DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 .
The present office action is responsive to communications received on 2/10/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 9/3/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 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 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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-30 of U.S. Patent No. 12248595. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims of the 12248595 contain every element of claims of the instant application. Application claims 1-20 are anticipated by the patent claims 1-30.
A later patent claim is not patentably distinct from an earlier patent claim if the later claim is obvious over, or anticipated by, the earlier claim. In re Longi, 759 F.2d at 896, 225 USPQ at 651 (affirming a holding of obviousness-type double patenting because the claims at issue were obvious over claims in four prior art patents); In re Berg, 140 F.3d at 1437, 46 USPQ2d at 1233 (Fed. Cir. 1998) (affirming a holding of obviousness-type double patenting where a patent application claim to a genus is anticipated by a 35 patent claim to a species within that genus). “ELI LILLY AND COMPANY v BARR LABORATORIES, INC., United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC (DECIDED: May 30, 2001).
Instant Application No. 19049451
Patent No. 12248595
1. A system comprising:
at least one hardware processor; and
at least one memory storing instructions that cause the at least one hardware processor to perform operations comprising:
encoding data stored at a first account of a user, the first account configured at a primary deployment of a database system, and the encoding based on a first encryption key;
detecting a network intrusion event associated with the first account of the user; and
performing a failover of the first account to a second account of the user based on the detecting of the network intrusion event, the failover granting the user access to a replicated version of the data based at least on a second encryption key.
1. A system comprising:
at least one hardware processor; and
at least one memory storing instructions that cause the at least one hardware processor to perform operations comprising:
generating a file encryption key based on a first private key of a user and a root key associated with a primary deployment of a database system;
encoding file data at a source account of the user, the source account configured at the primary deployment of the database system, and the encoding using the file encryption key;
performing replication of the file data from the source account into a target account of the user to generate replicated file data;
detecting a network intrusion event associated with the source account of the user;
generating a notification of the network intrusion event for transmission to the user; and
performing a failover of the source account to the target account of the user based on the notification, the failover granting the user access to the replicated file data based at least on a second private key of the user.
2. The system of claim 1, the operations further comprising:
retrieving a replication configuration from the first account of the user, the replication configuration identifying the second account and one or more data objects for replication, the one or more data objects including the data; and
performing a replication of the data from the first account into the second account to generate the replicated version of the data, the replication based on the replication configuration.
2. The system of claim 1, the operations further comprising:
retrieving replication configurations from the source account of the user, the replication configurations identifying the target account and one or more data objects for replication, the one or more data objects including the file data; and
performing the replication based on the replication configurations.
3. The system of claim 1, the operations further comprising:
generating the first encryption key as a first file encryption key, the first file encryption key based on a first private key of the user and a root key associated with the primary deployment.
1. A system comprising:
…
generating a file encryption key based on a first private key of a user and a root key associated with a primary deployment of a database system;
4. The system of claim 3, wherein the second account is located at the primary deployment of the database system, wherein the second encryption key comprises a second file encryption key, and the operations further comprising:
encoding the replicated version of the data at the second account using the second file encryption key, the second file encryption key based on the root key associated with the primary deployment and a second private key of the user.
3. The system of claim 2, wherein the replication configurations further indicate the target account is located at the primary deployment of the database system, and the operations further comprising:
encoding the replicated file data at the target account using a second file encryption key, the second file encryption key based on the root key associated with the primary deployment and the second private key of the user.
5. The system of claim 4, the operations further comprising:
generating an account master key for the second account of the user at the primary deployment using the root key and the second private key.
4. The system of claim 3, the operations further comprising:
generating an account master key for the target account of the user at the primary deployment using the root key and the second private key.
6. The system of claim 5, the operations further comprising:
generating a table master key for a table storing the replicated version of the data, the table master key based on the account master key for the second account; and
generating the second file encryption key based on the table master key for the table.
5. The system of claim 4, the operations further comprising:
generating a table master key for a target account table storing the replicated file data at the primary deployment, the table master key based on the account master key for the target account; and
generating the second file encryption key based on the table master key for the target account table.
7. The system of claim 1, the operations further comprising:
generating a notification of the network intrusion event for transmission to the user, the notification including an instruction causing deletion of a first private key associated with the first encryption key, the first private key stored at a storage location of the user that is external to the database system.
9. The system of claim 1, the operations further comprising:
configuring the notification of the network intrusion event to include an instruction causing deletion of the first private key of the user, the first private key stored at a storage location of the user that is external to the database system.
8. The system of claim 1, the operations further comprising:
generating a notification of the network intrusion event for transmission to the user, the notification including an instruction causing deletion of the first account of the user; and
configuring the second account as a new source account of the user based on the deletion of the first account.
10. The system of claim 1, the operations further comprising:
configuring the notification of the network intrusion event to include an instruction causing deletion of the source account of the user; and
configure the target account as a new source account of the user based on the deletion of the source account.
Similar rationale for claim 9-20
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 are allowable over prior art.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 17, the prior art:
Gernhardt (US 11748374 B2) teaches configuring replication group objects. A system includes at least one hardware processor coupled to memory and configured to decode a replication request received from a client device of a data provider. The replication request indicates a plurality of account objects for replication. The plurality of account objects associated with a corresponding plurality of account object types. A replication group object is generated based on the replication request. The replication group object includes a manifest. The manifest lists the plurality of account objects. The replication of the plurality of account objects is performed from a source account of the data provider into at least one target account. The replication is based on the manifest of the replication group object.
Gernhardt (US 11494411 B1) teaches configuring replication of account object metadata. A system includes at least one hardware processor coupled to a memory and configured to decode a replication request received from a client device of a data provider. The replication request indicates at least a first account object, a source account, and a target account of the data provider. An object dependency of the at least first account object to at least a second account object of the data provider is determined. A replication of the at least first account object and the at least second account object is performed from the source account into the target account of the data provider.
However, the prior art – individually, or in a reasonable combination – fails to teach the invention described in the claims as a whole.
“performing a failover of the first account (encoding data stored at a first account of a user, the encoding based on a first encryption key;) to a second account of the user based on the detecting of the network intrusion event, the failover granting the user access to a replicated version of the data based at least on a second encryption key.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 12135734 B2, "Replication of share across deployments in database system", by Chu.
US 11314875 B1, “Replication of account security features in multiple deployment database”, by Acharya.
US 11630845 B2, “Data replication and data failover in database systems”, by Dageville.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAN YANG whose telephone number is (408)918-7638. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday, 9:00-5:00.
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, Carl Colin can be reached on 571-272-3862. 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.
/HAN YANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2493
Prosecution Insights