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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 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)(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.
Claim(s) 1 – 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Southgate, publication number: US 2024/0281352.
As per claims 1 and 15, Southgate teaches method for detecting fraud through artificial intelligence (Al) agent testing,
comprising:
- receiving, by a fraud detection module, a plurality of data types including factual data and derived inferential knowledge associated with an inferential knowledge profile of the AI agent (monitoring permissible and impermissible outputs of AI agents, [0046]);
- executing, by the AI agent test module, at least one of a clone detection test or a validate user test, wherein:
- the validate user test configured to verify whether the AI agent behavior aligns
with a known user identity or profile (Checking if output conforms to a profile, [0046]); and
the clone detection test configured to detect whether the AI agent is imitating
another agent or identity based on inference patterns or response characteristics (Checking if output of the agent does not conform to a profile, [0046]);
- retrieving, from a secure cloud-based enclave, the factual data access permissions and explicitly defined inference permissions associated with the AI agent (behavior profile stored in a database, [0064]);
- comparing, by a validation test, the AI agent's observed data access permission and
inference permissions with the factual data access permissions and explicitly defined
inference permissions to detect unauthorized or excessive inferential behavior (data boundaries, [0032], interpretations [0047], comparing to behavioral profile, [0016][0046][0064]); and
- detecting, by the fraud detection module, a fraud event based on outputs from at least one of the clone detection test, validate user test or validation test (Flagging abnormal and rogue agent behavior, [0031][0048][0054]).
As per claim 2, Southgate teaches comprising initiating at least one remedial action upon detection of the fraud event (threat procedure, [0033][0035]).
As per claim 3, Southgate teaches wherein the remedial action includes but not limited to AI agent suspension, trust score reduction, user notification, or logging the fraud event in an immutable audit log (alert, [0048]).
As per claim 4, Southgate teaches wherein the secure cloud-based enclave stores the
inferential knowledge profile comprising authorized inference types, reference behavior
models, and context-sensitive access conditions for each AI agent (Behavior profile, [0021]).
As per claim 5, Southgate teaches wherein the secure cloud-based enclave maintains
immutable audit logs detailing at least one of data access by the AI agent, inference
permissions granted, and inferences made by the AI agent (Logs, [0041]).
As per claim 6, Southgate teaches comprising tracking and enforcing permission to infer
within the secure cloud-based enclave as an auditable right (monitoring permissible output, [0046]).
As per claim 7, Southgate teaches comprising registering, monitoring and governing one or more AI agents in a marketplace platform, wherein the AI agents interact with user data under defined inferential permission constraints (Alexa, [0029]).
Claims 8 – 14 are rejected based on claims 1 - 7
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLUGBENGA O IDOWU whose telephone number is (571)270-1450. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am - 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, Jung Kim can be reached at 5712723804. 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.
/OLUGBENGA O IDOWU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2494
Prosecution Insights