Ex Parte Boldyrev et alDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardMay 27, 201613359182 (P.T.A.B. May. 27, 2016) Copy Citation UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE 13/359, 182 01/26/2012 10949 7590 06/01/2016 Nokia Corporation and Alston & Bird LLP c/o Alston & Bird LLP Bank of America Plaza, 101 South Tryon Street Suite 4000 Charlotte, NC 28280-4000 FIRST NAMED INVENTOR Sergey Boldyrev UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www .uspto.gov ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 042933/454432 6619 EXAMINER JAMI, HARES ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2162 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 06/01/2016 ELECTRONIC Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the following e-mail address( es): usptomail@alston.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte SERGEY BOLDYREV, MIKA JUHANI MANNERMAA, and DMITRY KOLESNIKOV Appeal2014-007995 Application 13/359, 182 Technology Center 2100 Before ROBERT E. NAPPI, CARLL. SILVERMAN, and JOHN D. HAMANN, Administrative Patent Judges. NAPPI, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE This is a decision on appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) of the Final Rejection of claims 1through3, 5 through 11, and 13 through 19. The Examiner has indicated claims 4, 12, and 20 as containing allowable subject matter. We reverse. INVENTION Appellants' invention relates to a method for providing data access via multi-user views, where an access management platform determines at least one view of data, and at least one view is created based on one or more queries with one or more projections in one or more monadic elements to the Appeal2014-007995 Application 13/359, 182 data. See Abstract. Claim 1 is illustrative of the invention and reproduced below: 1. A method comprising facilitating a processing of and/or processing (1) data and/or (2) information and/or (3) at least one signal, the (1) data and/or (2) information and/or (3) at least one signal based, at least in part, on the following: at least one determination of at least one view of data, wherein the at least one view is created based, at least in part, on one or more queries with one or more projections in one or more monadic elements to the data; one or more policies for accessing the data, wherein the one or more policies specify at least one or more access capabilities; a storage of the one or more policies, the one or more access capabilities, or a combination thereof in the one or more monadic elements; and a granting of access to the at least one view by one or more requesting devices, wherein the granting of the access is determined by processing and/or facilitating a processing of the one or more monadic elements to determine whether the one or more requesting devices have the one or more access capabilities. REJECTION AT ISSUE The Examiner has rejected claims 1 through 3, 5 through 11, and 13 through 19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Fisher (US 6,085,191; July 4, 2000), Majkic (Zoran Majkic and Bhanu Prasad, Kleisli Category and Database Mappings, Oct. 2010) and Chowdhury (US 2008/0086758 Al; Apr. 10, 2008). Answer 2-7. 1 1 Throughout this Opinion, we refer to the Appeal Brief (filed February, 10 2014), Reply Brief (filed July 9, 2014), and the Examiner's Answer (mailed May 9, 2014). 2 Appeal2014-007995 Application 13/359, 182 ANALYSIS Appellants have presented several arguments directed to the rejection of independent claims 1, 9, and 17. App. Br. 7-12. The dispositive issue presented by these arguments is: Did the Examiner err in concluding the skilled artisan would combine Fisher, Majkic, and Chowdhury such that there is a storage of: the one or more policies, the one or more access capabilities, or a combination thereof, in the one or more monadic elements to the data which is used to determine the view of the data. Each of the independent claims recites storing in the monadic element, which is used in the determination of the view, policies for accessing the data or access capabilities. The Examiner relies upon Chowdhury to teach the monadic element, and considers that the skilled artisan would combine Chowdhury with Fisher and Majkic as it would "improve efficacy of access controlling through translating of high level policies in English like specification into a formal logic language by parameterizing events which represent access control requests, decisions, and system context." Answer 11. We have reviewed the references and the Examiner's rejection. We disagree with the Examiner's rationale for combining the references. We find the Examiner has not adequately shown that the improved efficacy of accessing is facilitated by the storage of policies in the monadic elements to determine the view as recited in each of the independent claims. Accordingly, we will not sustain the Examiner's rejection of independent claims 1, 9, and 1 7, as well as the claims that depend therefrom. 3 Appeal2014-007995 Application 13/359, 182 DECISION The decision of the Examiner to reject claims 1 through 3, 5 through 11, and 13 through 19 is reversed. REVERSED 4 Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation