DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Election/Restrictions
NO restrictions warranted at applicant’s time of filing for CONtinuation.
Priority
Applicant claim[s] domestic priority under 35 USC 120 to non – provisional application # 17/893947, filed on 08/23/2022, now US PAT # 12299093.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/08/2025, the submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
Applicant’s drawings filed on 04/04/2025 has been inspected and is in compliance with MPEP 608.02.
Specification
Applicant’s specification filed on 04/04/2025 has been inspected and is in compliance with MPEP 608.01.
Claim Objections
NO claim objections warranted at applicant’s time of filing for CONtinuation.
Claim Interpretation – 35 USC 112th f
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
As per claim 12. A system, comprising:
one or more processors coupled to non-transitory memory, the one or more processors configured “to:
generate a metric for each digital identity profile in a set of digital identity profiles, the metric indicative, for each of the digital identity profiles, of one or more electronic activities performed by a corresponding user;
identify a subset of the set of digital identity profiles for which the metric falls below a threshold;
input the subset of digital identity profiles to an artificial intelligence (AI) agent to generate, for each digital identity profile in the subset of digital identity profiles, a set of transitional elements, the AI agent configured to receive, as input, digital identity profiles and provide, as output, transitional elements corresponding to digital identity elements in the digital identity profiles received as input, the AI agent trained using training data comprising digital identity profiles in which the metric changed from being below a threshold in a first time period to being above the threshold in a second time period subsequent to the first time period; and
transmit, to one or more computing devices identified in the subset of digital identity profiles, one or more electronic messages to enhance network security.”
As per claim 13. The system of claim 12, wherein the one or more processors are further configured “to identify the set of digital identity profiles based on a third time period.”
As per claim 15. The system of claim 12, wherein the one or more processors are further configured “to train the AI agent using the training data and a supervised learning process.”
As per claim 16. The system of claim 12, wherein the one or more processors are further configured “to generate, using a regression model, one or more causal factors for the set of digital identity profiles.”
As per claim 17. The system of claim 12, wherein the one or more processors are further configured “to update a second set of digital identity profiles based on the set of transitional elements.”
As per claim 18. The system of claim 12, wherein the one or more processors are further configured “to generate one or more actions using a decisioning model and a set of available options.”
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may:
(1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or
(2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Appropriate action required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
NO rejections warranted at applicant’s time of filing for CONtinuation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
NO rejections warranted at applicant’s time of filing for CONtinuation.
Double Patenting
The non-statutory 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 non-statutory 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 non-statutory 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 § 2146 et seq. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a non-statutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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 e-Terminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An e-Terminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about e-Terminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim[s] 1, 3, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim[s] 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 12, 16, 17 of U.S. Patent No. 12299093.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter of both the pending application and the reference patent claim the same or similar subject matter and are not distinct in the following manner:
“..generating metrics for identity elements stored in digital profiles of users. A subset of profiles can be identified that have metrics that fall below a predetermined threshold and rise above a predetermined threshold, with which a training dataset can be generated. Machine-learning models can be executed over the training dataset to train an artificial intelligence agent that receives digital profiles as input and outputs translational elements corresponding to identity elements in the digital profiles. After training, additional profiles can be input to the machine-learning models of the artificial intelligence agent to identify a second subset of digital profiles with corresponding metrics. Electronic messages corresponding to the second subset can be generated and transmitted to one or more computing devices identified in the second subset of digital profiles…”
See the table below for a claim-by-claim comparison.
Pending US Application # 19/893947
US PAT # 12299093
1. A method, comprising:
generating, by a computing system, a metric for each digital identity profile in a set of digital identity profiles, the metric indicative, for each of the digital identity profiles, of one or more electronic activities performed by a corresponding user;
identifying, by the computing system, a subset of the set of digital identity profiles for which the metric falls below a threshold;
inputting, by the computing system, the subset of digital identity profiles to an artificial intelligence (AI) agent to generate, for each digital identity profile in the subset of digital identity profiles, a set of transitional elements, the AI agent configured to receive, as input, digital identity profiles and provide, as output, transitional elements corresponding to digital identity elements in the digital identity profiles received as input, the AI agent trained using training data comprising digital identity profiles in which the metric changed from being below a threshold in a first time period to being above the threshold in a second time period subsequent to the first time period; and
transmitting, by the computing system, to one or more computing devices identified in the subset of digital identity profiles, one or more electronic messages to enhance network security.
1. (Currently Amended) A method, comprising:
generating, by a computing system comprising one or more processors, for cache digital identity profile in a first set of digital identity profiles, a first metric corresponding to a first time period, and a second metric corresponding to a second time period following the first time period;
identifying, by the computing system, a first subset of the first set of digital identity profiles for which (i) the first metric falls below a threshold, and (ii) the second metric is at least as great as the threshold;
generating, by the computing system, for each digital identity profile in the first subset of digital identity profiles, a training dataset based on a first set of digital identity elements and a second set of digital identity elements;
applying, by the computing system, one or more machine learning models to the training dataset to train an artificial intelligence (AI) agent that is configured to receive, as input, digital identity profiles and provide, as output, transitional elements corresponding to digital identity elements in the digital identity profiles received as input;
generating, by the computing system, a third metric for each digital identity profile in a second set of digital identity profiles;
identifying, by the computing system, a second subset of the second set of digital identity profiles for which the third metric falls below the threshold;
inputting, by the computing system, the second subset of second set of digital identity profiles to the AI agent to generate, for each digital identity profile in the second set of digital identity profiles, a set of transitional elements; and
transmitting, by the computing system, to one or more computing devices identified in the second subset of digital identity profiles, one or more electronic messages corresponding to the set of transitional elements.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the AI agent comprises one or more of a classification model or a pattern recognition model.
2. (Original) The method of claim 1, wherein applying the one or more machine learning models comprises applying a pattern recognition model or a classification model to recognize normal or abnormal patterns of behavior.
7. The method of claim 1, further comprising generating, by the computing system, one or more actions using a decisioning model and a set of available options.
4. (Original) The method of claim 1, wherein applying the one or more machine learning models comprises applying a decisioning model to identify actions suited to achieving particular goals based on available options.
8. The method of claim 1, further comprising generating, by the computing system, a set of clusters each comprising one or more identity elements associated with the set of identity profiles.
5. (Original) The method of claim 1, further comprising adding, by the computing system, the set of transitional elements to corresponding digital identity profiles in the second subset of digital identity profiles.
10. The method of claim 9, wherein the retrieving comprises transmitting, by the computing system, an application programming interface (API) call to the second computing system.
7. (Original) The method of claim 6, wherein the retrieving comprises transmitting a first application programming interface (API) call to the second computing system.
11. The method of claim 1, wherein the once or more electronic messages comprise one or more interactive links for activities corresponding to a predetermined outcome.
12. (Original) The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more electronic messages comprise one or more selectable electronic links for activities corresponding to a predetermined outcome.
12. A system, comprising:
one or more processors coupled to non-transitory memory, the one or more processors configured to:
generate a metric for each digital identity profile in a set of digital identity profiles, the metric indicative, for each of the digital identity profiles, of one or more electronic activities performed by a corresponding user;
identify a subset of the set of digital identity profiles for which the metric falls below a threshold;
input the subset of digital identity profiles to an artificial intelligence (AI) agent to generate, for each digital identity profile in the subset of digital identity profiles, a set of transitional elements, the AI agent configured to receive, as input, digital identity profiles and provide, as output, transitional elements corresponding to digital identity elements in the digital identity profiles received as input, the AI agent trained using training data comprising digital identity profiles in which the metric changed from being below a threshold in a first time period to being above the threshold in a second time period subsequent to the first time period; and
transmit, to one or more computing devices identified in the subset of digital identity profiles, one or more electronic messages to enhance network security.
16. (Currently Amended) A computing system comprising one or more hardware processors coupled to non-transitory memory, the computing system configured to:
generate, for each digital identity profile in a first set of digital identity profiles, a first metric corresponding to a first time period, and a second metric corresponding to a second time period following the first time period;
identify a first subset of the first set of digital identity profiles for which (i) the first metric falls below a threshold, and (ii) the second metric is at least as great as the threshold;
generate, for digital identity profiles in the first subset of digital identity profiles, a training dataset based on a first set of digital identity elements and a second set of digital identity elements;
apply one or more machine learning models to the training dataset to train an artificial intelligence (AI) agent that is configured to receive, as input, digital identity profiles and provide, as output, transitional elements corresponding to digital identity elements in the digital identity profiles received as input;
generate a third metric for each digital identity profile in a second set of digital identity profiles;
identify a second subset of the second set of digital identity profiles for which the third metric falls below the threshold;
input the second subset of second set of digital identity profiles to the AI agent to generate, for each digital identity profile in the second set of digital identity profiles, a set of transitional elements; and
transmit, to one or more computing devices identified in the second subset of digital identity profiles, one or more electronic messages corresponding to the set of transitional elements.
14. The system of claim 12, wherein the AI agent comprises one or more of a classification model or a pattern recognition model.
17. (Original) The computing system of claim 16, wherein applying the one or more machine learning models comprises applying at least one of:
a pattern recognition model or a classification model to recognize normal or abnormal patterns of behavior;
a regression model to identify causal factors for one or more identity elements or corresponding metadata in digital identity profiles; or
a decisioning model to identify actions suited to achieving particular goals based on available options.
16. The system of claim 12, wherein the one or more processors are further configured to generate, using a regression model, one or more causal factors for the set of digital identity profiles.
17. (Original) The computing system of claim 16, wherein applying the one or more machine learning models comprises applying at least one of:
a pattern recognition model or a classification model to recognize normal or abnormal patterns of behavior;
a regression model to identify causal factors for one or more identity elements or corresponding metadata in digital identity profiles; or
a decisioning model to identify actions suited to achieving particular goals based on available options.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
NO rejections warranted at applicant’s time of filing for CONtinuation.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
NO rejections warranted at applicant’s time of filing for CONtinuation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim[s] 1 – 20 contain allowable subject matter but as allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
***The examiner notes that a reason’s for allowance can be written in the next subsequent office action once all formal requirements have been overcome as identified above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANT SHAIFER - HARRIMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7910. The examiner can normally be reached M - F: 9am to 5pm.
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, Ali Shayanfar can be reached at 571- 270 - 1050. 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.
/DANT B SHAIFER HARRIMAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2434
Prosecution Insights