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 .
This Office Action is responsive to communication filed on 08/07/2025.
Claims 1 – 20 are currently pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/05/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 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 - 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,405,983 B1. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because subject matters claimed in instant application can also find in patent ‘983.
In claim 1 of instant application, Applicant claims “A method of processing queries of ontology-based databases, comprising: obtaining a prompt indicating that when a user query satisfies a set of criteria, the user query is to be translated into a set of graph queries in a graph query language; receiving a specific user query in natural language, the specific user query indicating access to an ontology and satisfying the set of criteria, the ontology defining a plurality of object types of objects and a plurality of link types of links between objects, the ontology including a set of objects instantiated from one or more object types of the plurality of object types and a set of links instantiated from one or more link types of the plurality of link types, data of the ontology being stored in one or more databases, including a graph database; incorporating the specific user query into the prompt to obtain an extended prompt; executing, with the extended prompt, a first large language model (LLM) that accepts a query in natural language and generates code in one or more programming languages, including the graph query language; obtaining, from the executing, a set of database queries including one or more graph queries in the graph query language to access the ontology; submitting the set of database queries to a set of databases of the one or more databases to obtain a database query result; transmitting the database query result in response to the specific user query, wherein the method is performed by one or more processors.”
Similar limitation also found in ‘983. Certain limitation found in claim 1 of ‘983 but not in instant application such as “obtaining, from the executing, a set of database queries including one or more graph queries in the graph query language to update one or more links in the ontology and one or more database queries to update metadata of the ontology”.
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claim invention to broaden the claims at no additional cost in development.
Table comparison of claim 1
Instant Application Patent ‘983
A method of processing queries of ontology-based databases, comprising:
A method of processing queries of ontology-based databases, comprising:
obtaining a prompt indicating that when a user query satisfies a set of criteria, the user query is to be translated into a set of graph queries in a graph query language;
obtaining a prompt indicating that when a user query satisfies a set of criteria, the user query is to be translated into a set of graph queries in a graph query language;
receiving a specific user query in natural language,
receiving a specific user query in natural language,
the specific user query leading to an update of an ontology and satisfying the set of criteria,
the specific user query leading to an update of an ontology and satisfying the set of criteria,
the ontology defining a plurality of object types of objects and a plurality of link types of links between objects,
the ontology defining a plurality of object types of objects and a plurality of link types of links between objects,
the ontology including a set of objects instantiated from one or more object types of the plurality of object types and a set of links instantiated from one or more link types of the plurality of link types,
the ontology including a set of objects instantiated from one or more object types of the plurality of object types and a set of links instantiated from one or more link types of the plurality of link types,
data of the ontology being stored in one or more databases, including a graph database;
data of the ontology is-being stored in one or more databases, including a graph database;
incorporating the specific user query into the prompt to obtain an extended prompt;
incorporating the specific user query into the prompt to obtain an extended prompt;
executing, with the extended prompt, a first large language model (LLM) that accepts a query in natural language and generates code in one or more programming languages, including the graph query language;
executing, with the extended prompt, a first large language model (LLM) that accepts a query in natural language and generates code in one or more programming languages, including the graph query language;
obtaining, from the executing, a set of database queries including one or more graph queries in the graph query language to access the ontology;
obtaining, from the executing, a set of database queries including one or more graph queries in the graph query language to update one or more links in the ontology and one or more database queries to update metadata of the ontology;
submitting the set of database queries to a set of databases of the one or more databases to obtain a database query result;
submitting the set of database queries to a set of databases of the one or more databases to obtain a database query result;
transmitting the database query result in response to the specific user query
transmitting the database query result in response to the specific user query
wherein the method is performed by one or more processors.
wherein the method is performed by one or more processors.
The following is the closest art:
Karlberg et al (US 20240419835 A1) discloses a system and methods are directed to incorporating large language model (LLM) prompts into graph queries using graph query language and executing these graph queries. the query language can be extended with a LLM prompt that indicates to construct an input context table based on context data obtained from a graph traversal and the query to be executed over the context table (See abstract, Para. 0021).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAM LINH T NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4024. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:00 - 3:00 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, Apu Mofiz can be reached at 571-272-4080. 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.
/CAM LINH T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2161
Prosecution Insights