DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This is in reply to papers filed on 2025-02-26. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 19, 20 is/are independent.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. No reference has been found that discloses "displaying, by the processor, a time series comprising a subset of the plurality of documents including the first document, wherein the subset of the plurality of documents is associated with the first application" in the claimed context.
Summary of Claim Rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 103
The following table summarizes the rejections set forth in detail below of the claims over the prior art.
Claim No.
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 in view of Official Notice
1
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
2
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
3
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
4
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
5
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
6
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
8
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
9
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
10
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
11
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
12
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
13
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
14
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
15
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
16
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
17
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
18
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
19
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
20
[Wingdings font/0xFC]
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 that 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication 20260211946 to Kotecha et al. (hereinafter "Kotecha '946") in view of U.S. Publication 20260230410 to Patnala et al. (hereinafter "Patnala '410"). Kotecha '946 is prior art to the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2). Patnala '410 is prior art to the claims under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2).
Per claim 1 (independent):
Kotecha '946 discloses a method, comprising: accessing, by a processor, a first embedding vector generated based on a first document associated with a first application of a plurality of applications (receives documentation and extracts feature information concerning application [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0186-0188])
Kotecha '946 discloses analyzing, by the processor based on the first embedding vector, an embedding vector database comprising embedding vectors associated with the plurality of applications (stores application feature vectors in database [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0186-0188, 0217]; compares database vectors to produce search results [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0193, 0217])
Kotecha '946 does not disclose determining, by the processor based on the analysis, that the first application includes generative artificial intelligence
However, Kotecha '946 discloses determining, by the processor based on the analysis, that the first application includes particular features (determines application features [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0118, 0181])
Kotecha '946 does not disclose generating, by the processor, an alert based on the determination that the first application includes the generative artificial intelligence
However, Kotecha '946 discloses generating, by the processor, an alert based on the determination that the first application includes the particular features (provides results for queries concerning application features [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0118, 0181]; creates user interfaces [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0149-0154]; orders, prioritizes, and displays alerts [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0043, 0143])
Kotecha '946 discloses storing, by the processor, the alert in an alert queue (orders, prioritizes, and displays alerts [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0143])
Further:
Patnala '410 discloses determining, by the processor based on the analysis, that the first suspect includes generative artificial intelligence (detects artificial intelligence usage and alerts administrator [Patnala '410 ¶ 0039, 0041]; displays alerts on administrator dashboard [Patnala '410 ¶ 0038, 0114, 0117, 0123, 0135])
Patnala '410 discloses generating, by the processor, an alert based on the determination that the first suspect includes the generative artificial intelligence (detects artificial intelligence usage and alerts administrator [Patnala '410 ¶ 0039, 0041]; displays alerts on administrator dashboard [Patnala '410 ¶ 0038, 0114, 0117, 0123, 0135])
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (1) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and (2) before the invention was made to have modified Kotecha '946 with the alerts for and detection of artificial intelligence usage of Patnala '410 to arrive at an apparatus, method, and product including:
determining, by the processor based on the analysis, that the first application includes generative artificial intelligence
generating, by the processor, an alert based on the determination that the first application includes the generative artificial intelligence
A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine them at least because being aware of artificial intelligence applications, which may take unpredictable action on valuable data, improves the security of a system against possible data leaks and data loss. A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been further motivated to combine them at least because Patnala '410 teaches [Patnala '410 ¶ 0038-0041, 0114, 0117, 0123, 0135] modifying an application feature detector [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0118, 0181] such as that of Kotecha '946 to arrive at the claimed invention; because Patnala '410 and Kotecha '946 are in the same field of endeavor; because doing so constitutes use of a known technique (the alerts for and detection of artificial intelligence usage [Patnala '410 ¶ 0038-0041, 0114, 0117, 0123, 0135]) to improve similar devices and/or methods (application feature detector [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0118, 0181]) in the same way; because doing so constitutes applying a known technique (the alerts for and detection of artificial intelligence usage [Patnala '410 ¶ 0038-0041, 0114, 0117, 0123, 0135]) to known devices and/or methods (application feature detector [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0118, 0181]) ready for improvement to yield predictable results; and because the modification amounts to combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Here, (1) the prior art included each element (as detailed above); (2) one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods, and in this combination, each element merely performs the same function as it does separately (application feature detector [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0118, 0181] identifies artificial intelligence usage and alerts users [Patnala '410 ¶ 0038-0041, 0114, 0117, 0123, 0135]); (3) one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable; and (4) other considerations do not overcome this conclusion.
Per claim 2 (dependent on claim 1):
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 discloses the elements detailed in the rejection of claim 1 above, incorporated herein by reference
Kotecha '946 discloses prior to accessing the first embedding vector: extracting, by a document processing agent, text, images, and structure from the first document; generating, by a multimodal embedding model, the first embedding vector based on the extracted text, images, and structure (receives documentation and extracts feature information [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0186-0188]; natural language model creates vectors for storage in database [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0186-0188, 0217]; receives images and video and extracts feature information [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0184])
Per claim 3 (dependent on claim 2):
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 discloses the elements detailed in the rejection of claim 2 above, incorporated herein by reference
Kotecha '946 discloses the extraction of the features and the generation of the first embedding vector are automatically initiated based on receiving the first document (discovery performed automatically [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0102, 0120, 0132])
Per claim 5 (dependent on claim 2):
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 discloses the elements detailed in the rejection of claim 2 above, incorporated herein by reference
Kotecha '946 discloses storing, by the processor, the first embedding vector in a vector database (receives documentation and extracts feature information [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0186-0187, 0156]; receives images and video and extracts feature information [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0184])
Per claim 6 (dependent on claim 1):
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 discloses the elements detailed in the rejection of claim 1 above, incorporated herein by reference
Kotecha '946 discloses generating, by the processor, an analysis dashboard comprising an indication of the alert in the alert queue (orders, prioritizes, and displays alerts [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0143])
Further:
Patnala '410 discloses generating, by the processor, an analysis dashboard comprising an indication of the alert in the alert queue (displays alerts on administrator dashboard [Patnala '410 ¶ 0038, 0114, 0117, 0123, 0135])
For the reasons detailed above with respect to claim 1, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (1) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and (2) before the invention was made to have modified Kotecha '946 with the alerts for and detection of artificial intelligence usage of Patnala '410 to arrive at an apparatus, method, and product including:
generating, by the processor, an analysis dashboard comprising an indication of the alert in the alert queue
Per claim 8 (dependent on claim 1):
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 discloses the elements detailed in the rejection of claim 1 above, incorporated herein by reference
Kotecha '946 does not disclose prior to determining that the first application includes the generative artificial intelligence: computing, by an analysis agent based on the analysis, a risk score for the first application
However, Kotecha '946 discloses prior to determining that the first application includes the particular features: computing, by an analysis agent based on the analysis, a risk score for the first application (retrieves vector if similarity is above threshold [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0178])
Further:
Patnala '410 discloses prior to determining that the suspect includes the generative artificial intelligence: computing, by an analysis agent based on the analysis, a determination for the first suspect (detects artificial intelligence usage and alerts administrator [Patnala '410 ¶ 0039, 0041]; displays alerts on administrator dashboard [Patnala '410 ¶ 0038, 0114, 0117, 0123, 0135])
For the reasons detailed above with respect to claim 1, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (1) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and (2) before the invention was made to have modified Kotecha '946 with the alerts for and detection of artificial intelligence usage of Patnala '410 to arrive at an apparatus, method, and product including:
prior to determining that the first application includes the generative artificial intelligence: computing, by an analysis agent based on the analysis, a risk score for the first application
Per claim 9 (dependent on claim 8):
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 discloses the elements detailed in the rejection of claim 8 above, incorporated herein by reference
Kotecha '946 does not disclose prior to determining that the first application includes the generative artificial intelligence: determining, by the analysis agent, that the risk score exceeds a threshold, wherein the determination that the first application includes the generative artificial intelligence is further based on the determination that the risk score exceeds the threshold
However, Kotecha '946 discloses prior to determining that the first application includes the particular feature: determining, by the analysis agent, that the risk score exceeds a threshold, wherein the determination that the first application includes the particular feature is further based on the determination that the risk score exceeds the threshold (retrieves vector if similarity is above threshold [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0178])
Further:
Patnala '410 discloses prior to determining that the first suspect includes the generative artificial intelligence: determining, by the analysis agent, that the suspect requires analysis, wherein the determination that the first suspect includes the generative artificial intelligence is further based on the determination that suspect requires analysis (detects artificial intelligence usage and alerts administrator [Patnala '410 ¶ 0039, 0041]; displays alerts on administrator dashboard [Patnala '410 ¶ 0038, 0114, 0117, 0123, 0135])
For the reasons detailed above with respect to claim 1, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (1) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and (2) before the invention was made to have modified Kotecha '946 with the alerts for and detection of artificial intelligence usage of Patnala '410 to arrive at an apparatus, method, and product including:
prior to determining that the first application includes the generative artificial intelligence: determining, by the analysis agent, that the risk score exceeds a threshold, wherein the determination that the first application includes the generative artificial intelligence is further based on the determination that the risk score exceeds the threshold
Per claim 10 (dependent on claim 9):
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 discloses the elements detailed in the rejection of claim 9 above, incorporated herein by reference
Kotecha '946 discloses prior to storing the alert in the alert queue: classifying, by an alert generation agent based at least in part on the risk score, the alert (retrieves vector if similarity is above threshold [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0178]; orders, prioritizes, and displays alerts [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0043, 0143])
Per claim 11 (dependent on claim 10):
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 discloses the elements detailed in the rejection of claim 10 above, incorporated herein by reference
Kotecha '946 discloses prior to storing the alert in the alert queue: assigning, by the alert generation agent based on the classified alert, a first priority level of a plurality of priority levels to the alert (retrieves vector if similarity is above threshold [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0178]; orders, prioritizes, and displays alerts [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0043, 0143])
Per claim 12 (dependent on claim 11):
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 discloses the elements detailed in the rejection of claim 11 above, incorporated herein by reference
Kotecha '946 discloses prior to storing the alert in the alert queue: formatting, by the alert generation agent, the alert (formats results for user [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0181, 0204, 0217])
Per claim 13 (dependent on claim 1):
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 discloses the elements detailed in the rejection of claim 1 above, incorporated herein by reference
Kotecha '946 discloses the analysis comprises extracting, by an analysis agent from the first embedding vector, one or more features of the first application; determining, by the analysis agent based on the one or more features, that the extracted features are associated with artificial intelligence features (stores application feature vectors in database [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0186-0188, 0217]; compares database vectors to produce search results [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0193, 0217])
Per claim 14 (dependent on claim 1):
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 discloses the elements detailed in the rejection of claim 1 above, incorporated herein by reference
Kotecha '946 discloses the analysis comprises accessing, by an analysis agent, a second embedding vector associated with the first application (stores application feature vectors in database [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0186-0188, 0217]; compares database vectors to produce search results [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0193, 0217]; determines results based upon patterns [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0108-0109, 0116-0117, 0123-0124, 0167-0169])
Kotecha '946 does not disclose determining, by the analysis agent based on the first and second embedding vectors, one or more patterns, wherein the determination that the first application includes the generative artificial intelligence is based on the determined one or more patterns
However, Kotecha '946 discloses determining, by the analysis agent based on the first and second embedding vectors, one or more patterns, wherein the determination that the first application includes the particular feature is based on the determined one or more patterns (stores application feature vectors in database [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0186-0188, 0217]; compares database vectors to produce search results [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0193, 0217]; retrieves vector if similarity is above threshold [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0178]; determines results based upon patterns [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0108-0109, 0116-0117, 0123-0124, 0167-0169])
Further:
Patnala '410 discloses determining, by the analysis agent based on the observations, one or more patterns, wherein the determination that the first suspect includes the generative artificial intelligence is based on the determined one or more patterns (detects artificial intelligence usage and alerts administrator [Patnala '410 ¶ 0039, 0041]; displays alerts on administrator dashboard [Patnala '410 ¶ 0038, 0114, 0117, 0123, 0135]; classifies suspects via patterns [Patnala '410 ¶ 0066, 0098-0102])
For the reasons detailed above with respect to claim 1, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (1) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and (2) before the invention was made to have modified Kotecha '946 with the alerts for and detection of artificial intelligence usage of Patnala '410 to arrive at an apparatus, method, and product including:
determining, by the analysis agent based on the first and second embedding vectors, one or more patterns, wherein the determination that the first application includes the generative artificial intelligence is based on the determined one or more patterns
Per claim 15 (dependent on claim 1):
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 discloses the elements detailed in the rejection of claim 1 above, incorporated herein by reference
Kotecha '946 discloses the first document is one of a plurality of documents stored in a document repository (receives documentation and extracts feature information [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0186-0187, 0156]; natural language model creates vectors for storage in database [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0186-0187, 0217])
Per claim 16 (dependent on claim 15):
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 discloses the elements detailed in the rejection of claim 15 above, incorporated herein by reference
Kotecha '946 discloses respective documents of the plurality of documents are associated with one or more of the plurality of applications (receives documentation and extracts feature information concerning application [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0186-0188]; (discovery performed automatically [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0102, 0120, 0132]; plurality of applications [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0106-0111, 0117-0120, 0124-0125])
Per claim 17 (dependent on claim 16):
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 discloses the elements detailed in the rejection of claim 16 above, incorporated herein by reference
Kotecha '946 discloses the plurality of documents comprise (i) documentation, (ii) release notes, (iii) marketing documents, (iv) technical notes, and (v) other documents associated with the plurality of applications (receives documentation and extracts feature information [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0186-0187, 0156]; natural language model creates vectors for storage in database [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0186-0187, 0217])
Per claim 18 (dependent on claim 1):
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 discloses the elements detailed in the rejection of claim 1 above, incorporated herein by reference
Kotecha '946 discloses prior to accessing the first embedding vector: generating, by the processor, a prompt based at least in part on the first document: providing, by the processor, the prompt to an analysis agent (generates prompts and sends to analysis model [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0163-0165, 0169-0174])
Per claim 19 (independent):
Kotecha '946 discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, the computer-readable storage medium including instructions that when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform operations (processor(s), memory, computer readable media, storage, executable instructions [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0047-0056])
The remaining limitations of the claim(s) correspond(s) to features of claim(s) 1 and the claim(s) is/are rejected for the reasons detailed with respect to those claims.
Per claim 20 (independent):
Kotecha '946 discloses an apparatus comprising a processor and a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the processor to perform operations (processor(s), memory, computer readable media, storage, executable instructions [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0047-0056])
The remaining limitations of the claim(s) correspond(s) to features of claim(s) 1 and the claim(s) is/are rejected for the reasons detailed with respect to those claims.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 in view of the knowledge of a person having ordinary skill in the art.
Per claim 4 (dependent on claim 2):
Kotecha '946 in view of Patnala '410 discloses the elements detailed in the rejection of claim 2 above, incorporated herein by reference
Kotecha '946 does not disclose converting, by the processor, at least one of the images to converted text
However, Kotecha '946 discloses converting, by the processor, at least one of the images to feature information (receives documentation and extracts feature information [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0186-0188]; receives images and video and extracts feature information [Kotecha '946 ¶ 0184, 0186-0188, 0217])
Further:
Examiner takes Official Notice that is was well known and conventional to persons having ordinary skill in the art to perform Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and related processes to extract textual information from images.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (1) before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and (2) before the invention was made to have modified Kotecha '946 with the textual information conversion well known in the art to arrive at an apparatus, method, and product including:
converting, by the processor, at least one of the images to converted text
A person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine them at least because extracting textual information from the images and videos of Kotecha '946 would have provided more accurate feature vectors for determining the features of applications as desired by Kotecha '946.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEODORE C PARSONS whose telephone number is (571)270-1475. The examiner can normally be reached on MTWRF 7:30-4:30.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jung Kim can be reached on (571) 272-3804. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/forms.
/THEODORE C PARSONS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2494
Prosecution Insights