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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/08/2025 has been entered.
Examiner Notes
(1) In the case of amending the Claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention. This will assist in expediting compact prosecution. MPEP 714.02 recites: “Applicant should also specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure. See MPEP § 2163.06. An amendment which does not comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.121 (b), (c), (d), and (h) may be held not fully responsive. See MPEP § 714.” Amendments not pointing to specific support in the disclosure may be deemed as not complying with provisions of 37 C.F.R. 1.131 (b), (c), (d), and (h) and therefore held not fully responsive. Generic statements such as "Applicants believe no new matter has been introduced" may be deemed insufficient.
(2) Examiner cites particular columns, paragraphs, figures and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant' s arguments with respect to claims 8, 27 and 36 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection (See new reference of Singh Ahuja).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 8, 27, and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramsay (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0208017 A1) in view of Lipkin et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0132193 A1), Singh Ahuja et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,447,777 B1) and Tighe et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11,500,824 B1).
Regarding claim 8, Ramsay teaches a database access method comprising:
connecting, by a database access scheduling module in a local area network (LAN), to one or more database instances in the LAN and comprising a first database instance (paragraph [0057]- [0060], [0082], Fig. 2 illustrate the established connections/communications via communication interface 230 to and from the cloud system 100; the synchronization engine control the synchronization of data between the cloud system 100 and the local system 200);
actively establishing, by the database access scheduling module, […], and in the LAN, a connection to […] in a first cloud (paragraph [0057]- [0060], [0082], Fig. 2 illustrate the established connections/communications via communication interface 230 to and from the cloud system 100; the synchronization engine control the synchronization of data between the cloud system 100 and the local system 200, noted, the synchronization engine is interpreted as a database access scheduling module).
Ramsay does not explicitly disclose: said connection to said database access service engine in said first cloud, wherein the database access service engine is deployed independently of and on a separate server from an application for routing data in a distributed environment.
Lipkin teaches: wherein the database access service engine is deployed independently of and on a separate server from an application (Fig. 1, paragraph [0014], the system 150 can include one or more cloud computing system 100, one or more controllers 102,…; the cloud computer system can include an orchestration engine 120; the orchestra engine 120 can be an executable application reside on the cloud computing system 100 configured to process transactions associated with physical objects; also see paragraph [0022] and [0025], the terminal 125 can attempt to transmit the request to process the transaction associated with one or more items to the cloud computing system 100, via load balancer 112; the load balancer 112 can detect the terminal attempt to transfer the request to the cloud computing system 100; the offline monitor 114 can confirm the cloud computing is currently online and available. The router can route the request to the cloud computing system 100 in response to establishing communication with the cloud computing system).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include said connection to a database access service engine in said first cloud, wherein the database access service engine is deployed independently of and on a separate server from an application into data accessing of Ramsay.
Motivation to do so would be to include said connection to a database access service engine in said first cloud, wherein the database access service engine is deployed independently of and on a separate server from an application for routing data in a distributed environment (Lipkin, paragraph [0011], line 2).
Ramsay as modified by Lipkin do not explicitly disclose:
said established based on a first internet Protocol (IP address) of a database access engine (Fig. 5B, col. 11, line 21-58, the system is represented by a logical IP address and port, TIP and Tp; as illustrated, the control block 514 includes a field 516 containing the logical IP address of the system, TIP , a field 518 containing the logical port of the system Tp, a field 520 containing the IP address of the server SIP, a field 522 containing the port of the server Sp; noted, as application specification, paragraph [0044], “the database access engine and the application are deployed on different servers”, which is an indication the database access is a part of the server, thus, the IP address and port corresponding to server as shown above, that reads on “database access engine” as claimed; also see Fig. 5A-5D); recording, by the database access service engine, in a metabase, and when the connection is successfully established, a first binding relationship corresponding to the connection and comprising a first identifier of the database access scheduling module and a second identifier of the database access service engine, wherein the first identifier is a third IP address of the database access scheduling module (col. 11, line 3-11, the connection is represented by a pointer in which points to the control block for the connection, which bears a 1-1 relationship with the connection; a connection can be a connection between a client and a system, the system and server, or a client and the server; also see col. 14, line 35-41, the system comprises interface, classification engine (also referred to in the figure as a binding lookup table (BLT)), etc.; also see Fig. 5A-5D, Fig. 5B, col. 11, line 21-58, the system is represented by a logical IP address and port, TIP and Tp; as illustrated, the control block 514 includes a field 516 containing the logical IP address of the system, TIP , a field 518 containing the logical port of the system Tp, a field 520 containing the IP address of the server SIP, a field 522 containing the port of the server Sp; also see col. 17, line 49-55, if a connection for the packet has already been established (indicated to the BLT 804 when it access the KRCAM 820 and receives a TCB pointer in response); since the desired class of service for the packet was already established, and a TCB pointer for the connection already allocated, when the connection first established; noted, “when the connection was first established” and the information of connection of client-server, server-system, and client-system are included in binding look up table [BLT], which is reads on as claimed).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include said established based on a first internet Protocol (IP address) of a database access engine; recording, by the database access service engine, in a metabase, and when the connection is successfully established, a first binding relationship corresponding to the connection and comprising a first identifier of the database access scheduling module and a second identifier of the database access service engine, wherein the first identifier is a third IP address of the database access scheduling module into data accessing of Ramsay.
Motivation to do so would be to include said established based on a first internet Protocol (IP address) of a database access engine; recording, by the database access service engine, in a metabase, and when the connection is successfully established, a first binding relationship corresponding to the connection and comprising a first identifier of the database access scheduling module and a second identifier of the database access service engine, wherein the first identifier is a third IP address of the database access scheduling module, which is modularized, scalable, and suitable for high throughput applications (Singh Ahuja, col. 1, line 26-28).
Ramsay as modified by Lipkin and Singh Ahuja further teach:
receiving, by the database access service engine, from the application, and according a second binding relationship between the first database instance and the database access service engine, an access request of the application and for accessing the first database instance, wherein the access request carries a third identifier of the first database instance, and wherein the third identifier is a second IP address of the first database instance or is both the second IP address and a port number of the first database instance;
receiving, by the database access service engine, from the application, and according a second binding relationship between the first database instance and the database access service engine, an access request of the application and for accessing the first database instance (Ramsay, paragraph [0094], [0108], paragraph [0081]-[0082], the commands present in the command lists may be generated in response to actions taken by the cloud system 100 or consumer system 300; for example, if a data store relates to payroll and consumer system 300 request creation of an new payee, a command may be placed in the command list 113 to instructs a local application to create a new payee; commands are received from the cloud system 100 by the connectivity unit 260; the request for synchronization [interpreted as ‘an access request’] may be received from the cloud system; the request for synchronization may comprise one or more the following parameters: a reference an adapter; a reference to a particular dataset within the local application [interpreted as ‘the first database instance’]; a reference to a particular connectivity unit, one or more commands while Lipkin, paragraph [0022], [0023] and [0025], teaches the terminal 125 can attempt to transmit the request to process the transaction associated with one or more items to the cloud computing system 100, via load balancer 112; the load balancer 112 can detect the terminal attempt to transfer the request to the cloud computing system 100; the offline monitor 114 can confirm the cloud computing is currently online and available. The router can route the request to the cloud computing system 100 in response to establishing communication with the cloud computing system; the computing system 100 can execute the orchestra engine 120 upon receiving the request; the orchestration engine can query the physical object databases to retrieve information associated with the physical object, using the physical information from the request),
wherein the access request carries a third identifier is a second IP address of the first database instance or is both the IP address and a port number of the first database instance (Ramsay, paragraph [0081] -[0082], teaches the request for synchronization may be received from the cloud system; the request for synchronization may comprise one or more the following parameters: a reference an adapter; a reference to a particular dataset within the local application; a reference to a particular connectivity unit, one or more commands; while Singh Ahuja, col. 10, line 28-31 and line 38-39, a protocol engine receives a resource request in accordance with a prescribed protocol; the resource requests may be in the form of packets; also see Fig. 6A, col. 12, line 1-14, a packet header for a TCP/IP packet is illustrated; the source IP address and source port fields of the packet header…; the combination of Ramsay and Tighe teaches said limitation as claimed);
sending, by the database access scheduling module, to the first database instance, and according to the third identifier (Ramsay, paragraph [0081] -[0082], teaches the request for synchronization may be received from the cloud system; the request for synchronization may comprise one or more the following parameters: a reference an adapter; a reference to a particular dataset within the local application; a reference to a particular connectivity unit, one or more commands).
Ramsay as modified by Lipskin and Singh Ahuja do not explicitly disclose:
receiving, by the database access scheduling module and from the first database instance, a processing result corresponding to the access request.
Tighe teaches: receiving, by the database access scheduling module and from the first database instance, a processing result corresponding to the access request (col. 10, line 55-67, the database server receive the set of database commands…; the database server execute the set of database commands received from proxy server, as a result of executing the set of database commands, the database server produces a set of results; also see col. 11, line 1-15, the proxy server receives a set of results; after applying the set of applicable rules to the set of results, the proxy server forwards the modified results to the client computer system; also see col. 8, the routing action field identifies a particular database server to be used when the rule is applied by specifying a name, IP address, or other identifier associated with particular database).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include receiving, by the database access scheduling module and from the first database instance, a processing result corresponding to the access request into data accessing of Ramsay.
Motivation to do so would be to include receiving, by the database access scheduling module and from the first database instance, a processing result corresponding to the access request that provides an interface to the database client that is compatible with the database client while modifying the operation of the database server (Tighe, col. 3, line 16-18).
Ramsay, Lipkin, Singh Ahuja and Tighe further teach:
sending, by the database access scheduling module and to the database access service engine, the processing result to enable provision of the processing result to the application (Lipkin, paragraph [0014], teaches the controller 102 can include a services engine 104, contain 106, and a queue 108; the service engine 104 can be executable residing on the controller 102 configured to process transaction associated with physical objects; also see paragraph [0020], the service engine can query the container 106 to retrieve information associated with the physical object, using the physical object information from the request; the service engine 102 can generate resultant data while processing the request; the resultant data can be stored in the queue 108;also see Fig. 2A, paragraph [0041], in response to determine the cloud computing system coming online, the resultant data can be transferred from the queue 108 to the EPF service and Tighe, col. 10, line 55-67, teaches the database server receive the set of database commands…; the database server execute the set of database commands received from proxy server, as a result of executing the set of database commands, the database server produces a set of results; also see col. 11, line 1-15, the proxy server receives a set of results; after applying the set of applicable rules to the set of results, the proxy server forwards the modified results to the client computer system).
As per claim 27, this claim is rejected on grounds corresponding to the rationales given above for rejected claim 8 and is similarly rejected.
As per claim 36, this claim is rejected on grounds corresponding to the rationales given above for rejected claim 8 and is similarly rejected.
Claims 11, 29 and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramsay (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0208017 A1) in view of Lipkin et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0132193 A1), Singh Ahuja et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,447,777 B1) and Tighe et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11,500,824 B1), further in view of HUANG et al. (China Publication CN 102523267 A).
Regarding claim 11, Ramsay as modified by Lipkin, Singh Ahuja and Tighe teach all claimed limitations as set forth in rejection of claim 8, but do not explicitly disclose: sending, by the database access engine, the access request to the database access scheduling module based on the first identifier.
HUANG teaches: sending, by the database access engine, the access request to the database access scheduling module based on the first identifier (page 3, paragraph 16th-20th, resource management module 1 receives user’s request, and the cloud backup schedule information user is corresponding according to user’s request, and cloud backup schedule information comprises the address information of scheduler module 2; scheduler module 2 receives the authentication information that users send according to cloud backup schedule information, verifies said user’s legitimacy according to authentication information; scheduler module 2 receives the backup request of validated users, noted, the address information of scheduler module 2, which is interpreted as the first identifier).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include sending, by the database access engine, the access request to the database access scheduling module based on the first identifier into data accessing of Ramsay.
Motivation to do so would be to include sending, by the database access engine, the access request to the database access scheduling module based on the first identifier to provide a kind of cloud standby system and cloud backup method, on this system, can dispose privately owned separately cloud backup, ensured the private ownership of enterprise's Backup Data and exclusive express network bandwidth to different enterprises (HUANG, 8th paragraph).
As per claims 29 and 37, these claims are rejected on grounds corresponding to the rationales given above for rejected claim 11 and are similarly rejected.
Claims 21, 22, 28, 39, 40, and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramsay (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0208017 A1) in view of Lipkin et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0132193 A1), Singh Ahuja et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,447,777 B1) and Tighe et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11,500,824 B1), further in view of Salinas et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0142856 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Ramsay as modified by Lipkin, Singh Ahuja, and Tighe teach all claimed limitations as set forth in rejection of claim 8, but do not explicitly disclose: establishing a connection between the database access service engine and database instance based on the identifier of the database service engine.
Salinas teaches: establishing a connection between the database access service engine and database instance based on the second identifier (Salinas, Fig. 4, paragraph [0028], line 11-4, [0038]-[0040], [0042]-[0044], each container include a database instance and multiple databases associated with customer of the multi-tenant environment; the scheduler can identify a cabinet by available computing and storage resources to handle the database; assume the request is from a customer having dedicated database resources such as dedicated cabinets; the identified host may be allocated an IP address, e.g., from a network layer of the environment, when the identified computing host is selected, a remote block storage can be configured and connection information for the selected host and database can be allocated, to provide for communication between host and block storage, an appropriate identifier can be established, e.g., along with a password, identification information can be used to access the database instance; the compute worker can request volume provisioning responsive to this verification that the IP address has been obtained, a guest worker then calls the guest OS to request containing of database instance, when this instance is received, it can be installed; thus the instance can be made available for handling database scenarios, this availability of the instance can be indicated to the requester via a verification message that the database instance is ready for operation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include establishing a connection between the database access service engine and database instance based on the second identifier into data accessing of Ramsay.
Motivation to do so would be to include establishing a connection between the database access service engine and database instance based on the second identifier to provide database services in a flexible on-demand manner (Salinas, paragraph [0003], line 7-8).
Regarding claim 22, Ramsay as modified by Lipkin, Singh Ahuja, and Tighe teach all claimed limitations as set forth in rejection of claim 8, but do not explicitly disclose: teach performing, by the database access service engine, authentication on the connection.
Salina teaches: performing, by the database access service engine, authentication on the connection (Salinas, Fig. 4, [0038]-[0040], the scheduler can identify a cabinet by available computing and storage resources to handle the database, the identified host may be allocated an IP address, e.g., from a network layer of the environment, when the identified computing host is selected, a remote block storage can be configured and connection information for the selected host and database can be allocated, to provide for communication between host and block storage, an appropriate identifier can be established, e.g., along with a password, identification information can be used to access the database instance).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include performing, by the database access service engine, authentication on the connection into data accessing of Ramsay.
Motivation to do so would be to include performing, by the database access service engine, authentication on the connection to provide database services in a flexible on-demand manner (Salinas, paragraph [0003], line 7-8).
As per claims 28 and 40, these claims are rejected on grounds corresponding to the rationales given above for rejected claim 22 and are similarly rejected.
As per claims 39 and 44, these claims are rejected on grounds corresponding to the rationales given above for rejected claim 21 and are similarly rejected.
Claims 24, 26, 31, 35, 42-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramsay (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0208017 A1) in view of Lipkin et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0132193 A1), Singh Ahuja et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,447,777 B1) and Tighe et al. (U.S. Patent No. 11,500,824 B1), further in view of Williams et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0134200 A1).
Regarding claim 24, Ramsay as modified by Lipkin, Singh Ahuja, and Tighe teach all claimed limitations as set forth in rejection of claim 8, do not explicitly disclose: encrypting, by the database access scheduling module, the processing result to obtain an encrypted processing result; sending, by the database access scheduling module and to the database access service engine, the encrypted processing result; decrypting, by the database access service engine, the encrypted processing result to obtain the processing result; and providing, by the database access service engine and to the application, the processing result.
Williams teaches: encrypting, by the database access scheduling module, the processing result to obtain an encrypted processing result (paragraph [0051], [0054], the server system can decrypt service requests, performing, the search or computational operation, and produce the service result, then encrypt the service result); sending, by the database access scheduling module and to the database access service engine, the encrypted processing result; decrypting, by the database access service engine, the encrypted processing result to obtain the processing result; and providing, by the database access service engine and to the application, the processing result (paragraph [0056], the encrypted services results can be provided to the client, the encrypted service results are sent from the server system to the client system as encrypted message, the client receives the encrypted result and decrypt the encrypted result to obtain the results of its service request).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include encrypting, by the database access scheduling module, the processing result to obtain an encrypted processing result; sending, by the database access scheduling module and to the database access service engine, the encrypted processing result; decrypting, by the database access service engine, the encrypted processing result to obtain the processing result; and providing, by the database access service engine and to the application, the processing result into data accessing of Ramsay.
Motivation to do so would be to include encrypting, by the database access scheduling module, the processing result to obtain an encrypted processing result; sending, by the database access scheduling module and to the database access service engine, the encrypted processing result; decrypting, by the database access service engine, the encrypted processing result to obtain the processing result; and providing, by the database access service engine and to the application, such that the processing result to decrypted by engine only inside secure environment; in this way malware cannot access/alter program information and data (Williams, paragraph [0032], line 7-11).
Regarding claim 26, Ramsay as modified by Lipkin, Singh Ahuja, and Tighe teach all claimed limitations as set forth in rejection of claim 8, but do not explicitly disclose: encrypting, by the database access service engine, the access request to obtain an encrypted access request; sending, by the database access service engine and to the database access scheduling module, the encrypted access request is; and decrypting, by the database access scheduling module, the encrypted access request to obtain the access request.
Williams teaches: encrypting, by the database access service engine, the access request to obtain an encrypted access request; sending, by the database access service engine and to the database access scheduling module, the encrypted access request is (Fig. 5, paragraph [0052]-[0053], an encrypted service request can be received by the server system as an encrypted message, the server system passes the encrypted request to the secure environment); and decrypting, by the database access scheduling module, the encrypted access request to obtain the access request (paragraph [0053], the server system passes the encrypted request to the secure environment which decrypts the encrypted message using the shared secret).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include encrypting, by the database access service engine, the access request to obtain an encrypted access request; sending, by the database access service engine and to the database access scheduling module, the encrypted access request is; and decrypting, by the database access scheduling module, the encrypted access request to obtain the access request into data accessing of Ramsay.
Motivation to do so would be to include encrypting, by the database access service engine, the access request to obtain an encrypted access request; sending, by the database access service engine and to the database access scheduling module, the encrypted access request is; and decrypting, by the database access scheduling module, the encrypted access request to obtain the access request such that the processing result to decrypted by engine only inside secure environment; in this way malware cannot access/alter program information and data (Williams, paragraph [0032], line 7-11).
Regarding claim 31, Ramsay as modified by Lipkin, Singh Ahuja, and Tighe teach all claimed limitations as set forth in rejection of claim 27, but do not explicitly disclose: receiving, by the database access service engine and from the database access scheduling module, an encrypted processing results corresponding to the access request; decrypting the encrypted processing result to obtain a processing result; and providing, by the database access service engine and to the application, the processing result.
Williams teaches: receiving, by the database access service engine and from the database access scheduling module, an encrypted processing result corresponding to the access request; decrypting the encrypted processing result to obtain a processing result; and providing, by the database access service engine and to the application, the processing result (paragraph [0051], [0054], paragraph [0056], the server system can decrypt service requests, performing, the search or computational operation, and produce the service result, then encrypt the service result; the encrypted services results can be provided to the client, the encrypted service results are sent from the server system to the client system as encrypted message, the client receives the encrypted result and decrypt the encrypted result to obtain the results of its service request).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include receiving, by the database access service engine and from the database access scheduling module, an encrypted processing results corresponding to the access request; decrypting the encrypted processing result to obtain a processing result; and providing, by the database access service engine and to the application, the processing result into data accessing of Ramsay.
Motivation to do so would be to include receiving, by the database access service engine and from the database access scheduling module, an encrypted processing result corresponding to the access request; decrypting the encrypted processing result to obtain a processing result; and providing, by the database access service engine and to the application, the processing result such that the processing result to decrypted by engine only inside secure environment; in this way malware cannot access/alter program information and data (Williams, paragraph [0032], line 7-11).
Regarding claim 35, Ramsay as modified by Lipkin, Singh Ahuja, and Tighe teach all claimed limitations as set forth in rejection of claim 27, but do not explicitly disclose: wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the computing device to: encrypt, by the database access service engine, the access request to obtain an encrypted access request; and send, to the database access scheduling module, the encrypted access request; and decrypting, by the database access scheduling module, the encrypted access request to obtain the access request.
Williams teaches: wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the computing device to: encrypt, by the database access service engine, the access request to obtain an encrypted access request; and send, to the database access scheduling module, the encrypted access request (Fig. 5, paragraph [0052]-[0053], an encrypted service request can be received by the server system as an encrypted message, the server system passes the encrypted request to the secure environment); and decrypting, by the database access scheduling module, the encrypted access request to obtain the access request (paragraph [0053], the server system passes the encrypted request to the secure environment which decrypts the encrypted message using the shared secret).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing date of the claim invention to include wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the computing device to: encrypt, by the database access service engine, the access request to obtain an encrypted access request; and send, to the database access scheduling module, the encrypted access request (Fig. 5, paragraph [0052]-[0053], an encrypted service request can be received by the server system as an encrypted message, the server system passes the encrypted request to the secure environment); and decrypting, by the database access scheduling module, the encrypted access request to obtain the access request (paragraph [0053], the server system passes the encrypted request to the secure environment which decrypts the encrypted message using the shared secret) into data accessing of Ramsay.
Motivation to do so would be to include wherein the processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the computing device to: encrypt, by the database access service engine, the access request to obtain an encrypted access request; and send, to the database access scheduling module, the encrypted access request; and decrypting, by the database access scheduling module, the encrypted access request to obtain the access request such that the processing result to decrypted by engine only inside secure environment; in this way malware cannot access/alter program information and data (Williams, paragraph [0032], line 7-11).
As per claim 42, this claim is rejected on grounds corresponding to the rationales given above for rejected claim 24 and is similarly rejected.
As per claim 43, this claim is rejected on grounds corresponding to the rationales given above for rejected claim 26 and is similarly rejected.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEN HOANG whose telephone number is (571)272-8401. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-5:00pm.
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, Charles Rones can be reached at (571)272-4085. 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.
/KEN HOANG/ Examiner, Art Unit 2168