DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. This action is responsive to communication filed on 07/14/2026. Claim(s) 1, 4-5, 7, 10, 11, 14, 15 & 17 have been amended. Claim(s) 1-19 is/are currently pending examination. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/14/2026 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
3. The Applicant filed amendment(s) to the claim(s) on 07/14/2026 to remedy the rejection(s).
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicants’ arguments filed 07/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The Double Patenting Rejection of Claim 1-19 remains with an analysis listed below.
Applicants’ arguments filed 07/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The 35 USC 101 Rejection of Claim 1-19 remains with an updated analysis listed below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
5. 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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) a unified model, entities, resources, principals, graphs, identifiers, detecting permission and generating a connection between representations.
The limitation(s) include detail that aligns with recognized abstract ideas such as collecting, organizing, analyzing and storing information describing relationships between entities.
The limitations are treated as creating methods of organizing human activity (e.g. access control, permission management) and mental processes (evaluations of relationships, identifying permissions and linking entities). Access control models, identity, permission mapping and relationship graph creations are treated as abstract data organization and analysis.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims does not recite an improvement to the functioning of a computer itself, a specific technical implementation of the unified model, defines a particular data structure improvement (i.e. novel graph structure, indexing mechanism) nor recite how detection is performed. The claimed additional elements “a computing environment”, “multiple computing environments”, “security graph”, “unified model” and “graph” are merely nominal recitation of generic computing elements used to collect and organize access control data. The “unified model” is functional, result oriented and not tied to any specific technical implementation. There is no meaningful limitation that integrates the abstract idea into a practical application.
The claim(s) do/does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because absent of the abstract idea, the remaining elements only include the generic components/elements “security graph”, “computing environment” and data processing steps. These are all well understood, routine and conventional, which merely implements the abstract idea on a computer. There is no specialized architecture, unconventional data structure or technical improvements to databases or security enforcement. The claim(s) is direct to an abstract idea, not integrated into a practical application and lacks an inventive concept. There is no inventive concept that transforms the abstract idea into patent-eligible subject matter.
Double Patenting
6. 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 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 either is anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim. 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 Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); 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 nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l) (1) - 706.02(l) (3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms, which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
7. Claim(s) 1-11, 13-19 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim(s) 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,278,840 B1. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Claim(s) 1-11, 13-19 of the current application matches directly to every element of Claim 1-2, 4-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,278,840 B1.
8. In addition, specifically Independent Claims 1, 10 & 11 is/are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being rejected over claim(s) 1, 12 & 13 of US Patent No. 12, 278,840 B1 and further in view Woolward et al. (US 2020/0382363 A1) and further in view of ROBBINS et al. (US 2022/0368702 A1).
The claims are not patentable distinct from each other because it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to take the teachings of Woolward-ROBBINS and apply them on the teachings of US Patent No. 12,278,840 B1 to create a system, method and computer program product for employing a identity and access management system for determining and allowing user, roles and principals.
9. The table below shows only a sample of how each of these claims is anticipated by claims such as Claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12,278,840 B1.
Instant Application 19/046,234
US Patent No. 12,278,840 B1.
1. (Currently amended) A method for generating a security graphbased on multiple computing environmentsthe security graph stored in a graph database, comprising:
1. A method for generating a security graph utilizing a unified model based on multiple cloud computing environments, comprising:
receiving data from a computing environment of the multiple computing environments pertaining to:
receiving data from a first cloud computing environment pertaining to:
a plurality of resources, a plurality of principals, and a plurality of permissions;
a plurality of resources, a plurality of principals, and a plurality of permissions;
generating a resource nodethe[[a]] security graphthe[[a]] unified model, the resource node
generating for each resource of the plurality of resources a corresponding resource node in the security graph based on the unified model, the corresponding resource node including an identifier of the resource, wherein the resource is a cloud entity deployed in the first cloud computing environment;
generating a principal nodegraphnode
generating for each principal of the plurality of principals a corresponding principal node in the security graph based on the unified model, the corresponding principal node including an identifier of the principal, wherein the principal is a cloud entity in the first cloud computing environment that generates a request for an operation in the first cloud computing environment; and
detecting a permission of the plurality of permissions authorizing the principal to access the resource; and
generating a connection between the principal nodenodegraph
generating a connection between at least a principal node and at least a resource node in the security graph based on the unified model, in response to detecting a permission indicating that a principal corresponding to the at least a principal node can access a resource corresponding to the at least a resource node.
9. The method of claim 8, wherein the at least an attribute value is any one of: a username, an email address, a role, a permission, and any combination thereof.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein a principal the plurality of principals is any one of: a user account, a service account, and a role.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein a resource of the plurality of resources is any one of: a virtual machine, a container, and a serverless function.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
requesting the received data from an application programming interface (API) of the computing environment.
4. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
requesting the data from an application programming interface (API) of the first cloud computing environment.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein receiving the data further comprises:
reading at least one text based policy received from the computing environment, each indicating at least one permission for the principal to act on the resource.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein receiving the data further comprises:
reading at least one text based policy received from the first cloud computing environment, each of the at least one policy indicating at least one permission for the plurality of principals to act on the plurality of resources.
4. (Currently amended) The method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving data from a second computing environment pertaining to: a plurality of resources and a plurality of principals of the second computing environment, including a plurality of identifiers and a plurality of permissions;
generating a resource representation for a resource of the plurality of resources of the second computing environment; and
generating a principal representation for a principal of the plurality of principals of the second computing environment, in response to determining that the principal of the second computing environment is not represented in the security graph by a corresponding principal representation.
6. The method of claim 1, further comprising:
receiving data from a second cloud computing environment pertaining to a plurality of resources and a plurality of principals of the second cloud computing environment, the data including a plurality of identifiers and a plurality of permissions;
generating a resource node for each resource of the plurality of resources, in response to determining that a resource of the second cloud computing environment is not represented in the security graph by a corresponding resource node; and
generating a principal node for each principal of the plurality of principals, in response to determining that a principal of the second cloud computing environment is not represented in the unified model graph by a corresponding principal node.
5. (Currently amended) The method of claim 4, further comprising:
mapping a resource of the second computing environment to a resource representation in the security graph, in response to determining that the resource of the second computing environment is the same as a resource already represented by the resource representation.
7. The method of claim 6, further comprising:
mapping a resource of the second cloud computing environment to a resource node in the unified model graph, in response to determining that the resource of the second cloud computing environment is represented in the security graph by the resource node.
6. The method of claim 5, wherein determining further comprises:
comparing an identifier of the resource to an identifier of the resource representation; and
mapping the resource to the resource representation in response to determining that the identifier of the resource is identical to the identifier of the resource representation.
8. The method of claim 7, wherein determining further comprises:
comparing an identifier of the resource to an identifier of the resource node; and
mapping the resource to the resource node in response to determining that the identifier of the resource is identical to the identifier of the resource node.
7. (Currently amended) The method of claim 4, further comprising:
generating an entity node in the security graph;
connecting a first principal representation from a first computing environment to the entity node; and
connecting a second principal representation from the second computing environment to the entity node, in response to determining that the first principal representation and the second principal representation represent a single entity.
9. The method of claim 6, further comprising:
generating an entity node in the security graph;
connecting a first principal node from the first cloud computing environment to the entity node; and
connecting a second principal node from the second cloud computing environment to the entity node, in response to determining that the first principal node and the second principal node represent a single entity.
8. The method of claim 7, further comprising:
determining that the first principal representation and the second principal representation represent a single entity by matching at least an attribute value of the first principal representation to a corresponding attribute value of the second principal representation.
10. The method of claim 9, further comprising:
determining that the first principal node and the second principal node represent a single entity by matching at least an attribute value of the first principal node to a corresponding attribute value of the second principal node.
9. The method of claim 8, wherein the at least an attribute value is any one of: a username, an email address, a role, a permission, and any combination thereof.
11. The method of claim 10, wherein the at least an attribute value pertains to any one of: a username, an email address, and a role.
10. (Currently amended) A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a set of instructions for generating a security graphbased on multiple computing environmentsthe security graph stored in a graph database, the set of instructions comprising: one or more instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a device, cause the device to: receive data from a computing environment of the multiple computing environments pertaining to: a plurality of resources, a plurality of principals, and a plurality of permissions; generate a resource nodethe[[a]] security graphresource nodenodegraphnodenodenodegraph
12. A non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon instructions for causing a processing circuitry to execute a process for generating a security graph utilizing a unified model based on multiple cloud computing environments, the process comprising: receiving data from a first cloud computing environment pertaining to: a plurality of resources, a plurality of principals, and a plurality of permissions; generating for each resource of the plurality of resources a corresponding resource node in the security graph based on the unified model, the corresponding resource node including an identifier of the resource, wherein the resource is a cloud entity deployed in the first cloud computing environment; generating for each principal of the plurality of principals a corresponding principal node in the security graph based on the unified model, the corresponding principal node including an identifier of the principal, wherein the principal is a cloud entity in the first cloud computing environment that generates a request for an operation in the first cloud computing environment; and generating a connection between at least a principal node and at least a resource node in the security graph based on the unified model, in response to detecting a permission indicating that a principal corresponding to the at least a principal node.
11. (Currently amended) A system for generating a security graphbased on multiple computing environments, the security graph stored in a graph database, comprising: a processing circuitry; a memory, the memory containing instructions that, when executed by the processing circuitry, configure the system to: receive data from a computing environment of the multiple computing environments pertaining to: a plurality of resources, a plurality of principals, and a plurality of permissions; generate a resource nodethe[[a]] security graphresource nodenodegraphnodenodenodegraph
13. A system for generating a security graph utilizing a unified model based on multiple cloud computing environments, comprising: a processing circuitry; and a memory, the memory containing instructions that, when executed by the processing circuitry, configure the system to: receive data from a first cloud computing environment pertaining to: a plurality of resources, a plurality of principals, and a plurality of permissions; generate for each resource of the plurality of resources a corresponding resource node in the security graph based on the unified model, the corresponding resource node including an identifier of the resource, wherein the resource is a cloud entity deployed in the first cloud computing environment; generate for each principal of the plurality of principals a corresponding principal node in the security graph based on the unified model, the corresponding principal node including an identifier of the principal, wherein the principal is a cloud entity in the first cloud computing environment that generates a request for an operation in the first cloud computing environment; and generate a connection between at least a principal node and at least a resource node in the security graph based on the unified model, in response to detecting a permission indicating that a principal corresponding to the at least a principal node can access a resource corresponding to the at least a resource node.
13. The system of claim 11, wherein the memory contains further instructions that, when executed by the processing circuitry for receiving the data, further configure the system to: read at least one text based policy received from the computing environment, each indicating at least one permission for the principal to act on the resource.
14. The system of claim 13, wherein the memory contains further instructions that when executed by the processing circuitry, further configure the system to: read at least one text based policy received from the first cloud computing environment, each of the at least one policy indicating at least one permission for the plurality of principals to act on the plurality of resources.
14. (Currently amended) The system of claim 11, wherein the memory contains further instructions which when executed by the processing circuitry further configure the system to: receive data from a second computing environment pertaining to: a plurality of resources and a plurality of principals of the second compute environment, including a plurality of identifiers and a plurality of permissions; generate a resource representation for a resource of the plurality of resources of the second computing environment; and generate a principal representation for a principal of the plurality of principals of the second computing environment, in response to determining that the principal of the second computing environment is not represented in the security graph by a corresponding principal representation.
15. The system of claim 13, wherein the memory contains further instructions that when executed by the processing circuitry, further configure the system to: receive data from a second cloud computing environment pertaining to a plurality of resources and a plurality of principals of the second cloud computing environment, the data including a plurality of identifiers and a plurality of permissions; generate a resource node for each resource of the plurality of resources, in response to determining that a resource of the second cloud computing environment is not represented in the security graph by a corresponding resource node; and generating a principal node for each principal of the plurality of principals, in response to determining that a principal of the second cloud computing environment is not represented in the security graph by a corresponding principal node.
15. (Currently amended) The system of claim 14, wherein the memory contains further instructions which when executed by the processing circuitry further configure the system to: map a resource of the second computing environment to a resource representation in the security graph, in response to determining that the resource of the second computing environment is the same as a resource already represented by the resource representation.
16. The system of claim 15, wherein the memory contains further instructions that when executed by the processing circuitry, further configure the system to: map a resource of the second cloud computing environment to a resource node in the security graph, in response to determining that the resource of the second cloud computing environment is represented in the security graph by the resource node.
16. The system of claim 15, wherein the memory contains further instructions that, when executed by the processing circuitry for determining, further configure the system to: compare an identifier of the resource to an identifier of the resource representation; and map the resource to the resource representation in response to determining that the identifier of the resource is identical to the identifier of the resource representation.
17. The system of claim 16, wherein the memory contains further instructions that when executed by the processing circuitry, further configure the system to: compare an identifier of the resource to an identifier of the resource node; and mapping the resource to the resource node in response to determining that the identifier of the resource is identical to the identifier of the resource node.
17. (Currently amended) The system of claim 14, wherein the memory contains further instructions which when executed by the processing circuitry further configure the system to: generate an entity node in the security graph; connect a first principal representation from a first computing environment to the entity node; and connect a second principal representation from the second computing environment to the entity node, in response to determining that the first principal representation and the second principal representation represent a single entity.
18. The system of claim 15, wherein the memory contains further instructions that when executed by the processing circuitry, further configure the system to: generate an entity node in the security graph; connect a first principal node from the first cloud computing environment to the entity node; and connect a second principal node from the second cloud computing environment to the entity node, in response to determining that the first principal node and the second principal node represent a single entity.
18. The system of claim 17, wherein the memory contains further instructions which when executed by the processing circuitry further configure the system to: determine that the first principal representation and the second principal representation represent a single entity by matching at least an attribute value of the first principal representation to a corresponding attribute value of the second principal representation.
19. The system of claim 18, wherein the memory contains further instructions that when executed by the processing circuitry, further configure the system to: determine that the first principal node and the second principal node represent a single entity by matching at least an attribute value of the first principal node to a corresponding attribute value of the second principal node.
19. The system of claim 18, wherein the at least an attribute value is any one of: a username, an email address, a role, a permission, and any combination thereof.
20. The system of claim 19, wherein the at least an attribute value pertains to any one of: a username, an email address, and a role.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
10. 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 10-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woolward et al. (US 2020/0382363 A1) and further in view of ROBBINS et al. (US 2022/0368702 A1).
Re Claim 1, 10 & 11, Woolward teaches a method for generating a security graph utilizing a unified model based on multiple computing environments, the security graph stored in a graph database, comprising: (Woolward; FIG. 1-6; Background, Summary, ¶ [0014]-[0034], [0036]-[0054]; The embodiment(s) detail AWS/Azure/GCP data into a standard graph model, that is stored in graphs/databases in which data is received from telemetry, events, inventory and control plane data.)
receiving data from a computing environment of the multiple computing environments pertaining to: (Woolward; FIG. 1-6; Background, Summary, ¶ [0014]- [0034], [0036]- [0054]; Telemetry, event, inventory and control plane data.)
Woolward does not explicitly suggest a plurality of resources, a plurality of principals, and a plurality of permissions; generating a resource node for a resource of the plurality of resources in the security graph based on the unified model, the resource node including an identifier of the resource, wherein the resource is deployed in the computing environment; generating a principal node for a principal of the plurality of principals in the security graph based on the unified model, the principal node including an identifier of the principal, wherein the principal includes a permission to initiate an action in the computing environment; detecting a permission of the plurality of permissions authorizing the principal to access the resource; and generating a connection between the principal node and the resource node in the security graph, in response to detecting the permission.
However, in analogous art, Robbins teaches a plurality of resources, a plurality of principals, and a plurality of permissions; (ROBBINS; FIG. 1-5; Background, Summary, ¶ [0042]- [0062], [0085]- [0091]; The embodiment(s) detail computer related resources, users and groups (principals), and access rights (permissions).)
generating a resource node for a resource of the plurality of resources in the security graph based on the[[a]] unified model, (ROBBINS; FIG. 1-5; Background, Summary, ¶ [0042]-[0062], [0085]-[0091]; Computer server related nodes and objects are standardized from separated environments into a common format before the data is displayed on a graph.)
the resource node including an identifier of the resource, wherein the resource is deployed in the computing environment; (ROBBINS; FIG. 1-5; Background, Summary, ¶ [0042]- [0062], [0085]- [0091]; Computer/server nodes and objects, identities and deploying the computing related resources in a computing environment.)
generating a principal node for a principal of the plurality of principals in the security graph based on the unified model, the principal node including an identifier of the principal, (ROBBINS; FIG. 1-5; Background, Summary, ¶ [0042]- [0062], [0085]- [0091]; The embodiment(s) detail names user groups, graph nodes and related identifiers.)
wherein the principal includes a permission to initiate an action in the computing environment; (ROBBINS; FIG. 1-5; Background, Summary, ¶ [0042]- [0062], [0085]- [0091]; Admin initiates an actions and grants access rights.)
detecting a permission of the plurality of permissions authorizing the principal to access the resource; and (ROBBINS; FIG. 1-5; Background, Summary, ¶ [0042]- [0062], [0074]-[0091]; Administrator authorizes access rights.)
generating a connection between the principal node and the resource node in the security graph, in response to detecting the permission. (ROBBINS; FIG. 1-5; Background, Summary, ¶ [0042]-[0062], [0085]-[0091]; Relationships between access rights and admin edges.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Woolward in view of ROBBINS to grant resources for the reasons of granting permission related to computing resources. (ROBBINS Background/Summary)
Re Claim 2 & 12, Woolward-ROBBINS discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising:
requesting the received data from an application programming interface (API) of the computing environment. (Woolward; FIG. 1; ¶ [0023], [0042]; API.)
Re Claim 3 & 13, Woolward-ROBBINS discloses the method of claim 1, wherein receiving the data further comprises:
reading at least one text based policy received from the computing environment, (ROBBINS; FIG. 1; ¶ [0063], [0076]; Group policy in computing environments.)
each indicating at least one permission for the principal to act on the resource. (ROBBINS; FIG. 1-5; Background, Summary, ¶ [0042]-[0062], [0074]-[0091]; Administrator authorizes access rights.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Woolward in view of ROBBINS to grant resources for the reasons of granting permission related to computing resources. (ROBBINS Background/Summary)
Claim(s) 4 & 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Woolward et al. (Us 2020/0382363 A1), in view of ROBBINS et al. (US 2022/0368702 A1) and further in view Jensen-Horne et al. (US 2011/0276674 A1).
Re Claim 4 & 14, Woolward-ROBBINS discloses the method of claim 1, yet does not explicitly suggest further comprising: receiving data from a second computing environment pertaining to: a plurality of resources and a plurality of principals of the second computing environment, including a plurality of identifiers and a plurality of permissions; generating a resource representation for a resource of the plurality of resources of the second computing environment; and generating a principal representation for a principal of the plurality of principals of the second computing environment, in response to determining that the principal of the second computing environment is not represented in the security graph by a corresponding principal representation.
However, in analogous art, Jensen-Horne teaches further comprising:
receiving data from a second computing environment pertaining to: (Jensen-Horne; FIG. 1-10; Background, ¶ [0026]-[0037], [0054]-[0088], [0137]-[0169]; Computing environments.)
a plurality of resources and a plurality of principals of the second computing environment, including a plurality of identifiers and a plurality of permissions; (Jensen-Horne; FIG. 1-10; Background, ¶ [0026]-[0037], [0054]-[0088], [0137]-[0169]; Account owners, identifiers and permission/access rights.)
generating a resource representation for a resource of the plurality of resources of the second computing environment; and (Jensen-Horne; FIG. 1-10; Background, ¶ [0026]-[0037], [0054]-[0088], [0137]-[0169]; Resources represented on a graph.)
generating a principal representation for a principal of the plurality of principals of the second computing environment, in response to determining that the principal of the second computing environment is not represented in the security graph by a corresponding principal representation. (Jensen-Horne; FIG. 1-10; Background, ¶ [0026]-[0037], [0054]-[0088], [0137]-[0169]; Graph depicting resource representation and ownership/accounts of a computing environment.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Woolward-ROBBINS in view of Jensen-Horne to graph resources for the reasons of creating representation of computing resources with an environment. (Jensen-Horne Abstract)
Conclusion
11. 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 CHRISTOPHER B ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0702. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-3:00 EST.
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, Nicholas R Taylor can be reached at 571-272-3889. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER B ROBINSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights