DETAILED ACTION
1. This office action is in response to application 19/286,033 filed on 7/30/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending in this office action.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Double Patenting
3. 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 § 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 nonstatutory 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 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims, 1, 5, 6-10 of U.S. Patent No. 12,380,152. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims in bold are the same and the differences would have been obvious to artisan of ordinary skill in the art. For instance with respect to claim 1 managing data is the functional equivalent to controlling data and with respect to claims 9 and 10 granting access or no access based on security is the functional equivalent of permissions.
19/286,033 12,380,152
1. A computer-implemented method of managing access control for ontology data,
comprising: receiving a set of data source updates for one or more datasets from one or more data sources; managing a set of user accounts of a user account type having one or more attributes; transforming the set of data source updates to a list of updates to an ontology, the ontology including a definition for each ontology entity type of a plurality of ontology entity types, the definition including one or more properties, the ontology including a plurality of ontology entities instantiated from the plurality of ontology entity types,
an ontology entity being an object or a link between two objects, obtaining a first transformation mapping columns of a first dataset of the one or more datasets to a first set of properties of a certain ontology entity type of the plurality of ontology entity types;
obtaining a second transformation mapping columns of a second dataset of the one or
more datasets to a second set of properties of the certain ontology entity type;
obtaining a specific security policy that applies to the first set of properties of ontology
entities of the certain ontology entity type based on a first set of permissions controlling access to rows of the first dataset by the set of user accounts; obtaining a particular security policy that applies to the second set of properties of the ontology entities of the certain ontology entity type based on a second set of permissions controlling access to rows of the second dataset by the set of user accounts; providing access to the ontology to user accounts according to the specific security policy or the particular security policy, wherein the method is performed by one or more processors.
1. A computer-implemented method of managing access control for ontology data, comprising: receiving a set of data source updates for one or more datasets from one or more data sources; transforming the set of data source updates to a list of updates to an ontology based on a first mapping, the ontology including a definition for each ontology entity type of a plurality of ontology entity types, the definition including one or more properties, the ontology including a plurality of ontology entities instantiated from the plurality of ontology entity types, an ontology entity being an object or a link between two objects, the first mapping being between the one or more datasets and the plurality of ontology entity types; managing a set of user accounts of a user account type having one or more attributes; causing presenting a first option including three items, the first option allowing creating a rule by choosing two items from the three items, the three items being an attribute of the user account type, a property of an ontology entity type, and a value; receiving a selection of the first option to create one or more rules; creating a first security policy based on the one or more rules; providing access to the ontology to user accounts according to the first security policy, wherein the method is performed by one or more processors.
creating a first transformation mapping columns of a first dataset of the one or more datasets to a first set of properties of a certain ontology entity type of the plurality of ontology entity types; creating a second transformation mapping columns of a second dataset of the one or more datasets to a second set of properties of the certain ontology entity type; creating a specific security policy that applies to the first set of properties of ontology entities of the certain ontology entity type based on a first set of permissions controlling access to rows of the first dataset by the set of user accounts; creating a particular security policy that applies to the second set of properties of the ontology entities of the certain ontology entity type based on a second set of permissions controlling access to rows of the second dataset by the set of user accounts (from claim 5)
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: causing presenting a first option including three items, the first option allowing creating a rule by choosing two items from the three items, the three items being an attribute of the user account type, a property of an ontology entity type, and a value; receiving a selection of the first option to create one or more rules; creating a first security policy based on the one or more rules; providing access to the ontology to user accounts according to the first security policy.
Causing presenting a first option including three items, the first option allowing creating a rule by choosing two items from the three items, the three items being an attribute of the user account type, a property of an ontology entity type, and a value; receiving a selection of the first option to create one or more rules; creating a first security policy based on the one or more rules; providing access to the ontology to user accounts according to the first security policy (from claim 1)
3. The method of claim 2, further comprising causing presenting a third option to combine the two items by choosing a relational operator from a plurality of relational operators.
6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising causing presenting a third option to combine the two items by choosing a relational operator from a plurality of relational operators.
4. The method of claim 2, further comprising causing presenting a fourth option to associate one or more permissions with the rule that are granted when the rule applies.
7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising causing presenting a fourth option to associate one or more permissions with the rule that are granted when the rule applies.
5. The method of claim 4, the creating comprising: determining a scope of each rule in a plurality of rules based on the associated one or more permissions; determining a scope of the plurality of rules in combination based on the scope of each rule and a logical operator.
9. The computer-implemented method of claim 7, the creating comprising: determining a scope of each rule in a plurality of rules based on the associated one or more permissions; determining a scope of the plurality of rules in combination based on the scope of each rule and a logical operator.
6. The method of claim 4, the providing comprising applying the specific security policy or the particular security policy before applying the first security policy.
4. The computer-implemented method of claim 3, the providing comprising applying the specific security policy before applying the first security policy.
7. The method of claim 1, a specific attribute of the one or more attributes of the user account type corresponding to a user role of plurality of user roles, each user role being associated with a distinct set of discovering, reading, writing, or administering permissions.
10. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, a specific attribute of the one or more attributes of the user account type corresponding to a user role of plurality of user roles, each user role being associated with a distinct set of discovering, reading, writing, or administering permissions.
8. The method of claim 1, the list of updates to the ontology including a list of changes to at least one ontology entity of the plurality of ontology entities, the method further comprising, for an ontology entity of the at least one ontology entity, representing the list of updates that applies to the ontology entity in multiple forms to generate multiple representations respectively in multiple object databases, the providing comprising applying the specific security policy or the particular security policy equally to the multiple representations.
11. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, the list of updates to the ontology including a list of changes to at least one ontology entity of the plurality of ontology entities, the method further comprising, for an ontology entity of the at least one ontology entity, representing the list of updates that applies to the ontology entity in multiple forms to generate multiple representations respectively in multiple object databases, the providing comprising applying the first security policy equally to the multiple representations.
9. The method of claim 1, the providing comprising: receiving a request from a first user account to access to a first ontology entity of the certain ontology entity type; granting access to the first set of properties but not the second set of properties of the first ontology entity.
8. The computer-implemented method of claim 7, the one or more permissions allowing no access to a first property of a specific ontology entity type of the plurality of ontology entity types and allowing access to a second property of the specific ontology entity type.
10. The method of claim 1, further comprising: obtaining a first security policy that applies to a first ontology entity type from which first objects are instantiated; obtaining a second security policy that applies to a second ontology entity type from which second objects are instantiated; receiving a request from a first user account to access a certain link between a specific first object of the first objects and a specific second object of the second objects; granting access to the certain link based on the first security policy and the second security policy.
the ontology including a plurality of ontology entities instantiated from the plurality of ontology entity types, an ontology entity being an object or a link between two objects, the first mapping being between the one or more datasets and the plurality of ontology entity types; managing a set of user accounts of a user account type having one or more attributes;
Claims 11-20 are system claim substantially corresponding to the method of claims 1-10 and are thus rejected for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claims 1-10.
Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIYAH STONE HARPER whose telephone number is (571)272-0759. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 10:00 am - 6:00 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, Sanjiv Shah can be reached on (571) 272-4098. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Eliyah S. Harper/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2166 June 9, 2026
Prosecution Insights