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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the application 19/282,952 filed on 07/28/2025.
Claims 1-20 have been examined and are pending in this application.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted on 10/13/2025 and 09/08/2025, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
This application is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. 17/814,315, filed July 22, 2022 (Now U.S. patent No. 12,423,402), which application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/363,909, filed on April 29, 2022.
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 obviousness-type 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); and 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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
“The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form 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 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. “
Claims 1, 5-12 and 16-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4-10, 14-16 and 19-20 of U.S. Patent Application No. 17/814,315 (Now U.S. patent No. 12,423,402) in view of Wieker (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0127831).
Current Application No. 19/282,952
Patent Application No. 17/814,315 (Now U.S. patent No. 12,423,402)
Claims 1, 12 and 20. A (method/ an apparatus/ A non-transitory computer-readable medium) for managing identifying information, comprising:
identifying, at a software platform, an indication of a data breach comprising a credential associated with an application, wherein:
the software platform comprises a plurality of associations with a plurality of applications including the application, and
the plurality of associations correspond to a plurality of access types by which the software platform accesses respective applications of the plurality of applications;
determining, in response to the indication of the data breach, an integration parameter for the software platform to communicate with the application based at least in part on an association of the plurality of associations between the software platform and the application, wherein the integration parameter indicates instructions to access the application in accordance with an access type of the plurality of access types corresponding to the association between the software platform and the application;
accessing the application via the software platform based at least in part on the instructions indicated by the determined integration parameter; and
updating the credential based at least in part on accessing the application.
Claims 1, 11 and 17. A (method/ an apparatus/ A non-transitory computer-readable medium) for managing identifying information, comprising:
receiving, at a software platform, a request to update a credential associated with an application, wherein:
the software platform comprises a plurality of associations with a plurality of applications including the application, and
the plurality of associations correspond to a plurality of access types by which the software platform accesses respective applications of the plurality of applications;
determining an integration parameter for the software platform to communicate with the application based at least in part on an association of the plurality of associations between the software platform and the application, wherein the integration parameter indicates instructions to access the application in accordance with an access type of the plurality of access types corresponding to the association between the software platform and the application;
accessing the application via the software platform based at least in part on the instructions indicated by the determined integration parameter and authentication information stored at the software platform; and
updating the credential based at least in part on accessing the application.
.
Claims 5-11 and 16-19
Claims 4-10, 14-16 and 19
Patent Application No. 17/814,315 (Now U.S. patent No. 12,423,402) does not explicitly identifying, at a software platform, an indication of a data breach comprising a credential.
However, in an analogous art, Wieker discloses identifying, at a software platform, an indication of a data breach comprising a credential (Wieker: par. 0007, 0015 and 0046; Wieker teaches that the first entity can monitor for data breaches at the second entity. If a data breach is detected, the first entity can notify the user of the data breach at the second entity, and provide the user with the option (e.g., through a push notification), to remove all user information at the second entity. receiving from the user device a deletion request to delete the encrypted user information at the first entity; (5) receiving, at the first entity from the second entity, a validation request to validate credentials of the second entity; (6) validating the credentials of the second entity and sending, from the first entity to the second entity, a validation token if the second entity's credentials are valid; (7) receiving at the first entity updated user information related to the user(s) and encrypting at the first entity the updated information; (15) comprising sending the updated user information to the second entity. See also par. 0045);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to combine the teachings of Wieker with the method and system of Patent Application No. 17/814,315, wherein identifying, at a software platform, an indication of a data breach comprising a credential to provide users with a means for receiving, at the first entity, information related to a data breach at the second entity and sending a breach notification to the user(s) (Wieker par. 0007).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if the rejection(s) under the nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection(s), set forth in this Office action is resolved.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
As to claims 1-20, the closest prior arts, over Weiker (US 2020/0127831), in view of Cameron (US 2005/ 0027713), in view of Pangam (US 2018/0176195), in view of Baldwin (US 20210209205) and further in view of Xie (US 2021.0194884), alone or in combination fails to anticipate or render obvious the claim invention.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANCHIT K SARKER whose telephone number is (571)270-7907. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 AM-5:30 PM.
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, FARID HOMAYOUNMEHR can be reached at 571-272-3739. 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.
/SANCHIT K SARKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2495
Prosecution Insights