Ex Parte Bolik et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Mar 28, 2016

12960866 (P.T.A.B. Mar. 28, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
12/960,866 12/06/2010
63400 7590 03/30/2016
IBM CORP, (DHJ)
c/o DAVID H. JUDSON
15950DALLAS PARKWAY
SUITE 225
DALLAS, TX 75248
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Christian Bolik
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.
A US920100368US 1 8074
EXAMINER
ZAIDI, SYED A
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2493
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
03/30/2016 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):
mail@davidjudson.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte CHRISTIAN BOLIK, NEETA GARIMELLA,
JAYASHREE RAMANATHAN, MARKUS ROHWEDDER,
and ZHIGUO HUANG
Appeal2014-005997
Application 12/960,866
Technology Center 2400
Before ROBERT E. NAPPI, ERIC S. FRAHM, and SCOTT B. HOWARD,
Administrative Patent Judges.
HOW ARD, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellants 1 appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from a Final Rejection of
claims 1-24, which constitute all of the claims pending in this application.
We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
We reverse.
1 Appellants identify International Business Machines Corporation as the
real party in interest. App. Br. 1.
Appeal2014-005997
Application 12/960,866
THE INVENTION
The claimed invention is directed to identity based auditing within a
multiple application environment. A user uses a first application to execute
a remote access login of a second application using a system account.
Although the remote access login was performed using a system account, the
identity of the user is propagated from the first application to the second
application. As a result, audit records generated by each of these
applications contain the user identity. Spec. 3 :2---6.
Claim 1, reproduced below, is illustrative of the claimed subject
matter:
1. A method for identity-based auditing in a data processing
system comprising a set of applications, at least first and second
of the applications maintaining distinct identity registries,
compnsmg:
upon receipt of a request at a first application, the request
being associated with a user identity, executing a remote access
login to a second application using a system account while
passing in the user identity;
performing an operation using the second application; and
writing an audit log entry associated with the second
application, the audit log entry being associated with the user
identity.
REFERENCES
The prior art relied upon by the Examiner as evidence in rejecting the
claims on appeal is:
Lusen US 2004/0128169 Al July 1, 2004
Ting US 2008/0184349 Al July 31, 2008
David Huemer et al., "Towards a Side Access Free Data Grid Resource
by Means of Infrastructure Clouds," 2009 International Conference on
Parallel Processinf!. Workshops, pp. 198-205 (2009) ("Huemer")
2
Appeal2014-005997
Application 12/960,866
REJECTIONS
Claims 1, 3, 7-9, 11, 15-17, 19, 23, and 24 stand rejected under
35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ting. Final Act. 14--18.
Claims 2, 10, and 18 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being
unpatentable over Ting in view of Huemer. Final Act. 18-20.
Claims 4--6, 12-14, and 20-22 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 103(a) as being unpatentable over Ting in view of Lusen. Final Act. 20-
23.
ANALYSIS
We have reviewed the Examiner's rejection in light of Appellants'
arguments that the Examiner erred. In reaching this decision, we consider
all evidence presented and all arguments made by Appellants. We agree
with Appellants' arguments regarding the pending claims.
Appellants argue Ting does not teach or suggest "writing an audit log
entry associated with the second application, the audit log entry being
associated with the user identity" as recited in claim 1 and similarly recited
in independent claims 9 and 17. App. Br. 11-13. Although Appellants
concede that Ting discloses audit records, Appellants argue Ting does not
teach or suggest the specific characteristics of the claimed audit log
associated with a user's identity that is passed from the first application to
the second application. Id.; see also Reply Br. 5---6.
The Examiner finds Ting discloses that "the single-sign-on agent
records and performs a user's activity audit as the user accesses one or more
applications." Final Act. 15 (citing Ting i-fi-135-37); Ans. 9 ("Ting
3
Appeal2014-005997
Application 12/960,866
summarily teaches the SSO agent keeps an audit record of a user's activity as
the user accesses one or more applications."). The Examiner further finds
"Ting ties the identity of the user with user's activities in one or more
applications and stores the information for monitoring requirements." Ans.
10.
Based on the record before us and the specific evidence relied on by
the Examiner, we agree with Appellants that the Examiner erred. Although
Ting states a user profile can contain "audit records of a user's activities
within an application" (Ting i-f 37), we agree with Appellants that the
sections cited by the Examiner do not teach or suggest the specific audit log
entries recited in claim 1.
Because we agree with at least one of the arguments advanced by
Appellants, we need not reach the merits of Appellants' other arguments.
Accordingly, we are constrained on this record to reverse the
Examiner's rejection of claims 1, 9, and 17, and dependent claims 2-8, 10-
16, and 18-24.
DECISION
For the above reasons, we reverse the Examiner's rejections of claims
1-24.
REVERSED
4