1).
Regarding Claim 6, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein:
Yoshikawa does not disclose the user credential comprises a network identifier associated with a network from which the request is received. Szeto discloses the user credential comprises a network identifier associated with a network from which the request is received (see Szeto, paragraph [0060], where the IP whitelisting 555 may include a list of trusted IP addresses or IP ranges from which user devices 505 may access the virtual private cloud 515; in some cases, an IP address may be added to the trusted list based on an authentication procedure for a remote user device 505).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Yoshikawa with Szeto for the benefit of providing secure access to a to separate environments for different tenants (see Szeto, Abstract).
Regarding Claim 18, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the computing system of Claim 13, wherein:
Yoshikawa does not disclose the user credential comprises a network identifier associated with a network from which the request is received. Szeto discloses the user credential comprises a network identifier associated with a network from which the request is received (see Szeto, paragraph [0060], where the IP whitelisting 555 may include a list of trusted IP addresses or IP ranges from which user devices 505 may access the virtual private cloud 515; in some cases, an IP address may be added to the trusted list based on an authentication procedure for a remote user device 505).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Yoshikawa with Szeto for the benefit of providing secure access to a to separate environments for different tenants (see Szeto, Abstract).
Claims 12 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yoshikawa and King as applied to Claims 1-5, 7-11, 13-16, 19, and 20 above, and further in view of Weaver (PG Pub. No. 2019/0361882 A1).
Regarding Claim 12, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the method of Claim 1, wherein:
Yoshikawa does not disclose the metadata indicates at least a portion of the third plurality of properties have been generated by an author, wherein the user credential is associated with the author, and wherein the subset of the third plurality of properties comprises the at least the portion of the third plurality of properties generated by the author. Weaver discloses the metadata indicates at least a portion of the third plurality of properties have been generated by an author, wherein the user credential is associated with the author, and wherein the subset of the third plurality of properties comprises the at least the portion of the third plurality of properties generated by the author (see Weaver, paragraph [0271], where a recursive hierarchy may allow an operator to grant a user of the database 100 access only to data created by the user).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Yoshikawa with Weaver for the benefit of allowing user access to data created by the user (see Weaver, paragraph [0271]).
Regarding Claim 17, Yoshikawa in view of King discloses the computing system of Claim 13, wherein:
Yoshikawa does not disclose the metadata indicates at least a portion of the third plurality of properties have been generated by an author, wherein the user credential is associated with the author, and wherein the subset of the third plurality of properties comprises the at least the portion of the third plurality of properties generated by the author. Weaver discloses the metadata indicates at least a portion of the third plurality of properties have been generated by an author, wherein the user credential is associated with the author, and wherein the subset of the third plurality of properties comprises the at least the portion of the third plurality of properties generated by the author (see Weaver, paragraph [0271], where a recursive hierarchy may allow an operator to grant a user of the database 100 access only to data created by the user).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine Yoshikawa with Weaver for the benefit of allowing user access to data created by the user (see Weaver, paragraph [0271]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Arguments, filed May 4, 2026, have been fully considered, but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on page 7 of Applicant’s Remarks that Yoshikawa, alone, or in combination with King, does not teach, disclose, or fairly suggest, all of the elements of Independent Claims 1 and 13 as amended. The Examiner respsectfully disagrees.
While the Examiner tenatively indicated in the Examiner Interview held on April 14, 2026 that Applicant’s Amendment appeared to overcome the grounds of rejection, further consideration of King revealed an attribute-level security policy that is not patentably distinguishable from a first and second subset of attributes, wherein the first subset is accessible to users with a first access level but not a second access level, and a second subset accessible by users with the second access level (see King, paragraph [0027], where in the employee table, an employee would be represented by a particular row that includes a ‘salary’ column; at the entity level, an attribute-level security policy may be defined as follows: only employees belonging to the Human Resources department are allowed to view the salary attribute of other employees … If the user has permissions to access at least some data in the employee table, the database server retrieves the set of data that is requested in the received query. Then, according to the techniques described herein, the database server or a component thereof evaluates the above security policy for each row in the retrieved set of rows. If the user is associated with the user group identified by group ID “100”, then the set of rows is returned to the client for presenting to the user; otherwise, the database server or the component thereof replaces with security-NULL values the data values in the “salary” column of the returned set of rows, and the resulting set of rows is then sent back to the client). For at least these reasons, it is the position of the Examiner that Yoshikawa in view of King discloses all of the elements of Independent Claims 1 and 13.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the Applicant’s disclosure:
Hatakeda (US Patent No. 6,057,837 A), which concerns on-screen manipulation of sources a data object depends on.
Khoyi (US Patent No. 5,303,379 A), which concerns linking objects and performing operations on the linked data.
Chen (PG Pub. No. 2017/0177646 A1), which concerns processing time series data from multiple sensors.
Boyce (PG Pub. No. 2008/0306989 A1), which concerns collection and storage of experimental data.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARHAD AGHARAHIMI whose telephone number is (571)272-9864. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5pm 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, Apu Mofiz can be reached at 571-272-4080. 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.
/FARHAD AGHARAHIMI/Examiner, Art Unit 2161
/APU M MOFIZ/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2161
Prosecution Insights