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 .
Status of the claims
The arguments received on December 12, 2025 have been acknowledged and entered. Claims 1-28 are currently pending.
Status of the claims
The arguments received on December 12, 2025 have been acknowledged and entered. Claims 1 and 15 are amended. Thus, claims 1-28 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed December 12, 2025 with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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, 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 1-6, 15-20, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wladek et al. (“HKL-3000: the integration of data reduction and structure solution-from diffraction images to an initial model in minutes” Acta Crystallographica section D: Biological Crystallography.,vol. 62, no. 8, 1 August 2006, pages 859-866, hereinafter referred to as “Wladek”) (cited in IDS dated October 12, 2021) in view of Mackaie (US 2004/0015828 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Mackaie”) further in view of Dorn et al. (US 2011/0231865 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Dorn”).
Regarding claim 1, Wladek teaches a diffraction system for determining a crystalline structure of a sample under test, the sample being illuminated by an incident beam of radiation and radiation diffracted from the sample being detected by a detector, the system comprising (abstract: a new approach that integrates data collection, data reduction, phasing and model building significantly accelerates the process of structure determination and on average minimizes the number of data sets and synchrotron time required for structure solution; Fig. 7 exhibits a diffraction system for determining a crystalline structure of a sample under test, the sample being illuminated by an incident beam of radiation and radiation diffracted from the sample being detected by a detector):
a data collection software segment that receives the detector output and generates a set of diffraction frames indicative of a corresponding diffraction pattern (abstract: a new approach that integrates data collection, data reduction, phasing and model building significantly accelerates the process of structure determination and on average minimizes the number of data sets and synchrotron time required for structure solution. initial testing of the HKL-3000 system (the beta version was named HKL-2000_ph) with more than 1400 novel structure determination has proven its high value for MAD/SAD experiments. The heuristics for choosing the best computational strategy at different data resolution limits of phasing signal and crystal diffraction are being optimized; page 865, left col. 1, lines 1-5: the concurrent data collection, processing and almost instantaneous preliminary structure solution provides an opportunity for ultimate verification of the X-ray experiment and allows one to changes the data-collection strategy when the crystal is still in the cryoloop at the goniostat); “a new approach that integrates data collection” in abstract and “the concurrent data collection, processing and almost instantaneous preliminary structure solution” in page 865, left col. 1, lines 1-5 read on “receives the detector output and generates a set of diffraction frames indicative of a corresponding diffraction pattern”;
a data reduction software segment that receives the diffraction frames and determines an HKL dataset indicative of a set of Miller indices of a reciprocal space lattice of the crystalline structure (abstract: a new approach that integrates data collection, data reduction, phasing and model building significantly accelerates the process of structure determination and on average minimizes the number of data sets and synchrotron time required for structure solution. initial testing of the HKL-3000 system (the beta version was named HKL-2000_ph) with more than 1400 novel structure determination has proven its high value for MAD/SAD experiments. The heuristics for choosing the best computational strategy at different data resolution limits of phasing signal and crystal diffraction are being optimized; Fig. 7: data collection and reduction; scaling, merging correction, space-group determination, etc); the above feature of “initial testing of the HKL-3000 system (the beta version was named HKL-2000_ph) with more than 1400 novel structure determination has proven its high value for MAD/SAD experiments” reads on “receives the diffraction frames and determines HKL dataset indicative of a set of Miller indices of a reciprocal space lattice of the crystalline structure”; the above feature of “data reduction and space-group determination” in Fig. 7 reads on “a data reduction software segment”; and
a structure determination software segment that receives the HKL dataset and determines a crystal structure therefrom, the structure determination segment outputting a crystal structure dataset (abstract: a new approach that integrates data collection, data reduction, phasing and model building significantly accelerates the process of structure determination and on average minimizes the number of data sets and synchrotron time required for structure solution. initial testing of the HKL-3000 system (the beta version was named HKL-2000_ph) with more than 1400 novel structure determination has proven its high value for MAD/SAD experiments. The heuristics for choosing the best computational strategy at different data resolution limits of phasing signal and crystal diffraction are being optimized); the above feature of “initial testing of the HKL-3000 system (the beta version was named HKL-2000_ph) with more than 1400 novel structure determination has proven its high value for MAD/SAD experiments” in Abstract “ reads on “receives the HKL dataset and determines a crystal structure therefrom, the structure determination segment outputting a crystal structure dataset”.
Wladek does not specifically teaches that wherein the data collection software segment, the data reduction software segment and the structure determination software segment comprise separate software modules, each of which is an independent processing component that use at least one input parameter output by another module of the system and generates at least one output parameter that is made available to at least one other module of the system, and wherein at least some of said modules operate simultaneously.
However, Mackaie teaches that wherein the data collection software segment, the data reduction software segment and the structure determination software segment comprise separate software modules (Figs. 1-3, modules M0-M4), each of which is an independent processing component that receives at least one input parameter from another module of the system (Figs. 1-3, modules M0-M4) and generates at least one output parameter that is made available to at least one other module of the system (Figs. 1-3, modules M0-M4), and wherein at least some of said modules operate simultaneously (Figs. 1-3, modules M0-M4).
Wladek and Mackaie are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of software architecture based on an existing module-based architecture. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the software architecture such as is described in Mackaie into Wladek, in order to provide a method of producing a new module based software architecture based on an existing one, with a relatively low investment in time and cost to implement the changes (Mackaie, para. [0007]).
Wladek and Mackaie do not specifically teach generating successive versions of said at least one output parameter based on successive versions of said at least one input parameter, at least one of the software modules making at least a first one of its output parameters available to a plurality of the other software modules in response to the generation of a successive version of the first output parameter.
However, Dorn teaches generating successive versions of said at least one output parameter based on successive versions of said at least one input parameter, at least one of the software modules making at least a first one of its output parameters available to a plurality of the other software modules in response to the generation of a successive version of the first output parameter (para. [0014]: the application platform is a software product whose component parts are configured for the purpose of performing the above-described method or one of its below-described variants by programming segments or modules; para. [0032]: The different versions of the version management module are preferably cascaded internally, i.e. implemented in a specified access sequence. In this case all requests for starting and managing a container instance are initially addressed always to the most recent version of the version management module, note that the above feature of “programming segments or modules” in para. [0014] and “the different versions of the version management module are preferably cascaded internally, i.e. implemented in a specified access sequence” reads on “generating successive versions of said at least one output parameter based on successive versions of said at least one input parameter, at least one of the software modules making at least a first one of its output parameters available to a plurality of the other software modules in response to the generation of a successive version of the first output parameter”).
Wladek and Dorn are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of software platform. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the generating successive versions of said at least one output parameter based on successive versions of said at least one input parameter such as is described in Dorn into Wladek, in order to improves the ease of handling of (software) applications which are executable in parallel on an application platform. (Dorn, para. [0011]).
Regarding claim 2, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Wladek teaches that the data reduction software segment comprises a harvesting software module that receives the diffraction frames and extracts a set of vector directions and intensities of the diffracted radiation therefrom and generates a corresponding reflection dataset (page 865, left col. 1, lines 1-5: the concurrent data collection, processing and almost instantaneous preliminary structure solution provides an opportunity for ultimate verification of the X-ray experiment and allows one to changes the data-collection strategy when the crystal is still in the cryoloop at the goniosta; Fig. 7: data collection and reduction; scaling, merging correction, space-group determination, etc); the above feature of “concurrent data collection” in page 865, left col. 1, lines 1-5 and “data correction” in Fig. 7 reads on “harvesting software module.”
Regarding claim 3, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 2, in addition, Wladek teaches that the data reduction software segment further comprises an indexing software module that receives the reflection dataset and determines characteristic indices of the crystalline structure therefrom, the indexing module generating a matrix dataset indicative of said characteristic indices (Fig. 7: data collection and reduction; scaling, merging correction, space-group determination, etc); the above feature of “data collection, reduction, and space-group determination” reads on “indexing software module.”
Regarding claim 4, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 3, in addition, Wladek teaches that the data reduction software segment further comprises an integration software module that receives the diffraction frames and matrix dataset and determines a model crystal profile therefrom, the model profile being represented as a raw data dataset (Fig. 7: data collection and reduction; scaling, merging correction, space-group determination, etc). The above feature of “space-group determination” reads on matrix dataset indicative of the characteristic indices; “merging” reads on “integration software module.”
Regarding claim 5 Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Wladek teaches that the data reduction software segment further comprises a scaling software module that receives the raw data dataset and corrects for errors and uncertainties therein, the scaling module generating said HKL dataset (Fig. 7: data collection and reduction; scaling, merging correction, space-group determination, etc). The above feature of “scaling” reads on “scaling software module.”
Regarding claim 6, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Wladek teaches that the data collection software segment comprises a data strategy software module that receives the HKL dataset and determines optimized data collection parameters that are used by the system in collecting the diffraction frames (abstract: a new approach that integrates data collection, data reduction, phasing and model building significantly accelerates the process of structure determination and on average minimizes the number of data sets and synchrotron time required for structure solution. initial testing of the HKL-3000 system (the beta version was named HKL-2000_ph) with more than 1400 novel structure determination has proven its high value for MAD/SAD experiments. The heuristics for choosing the best computational strategy at different data resolution limits of phasing signal and crystal diffraction are being optimized; page 865, left col. lines 27-29: The performance of the system is being evaluated and parameters optimized on the basis of the structures included in the MCSG database). The above feature of “initial testing of the HKL-3000 system” and “choosing the best computational strategy at different data resolution limits of phasing signal and crystal diffraction are being optimized” in Abstract and “evaluated and parameters optimized” in page 865, left col. lines 27-29 reads on “a data strategy software module that receives the HKL dataset and determines optimized data collection parameters.”
Regarding claim 15, Wladek teaches a method of controlling a diffraction system for determining a crystalline structure of a sample under test, the sample being illuminated by an incident beam of radiation and radiation diffracted from the sample being detected by a detector, the method comprising (abstract: a new approach that integrates data collection, data reduction, phasing and model building significantly accelerates the process of structure determination and on average minimizes the number of data sets and synchrotron time required for structure solution; Fig. 7 exhibits a diffraction system for determining a crystalline structure of a sample under test, the sample being illuminated by an incident beam of radiation and radiation diffracted from the sample being detected by a detector):
receiving the detector output with a data collection software segment that generates a set of diffraction frames therefrom that is indicative of a corresponding diffraction pattern (abstract: a new approach that integrates data collection, data reduction, phasing and model building significantly accelerates the process of structure determination and on average minimizes the number of data sets and synchrotron time required for structure solution. initial testing of the HKL-3000 system (the beta version was named HKL-2000_ph) with more than 1400 novel structure determination has proven its high value for MAD/SAD experiments. The heuristics for choosing the best computational strategy at different data resolution limits of phasing signal and crystal diffraction are being optimized; page 865, left col. 1, lines 1-5: the concurrent data collection, processing and almost instantaneous preliminary structure solution provides an opportunity for ultimate verification of the X-ray experiment and allows one to changes the data-collection strategy when the crystal is still in the cryoloop at the goniosta); the above feature of “a new approach that integrates data collection” in abstract and “the concurrent data collection, processing and almost instantaneous preliminary structure solution” in page 865, left col. 1, lines 1-5 read on “receives the detector output and generates a set of diffraction frames indicative of a corresponding diffraction pattern”;
receiving the diffraction frames with a data reduction software segment that determines an HKL dataset therefrom that is indicative of a set of Miller indices of a reciprocal space lattice of the crystalline structure (abstract: a new approach that integrates data collection, data reduction, phasing and model building significantly accelerates the process of structure determination and on average minimizes the number of data sets and synchrotron time required for structure solution. initial testing of the HKL-3000 system (the beta version was named HKL-2000_ph) with more than 1400 novel structure determination has proven its high value for MAD/SAD experiments. The heuristics for choosing the best computational strategy at different data resolution limits of phasing signal and crystal diffraction are being optimized; Fig. 7: data collection and reduction; scaling, merging correction, space-group determination, etc); the above feature of “initial testing of the HKL-3000 system (the beta version was named HKL-2000_ph) with more than 1400 novel structure determination has proven its high value for MAD/SAD experiments” reads on “receives the diffraction frames and determines HKL dataset indicative of a set of Miller indices of a reciprocal space lattice of the crystalline structure”; “data reduction and space-group determination” in Fig. 7 reads on “a data reduction software segment”; and
receiving the HKL data set with a structure determination software segment that determines a crystal structure therefrom, the structure determination segment outputting a crystal structure dataset (abstract: a new approach that integrates data collection, data reduction, phasing and model building significantly accelerates the process of structure determination and on average minimizes the number of data sets and synchrotron time required for structure solution. initial testing of the HKL-3000 system (the beta version was named HKL-2000_ph) with more than 1400 novel structure determination has proven its high value for MAD/SAD experiments. The heuristics for choosing the best computational strategy at different data resolution limits of phasing signal and crystal diffraction are being optimized); the above feature of “initial testing of the HKL-3000 system (the beta version was named HKL-2000_ph) with more than 1400 novel structure determination has proven its high value for MAD/SAD experiments” in Abstract reads on “receives the HKL dataset and determines a crystal structure therefrom, the structure determination segment outputting a crystal structure dataset”; and
Wladek does not specifically teaches that wherein the data collection software segment, the data reduction software segment and the structure determination software segment comprise separate software modules, each of which is an independent processing component that use at least one input parameter output by another module of the system and generates at least one output parameter that is made available to at least one other module of the system, and wherein at least some of said modules operate simultaneously.
However, Mackaie teaches that wherein the data collection software segment, the data reduction software segment and the structure determination software segment comprise separate software modules (Figs. 1-3, modules M0-M4), each of which is an independent processing component that receives at least one input parameter from another module of the system (Figs. 1-3, modules M0-M4) and generates at least one output parameter that is made available to at least one other module of the system (Figs. 1-3, modules M0-M4), and wherein at least some of said modules operate simultaneously (Figs. 1-3, modules M0-M4).
Wladek and Mackaie are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of software architecture based on an existing module-based architecture. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the software architecture such as is described in Mackaie into Wladek, in order to provide a method of producing a new module based software architecture based on an existing one, with a relatively low investment in time and cost to implement the changes (Mackaie, para. [0007]).
Wladek and Mackaie do not specifically teach generating successive versions of said at least one output parameter based on successive versions of said at least one input parameter, at least one of the software modules making at least a first one of its output parameters available to a plurality of the other software modules in response to the generation of a successive version of the first output parameter.
However, Dorn teaches generating successive versions of said at least one output parameter based on successive versions of said at least one input parameter, at least one of the software modules making at least a first one of its output parameters available to a plurality of the other software modules in response to the generation of a successive version of the first output parameter (para. [0014]: the application platform is a software product whose component parts are configured for the purpose of performing the above-described method or one of its below-described variants by programming segments or modules; para. [0032]: The different versions of the version management module are preferably cascaded internally, i.e. implemented in a specified access sequence. In this case all requests for starting and managing a container instance are initially addressed always to the most recent version of the version management module, note that the above feature of “programming segments or modules” in para. [0014] and “the different versions of the version management module are preferably cascaded internally, i.e. implemented in a specified access sequence” reads on “generating successive versions of said at least one output parameter based on successive versions of said at least one input parameter, at least one of the software modules making at least a first one of its output parameters available to a plurality of the other software modules in response to the generation of a successive version of the first output parameter”).
Wladek and Dorn are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of software platform. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the generating successive versions of said at least one output parameter based on successive versions of said at least one input parameter such as is described in Dorn into Wladek, in order to improves the ease of handling of (software) applications which are executable in parallel on an application platform. (Dorn, para. [0011]).
Regarding claim 16, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 15, in addition, Wladek teaches that the data reduction software segment comprises a harvesting software module that receives the diffraction frames and extracts a set of vector directions and intensities of the diffracted radiation therefrom and generates a corresponding reflection dataset (page 865, left col., lines 1-5: the concurrent data collection, processing and almost instantaneous preliminary structure solution provides an opportunity for ultimate verification of the X-ray experiment and allows one to changes the data-collection strategy when the crystal is still in the cryoloop at the goniosta; Fig. 7: data collection and reduction; scaling, merging correction, space-group determination, etc). The above feature of “concurrent data collection” in page 865, left col. 1, lines 1-5 and “data correction” in Fig. 7 reads on “harvesting software module.”
Regarding claim 17, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 16, in addition, Wladek teaches that the data reduction software segment further comprises an indexing software module that receives the reflection dataset and determines characteristic indices of the crystalline structure therefrom, the indexing module generating a matrix dataset indicative of said characteristic indices (Fig. 7: data collection and reduction; scaling, merging correction, space-group determination, etc). The above feature of “data collection, reduction, and space-group determination” reads on “indexing software module.”
Regarding claim 18, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 17, in addition, Wladek teaches that the data reduction software segment further comprises an integration software module that receives the diffraction frames and matrix dataset and determines a model crystal profile therefrom, the model profile being represented as a raw data dataset (Fig. 7: data collection and reduction; scaling, merging correction, space-group determination, etc). The above feature of “space-group determination” reads on matrix dataset indicative of the characteristic indices; “merging” reads on “integration software module.”
Regarding claim 19, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 18, in addition, Wladek teaches that the data reduction software segment further comprises a scaling software module that receives the raw data dataset and corrects for errors and uncertainties therein, the scaling module generating said HKL dataset (Fig. 7: data collection and reduction; scaling, merging correction, space-group determination, etc). The above feature of “scaling” reads on “scaling software module.”
Regarding claim 20, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 15, in addition, Wladek teaches that the data collection software segment comprises a data strategy software module that receives the HKL dataset and determines optimized data collection parameters that are used by the system in collecting the diffraction frames (abstract: a new approach that integrates data collection, data reduction, phasing and model building significantly accelerates the process of structure determination and on average minimizes the number of data sets and synchrotron time required for structure solution. initial testing of the HKL-3000 system (the beta version was named HKL-2000_ph) with more than 1400 novel structure determination has proven its high value for MAD/SAD experiments. The heuristics for choosing the best computational strategy at different data resolution limits of phasing signal and crystal diffraction are being optimized; page 865, left col., lines 27-29: The performance of the system is being evaluated and parameters optimized on the basis of the structures included in the MCSG database). The above feature of “initial testing of the HKL-3000 system” and “choosing the best computational strategy at different data resolution limits of phasing signal and crystal diffraction are being optimized” in Abstract and “evaluated and parameters optimized” in page 865, left col. lines 27-29 reads on “a data strategy software module that receives the HKL dataset and determines optimized data collection parameters.”
Regarding claim 28, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 15, in addition, Wladek teaches that the diffraction system comprises an X-ray diffraction system, and wherein the incident beam of radiation comprises an X-ray beam (page 865, left col., lines 1-5: the concurrent data collection, processing and almost instantaneous preliminary structure solution provides an opportunity for ultimate verification of the X-ray experiment and allows one to changes the data-collection strategy when the crystal is still in the cryoloop at the goniosta).
Claims 9-14 and 23-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wladek in view of Mackaie, Dorn, and Lin et al. (US 2006/0029184 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Lin”).
Regarding claim 9, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 1.
Wladek, Mackaie, and Dorn do not specifically teach that a software module of the system executes an operation specific to that module automatically upon receiving a modified version of an input parameter of that module.
However, Lin teaches a software module of the system executes an operation specific to that module automatically upon receiving a modified version of an input parameter of that module (para. [0030]: the manner in which the interface is presented to users as an input form is automated by specifying the contents of an input form in a dictionary comprising a collection of sufficient specifications to generate input forms).
Wladek and Lin are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of diffractometrically determining electron density distributions and structures of crystals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the software module of system such as is described in Lin into Wladek, in order to determining electron density distributions and structures of complex materials such as crystals (Lin, para. [0015]).
Regarding claim 10, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 1.
Wladek and Mackaie do not specifically teach that at least one of the software modules assigns a trustworthiness value to an output parameter that it generates that is used to rank its reliability in comparison to other versions of the same output parameter generated by any software module.
However, Lin teaches that at least one of the software modules assigns a trustworthiness value to an output parameter that it generates that is used to rank its reliability in comparison to other versions of the same output parameter generated by any software module (para. [0037]: bioinformatic data mining analysis modules also provide a means of identifying and evaluating correlations between input parameters and output parameters, which may also serve as important confidence assessment criteria for assessing the accuracy of crystallographic computations. Such methods are particularly beneficial for refinement of calculated electron density distributions and molecular models by iterative structure refinement methods. Further, data mining analysis modules of the present invention are also useful for identifying different combinations of discrete X-ray diffraction data sets). The above feature of “identifying and evaluating correlations between input parameters and output parameters, which may also serve as important confidence assessment criteria for assessing the accuracy of crystallographic computations” in para. [0037] reads on “at least one of the software modules assigns a trustworthiness value to an output parameter that it generates that is used to rank its reliability in comparison to other versions of the same output parameter generated by any software module.”
wherein a software module having two versions of the same input parameter available may select only the version having the higher trustworthiness value (para. [0037]: bioinformatic data mining analysis modules also provide a means of identifying and evaluating correlations between input parameters and output parameters, which may also serve as important confidence assessment criteria for assessing the accuracy of crystallographic computations. Such methods are particularly beneficial for refinement of calculated electron density distributions and molecular models by iterative structure refinement methods. Further, data mining analysis modules of the present invention are also useful for identifying different combinations of discrete X-ray diffraction data sets). The above feature of “identifying and evaluating correlations between input parameters and output parameters, which may also serve as important confidence assessment criteria for assessing the accuracy of crystallographic computations” in para. [0037] reads on “a software module having two versions of the same input parameter available may select only the version having the higher trustworthiness value.”
Wladek and Lin are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of diffractometrically determining electron density distributions and structures of crystals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the at least one of the software modules such as are described in Lin into Wladek, in order to determining electron density distributions and structures of complex materials such as crystals (Lin, para. [0015]).
Regarding claim 11, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 1.
Wladek, Mackaie, and Dorn do not specifically teach that certain parameters that have an interrelationship are tied together such that they are received as an input pair, or made available as an output pair, by a software module.
However, Lin teaches that certain parameters that have an interrelationship are tied together such that they are received as an input pair, or made available as an output pair, by a software module (para. [0029]: A dictionary-driven pipeline interface is built from a “dictionary” comprising a relational database that has been compiled in code). The above feature of “a relational database” reads on “interrelationship are tied together such that they are received as an input pair.”
Wladek and Lin are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of diffractometrically determining electron density distributions and structures of crystals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the certain parameters such as are described in Lin into Wladek, in order to determining electron density distributions and structures of complex materials such as crystals (Lin, para. [0015]).
Regarding claim 12, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 1.
Wladek, Mackaie, and Dorn do not specifically teach that a software module may revoke an earlier version of an output parameter if it subsequently generates a newer version of that output parameter, and may broadcast the revocation to other software modules that receive that parameter as an input.
However, Lin teaches that a software module may revoke an earlier version of an output parameter if it subsequently generates a newer version of that output parameter, and may broadcast the revocation to other software modules that receive that parameter as an input (para. [0085]: Methods of the present invention approach a determination of the optimal resolution for interpreting X-ray diffraction data by screening this parameter over a wide range of possible resolution integrals and calculating crystal structures for all combinations of screened values relating to X-ray diffraction data resolution. This method provides a practical means of identifying the resolution cutoff providing the best crystal structure determination).
Wladek and Lin are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of diffractometrically determining electron density distributions and structures of crystals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the software module such as is described in Lin into Wladek, in order to determining electron density distributions and structures of complex materials such as crystals (Lin, para. [0015]).
Regarding claim 13, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 1.
Wladek, Mackaie, and Dorn do not specifically teach that certain of the parameters are identified as optional, and a software module will check for the presence of an optional input parameter, but will continue performing an operation using previous inputs if a new optional input parameter is received.
However, Lin teaches that certain of the parameters are identified as optional, and a software module will check for the presence of an optional input parameter, but will continue performing an operation using previous inputs if a new optional input parameter is received (para. [0018]: the methods of the present invention utilize a series of parallel calculations reflecting a wide range of fixed and variable input parameters to determine estimates of these phases; para. [0019]: variable input parameters of the present invention may be characterized in terms of an upper limit, a lower limit and a means for determining screened values between upper and lower limits. For example, the set of screened values for a given variable input parameter may comprises a plurality of values that systematically vary by selected screening increment from a selected lower limit to a selected upper limit). The above feature of “variable input parameters” in paras. [0018]-1[0019] reads on “optional input parameter.”
Wladek and Lin are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of diffractometrically determining electron density distributions and structures of crystals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the certain of the parameters such as is described in Lin into Wladek, in order to determining electron density distributions and structures of complex materials such as crystals (Lin, para. [0015]).
Regarding claim 14, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 1, in addition, Wladek teaches that the diffraction system comprises an X-ray diffraction system, and wherein the incident beam of radiation comprises an X-ray beam (page 865, left col. 1, lines 1-5: the concurrent data collection, processing and almost instantaneous preliminary structure solution provides an opportunity for ultimate verification of the X-ray experiment and allows one to changes the data-collection strategy when the crystal is still in the cryoloop at the goniosta).
Regarding claim 23, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 15.
Wladek, Mackaie, and Dorn do not specifically teach that a software module of the system executes an operation specific to that module automatically upon receiving a modified version of an input parameter of that module.
However, Lin teaches that a software module of the system executes an operation specific to that module automatically upon receiving a modified version of an input parameter of that module (para. [0030]: the manner in which the interface is presented to users as an input form is automated by specifying the contents of an input form in a dictionary comprising a collection of sufficient specifications to generate input forms).
Wladek and Lin are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of diffractometrically determining electron density distributions and structures of crystals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the software module of system such as is described in Lin into Wladek, in order to determining electron density distributions and structures of complex materials such as crystals (Lin, para. [0015]).
Regarding claim 24, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 15.
Wladek, Mackaie, and Dorn do not specifically teach that at least one of the software modules assigns a trustworthiness value to an output parameter that it generates that is used to rank its reliability in comparison to other versions of the same output parameter generated by any software module.
However, Lin teaches that at least one of the software modules assigns a trustworthiness value to an output parameter that it generates that is used to rank its reliability in comparison to other versions of the same output parameter generated by any software module (para. [0037]: bioinformatic data mining analysis modules also provide a means of identifying and evaluating correlations between input parameters and output parameters, which may also serve as important confidence assessment criteria for assessing the accuracy of crystallographic computations. Such methods are particularly beneficial for refinement of calculated electron density distributions and molecular models by iterative structure refinement methods. Further, data mining analysis modules of the present invention are also useful for identifying different combinations of discrete X-ray diffraction data sets); the above feature of “identifying and evaluating correlations between input parameters and output parameters, which may also serve as important confidence assessment criteria for assessing the accuracy of crystallographic computations” in para. [0037] reads on “at least one of the software modules assigns a trustworthiness value to an output parameter that it generates that is used to rank its reliability in comparison to other versions of the same output parameter generated by any software module”;
wherein a software module having two versions of the same input parameter available may select only the version having the higher trustworthiness value (para. [0037]: bioinformatic data mining analysis modules also provide a means of identifying and evaluating correlations between input parameters and output parameters, which may also serve as important confidence assessment criteria for assessing the accuracy of crystallographic computations. Such methods are particularly beneficial for refinement of calculated electron density distributions and molecular models by iterative structure refinement methods. Further, data mining analysis modules of the present invention are also useful for identifying different combinations of discrete X-ray diffraction data sets). The above feature of “identifying and evaluating correlations between input parameters and output parameters, which may also serve as important confidence assessment criteria for assessing the accuracy of crystallographic computations” in para. [0037] reads on “a software module having two versions of the same input parameter available may select only the version having the higher trustworthiness value.”
Wladek and Lin are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of diffractometrically determining electron density distributions and structures of crystals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the at least one of the software modules such as are described in Lin into Wladek, in order to determining electron density distributions and structures of complex materials such as crystals (Lin, para. [0015]).
Regarding claim 25, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 15.
Wladek, Mackaie, and Dorn do not specifically teach certain parameters that have an interrelationship are together such that they are received as an input pair, or made available as an output pair, by a software module.
However, Lin teaches that certain parameters that have an interrelationship are together such that they are received as an input pair, or made available as an output pair, by a software module (para. [0029]: A dictionary-driven pipeline interface is built from a “dictionary” comprising a relational database that has been compiled in code). The above feature of “a relational database” reads on “interrelationship are tied together such that they are received as an input pair.”
Wladek and Lin are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of diffractometrically determining electron density distributions and structures of crystals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the well-known certain parameters such as are described in Lin into Wladek, in order to determining electron density distributions and structures of complex materials such as crystals (Lin, para. [0015]).
Regarding claim 26, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 15.
Wladek, Mackaie, and Dorn do not specifically teach that a software module may revoke an earlier version of an output parameter if it subsequently generates a newer version of that output parameter, and may broadcast the revocation to other software modules that receive that parameter as an input.
However, Lin teaches that a software module may revoke an earlier version of an output parameter if it subsequently generates a newer version of that output parameter, and may broadcast the revocation to other software modules that receive that parameter as an input (para. [0085]: Methods of the present invention approach a determination of the optimal resolution for interpreting X-ray diffraction data by screening this parameter over a wide range of possible resolution integrals and calculating crystal structures for all combinations of screened values relating to X-ray diffraction data resolution. This method provides a practical means of identifying the resolution cutoff providing the best crystal structure determination).
Wladek and Lin are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of diffractometrically determining electron density distributions and structures of crystals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the software module such as is described in Lin into Wladek, in order to determining electron density distributions and structures of complex materials such as crystals (Lin, para. [0015]).
Regarding claim 27, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 15.
Wladek, Mackaie, and Dorn do not specifically teach that certain of the parameters are identified as optional, and a software module will check for the presence of an optional input parameter, but will continue performing an operation using previous inputs if a new optional input parameter is received.
However, Lin teaches that certain of the parameters are identified as optional, and a software module will check for the presence of an optional input parameter, but will continue performing an operation using previous inputs if a new optional input parameter is received (para. [0018]: the methods of the present invention utilize a series of parallel calculations reflecting a wide range of fixed and variable input parameters to determine estimates of these phases; para. [0019]: variable input parameters of the present invention may be characterized in terms of an upper limit, a lower limit and a means for determining screened values between upper and lower limits. For example, the set of screened values for a given variable input parameter may comprises a plurality of values that systematically vary by selected screening increment from a selected lower limit to a selected upper limit). The above feature of “variable input parameters” in paras. [0018]-1[0019] reads on “optional input parameter.”
Wladek and Lin are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of diffractometrically determining electron density distributions and structures of crystals. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the certain of the parameters such as is described in Lin into Wladek, in order to determining electron density distributions and structures of complex materials such as crystals (Lin, para. [0015]).
Claims 7-8 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wladek in view of Mackaie, Dorn, and Cerutti (EP 2246786 A1, hereinafter referred to as “Cerutti”).
Regarding claim 7, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 1.
Wladek, Mackaie, and Dorn do not specifically teach further comprising a global parameter list in which is recorded said input parameters and output parameters of said softwear modules and that is accessible to, and updatable by, said software modules.
However, Cerutti teaches a global parameter list in which is recorded said input parameters and output parameters of said software modules and that is accessible to, and updatable by, said software modules (Para. [0025]: most modules in the shared memory software application may produce one or more output parameters on the basis of one or more input parameters; para. [0027]: An update or a new release of one or more software modules may cause changes in the mapping of the shared memory. This situation is shown in Fig. 2 illustrating a shared memory system 200 comprising a shared memory software application 204 and a shared memory 202, note that the above feature of “shared memory in paras [0025] and [0027]” is considered as “a global parameter list”).
Wladek and Cerutti are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of software application. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to incorporate the global parameter list such as is described in Cerutti into Wladek, in order to provide at least one modification in the mapping information, and/or provide at least one shared memory management (SMM) library configured to be statically linked to at least one of said software programs and to be dynamically linked to at least part of said shared memory using the modified mapping information (Cerutti , para. [0011]).
Regarding claim 8, Wladek in view of Mackaie, Dorn, and Cerutti teaches all the limitation of claim 7.
Wladek, Mackaie, and Dorn do not specifically teaches each software module has access to, and updates, only a subset of the parameters of the global parameter list.
However, Cerutti teaches that each software module has access to, and updates, only a subset of the parameters of the global parameter list (Para. [0025]: most modules in the shared memory software application may produce one or more output parameters on the basis of one or more input parameters; para. [0027]: An update or a new release of one or more software modules may cause changes in the mapping of the shared memory. This situation is shown in Fig. 2 illustrating a shared memory system 200 comprising a shared memory software application 204 and a shared memory 202, note that the above feature of “shared memory in paras [0025] and [0027]” is considered as “a global parameter list). Mackaie teaches most modules in the shared memory software application may produce one or more output parameters on the basis of one or more input parameters (see para. [0025]) and an update or a new release of one or more software modules may cause changes in the mapping of the shared memory (see para. [0027]). Therefore, only a subset of the parameters of the global parameter list such as described above would be an obvious variation of such methods. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Wladek to use the above features in order to access only a subset of the parameters of the global parameter list.
Regarding claim 21, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 15.
Wladek, Mackaie, and Dorn do not specifically teaches further comprising establishing a global parameter list that is accessible to, and updatable by, said software modules.
However, Cerutti teaches further comprising establishing a global parameter list that is accessible to, and updatable by, said software modules (Para. [0025]: most modules in the shared memory software application may produce one or more output parameters on the basis of one or more input parameters; para. [0027]: An update or a new release of one or more software modules may cause changes in the mapping of the shared memory. This situation is shown in Fig. 2 illustrating a shared memory system 200 comprising a shared memory software application 204 and a shared memory 202, note that the above feature of “shared memory in paras [0025] and [0027]” is considered as “a global parameter list)
Wladek and Cerutti are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of software application. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention to incorporate the global parameter list such as is described in Cerutti into Wladek, in order to provide at least one modification in the mapping information, and/or provide at least one shared memory management (SMM) library configured to be statically linked to at least one of said software programs and to be dynamically linked to at least part of said shared memory using the modified mapping information (Cerutti , para. [0011]).
Regarding claim 22, Wladek in view of Mackaie and Dorn teaches all the limitation of claim 21.
Wladek, Mackaie, and Dorn do not specifically teach that each software module has access to, and updates, only a subset of the parameters of the global parameter list.
However, Cerutti teaches that each software module has access to, and updates, only a subset of the parameters of the global parameter list (Para. [0025]: most modules in the shared memory software application may produce one or more output parameters on the basis of one or more input parameters; para. [0027]: An update or a new release of one or more software modules may cause changes in the mapping of the shared memory. This situation is shown in Fig. 2 illustrating a shared memory system 200 comprising a shared memory software application 204 and a shared memory 202, note that the above feature of “shared memory in paras [0025] and [0027]” is considered as “a global parameter list). Mackaie teaches most modules in the shared memory software application may produce one or more output parameters on the basis of one or more input parameters (see para. [0025]) and an update or a new release of one or more software modules may cause changes in the mapping of the shared memory (see para. [0027]). Therefore, only a subset of the parameters of the global parameter list such as described above would be an obvious variation of such methods. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Wladek to use the above features in order to access only a subset of the parameters of the global parameter list.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kulkarni et al. (US 9,880,603 B1) teaches a dispatch module implemented in at least one of a memory or a processing device is operatively coupled to a first processing module and a second processing module. The first processing module has a priority higher than a priority of the second processing module. The dispatch module includes a workload counter associated with the first processing module to provide an indication of a workload at the first processing module.
Yang et al. (US 2017/0212759 A1) teaches an asynchronous instruction execution apparatus and method are provided. The asynchronous instruction execution apparatus includes a vector execution unit control VXUC module and n vector execution unit data VXUD modules, where n is a positive integer. The VXUC module is configured to perform instruction decoding and token management. The n VXUD modules are cascaded, separately connected to the VXUC module, and configured to invoke an external calculation resource to perform data calculation.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANGKYUNG LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3669. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 8:30am-4:00pm.
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, Lee Rodak can be reached on (571)270-5628. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/SANGKYUNG LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2858 /LEE E RODAK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2858