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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09/22/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim(s) 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as based on a disclosure which is not enabling. The disclosure does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to practice the invention without “metadata”, which is/are critical or essential to the practice of the invention but not included in the claim(s). See In re Mayhew, 527 F.2d 1229, 188 USPQ 356 (CCPA 1976). There is no mention of the term “metadata” or “meta data” in the entirety of the specification. The Claim language state that metadata is associated with the information exchange request and for access information.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim(s) 6, 14, 16, 18 the above-mentioned claims contains the phrase “and/or”, which renders the claim indefinite. In addition, it is unclear whether the phrase “and/or” and is intended to make the claim encompass one or both of the conjoined limitations. Appropriate action is required.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. —The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter, which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter, which the applicant regards as his invention.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 13-14, 17-19, 21, 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conboy et al. (US 2011/0173178 A1) and further in view of Awasthi (US 2012/0179779 A1).
Re Claim 1, 17, 19 & 23, Conboy teaches a method for dynamically connecting a network communication channel in a software system, the method comprising steps of:
(i) providing a software module in the software system, and triggering activation of a connection flow in response to an information exchange request by the software module, (Conboy; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0043]-[0056]; Software based systems contained on a user device, for exchanging data between a user device and an external network based on user requests.)
wherein during the connection flow, a response interface corresponding to the information exchange request is generated for a user to operate according to a content of the information exchange request; (Conboy; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0036]-[0057]; A established connection, in which request data and content is shared between a user and external network, web page.)
wherein the information exchange request is transmitted from an external network to the software module; and (Conboy; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0036]-[0057]; Exchanging data between a user device and an external network via software means.)
(ii) guiding the user to perform a task of accessing an information exchange activity through the response interface, (Conboy; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0036]-[0057]; A user performing tasks with accessing and requesting data.)
wherein task of accessing the information exchange activity is executed by an external application that is dynamically loaded to run, and (Conboy; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0036]-[0057], [0118]-[0122]; Accessing, exchanging data between a user and an external loaded and ran application/web page.)
the external application accesses the information exchange activity by connecting the network communication channel corresponding to the information exchange activity, (Conboy; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0036]-[0057], [0118]-[0122]; An information link/URL connected the user to the external network for exchanging data.)
wherein the content of the information exchange request contains a link that is used to point to a network address of the external application, and (Conboy; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0036]-[0057], [0118]-[0122]; Content exchange based on the request a link such as a URL, which has an associated network address of an external application/web page.)
the external application is dynamically loaded to run through the network address during the connection flow; (Conboy; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0036]-[0057], [0118]-[0122]; An external application/web page, dynamically loaded to run through the URL.)
Conboy does not explicitly suggest wherein the external application is dynamically loaded to run in the software system wherein the external application is deployed, stored or published in an external server, and the external server and the machine where the software system and the software module are located are different computing devices, and wherein any one of the software system and the software module is a third-party software system corresponding to the external application, and wherein before the external application is dynamically loaded, the external application has not been installed or imported into the machine running the software system and the software module.
However, in analogous art, Awasthi teaches wherein the external application is dynamically loaded to run in the software system wherein the external application is deployed, stored or published in an external server, and (Awasthi; FIG. 1-14; Background, Summary, ¶ [0032]-[0041], An external application, loaded to run in the software system. The external application is deployed, stored or published in an external server.)
the external server and the machine where the software system and the software module are located are different computing devices, and (Awasthi; FIG. 1-14; Background, Summary, ¶ [0025]-[0036], [0044]-[0057]; External servers, machines, devices, and software are located on different computing devices.)
wherein any one of the software system and the software module is a third-party software system corresponding to the external application, and (Awasthi; FIG. 1-14; Background, Summary; Third party software systems, external applications.)
wherein before the external application is dynamically loaded, the external application has not been installed or imported into the machine running the software system and the software module. (Awasthi; FIG. 1-14; Background, Summary, ¶ [0030]-[0045]; The external application is loaded and hosted on a server before download or installation.)
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Conboy in view of Awasthi to store and run external applications for the reason of storing and accessing software application in a cloud system. (Awasthi Abstract)
Re Claim 3, Conboy-Awasthi discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the information exchange activity is a message chat, a voice call, a video call, a web conference, an online sign-off activity or any online activity that can be accessed through a network connection. (Awasthi; FIG. 1-14; Background, Summary, ¶ [0030]-[0045]; Online activity.)
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Conboy in view of Awasthi to store and run external applications for the reason of storing and accessing software application in a cloud system. (Awasthi Abstract)
Re Claim 4, Conboy-Awasthi discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the external application is a Web system, a native application or any software service that can be dynamically loaded to run, (Conboy; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0036]-[0057], [0118]-[0122]; Accessing, exchanging data between a user and an external loaded and ran application/web page.)
wherein when a startup module of the external application is dynamically loaded and executed, the external application is dynamically loaded to run. (Conboy; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0036]-[0057], [0118]-[0122]; Accessing, exchanging data between a user and an external loaded and ran application/web page.)
Re Claim 13, Conboy-Awasthi discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the activation of the connection flow, a procedure of generating the response interface and a procedure of dynamically loading and running the external application are performed in a same operating system (OS) process in a same machine, in different OS processes in the same machine or in different machines. (Awasthi; FIG. 1; ¶ [0070]; The embodiment(s) are performed by an operating system.)
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Conboy in view of Awasthi to store and run external applications for the reason of storing and accessing software application in a cloud system. (Awasthi Abstract)
Re Claim 14, Conboy-Awasthi discloses the method according to claim 6, wherein the information exchange activity is an online activity that is generated through an interaction between at least one person and a network communication service, wherein after accessing the online activity, the at least one person, (Awasthi; FIG. 1; Background, Summary, ¶ [0068]; A human user sending and receiving data.)
or
they at least one person and at least another person exchanges information in real time through a network.
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Conboy in view of Awasthi to store and run external applications for the reason of storing and accessing software application in a cloud system. (Awasthi Abstract)
Re Claim 18, Conboy-Awasthi discloses a computer program product, wherein a content of the computer program product has a machine-executable instruction, wherein when the machine-executable instruction is executed, a machine executes the method according to at least one of the claims 1 to 16. (Awasthi; FIG. 1; Background, Summary; Computer related machine readable mediums for storing code for the execution of the embodiments.)
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Conboy in view of Awasthi to store and run external applications for the reason of storing and accessing software application in a cloud system. (Awasthi Abstract)
Re Claim 21 & 24, Conboy-Awasthi discloses the machine according to claim 23, wherein the content of the information exchange request contains a link that is used to point to a network address of the external application, and the external application is dynamically loaded to run through the network address during the connection flow. (Conboy; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0036]-[0057], [0118]-[0122]; Content exchange based on the request a link such as a URL, which has an associated network address of an external application/web page.)
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conboy et al. (US 2011/0173178 A1), in view of Awasthi (US 2012/0179779 A1) and further in view of Nelken (US 2006/0200374 A1).
Re Claim 2, Conboy-Awasthi discloses the method according to claim 1, yet does not explicitly suggest wherein the information exchange request is issued when the information exchange activity is established, an invitation of the information exchange activity is received and/or an instant access event of the information exchange activity is triggered.
However, in analogous art, Nelken teaches wherein the information exchange request is issued when the information exchange activity is established, an invitation of the information exchange activity is received and/or an instant access event of the information exchange activity is triggered. (Nelken; FIG. 1-6; Background, Summary, ¶ [0036]-[0061]; The embodiment(s) detail the sending of invitation to exchange data information between users.)
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Conboy-Awasthi in view of Nelken to send data invitations for the reasons of scheduling activities between users. (Nelken Abstract)
Claim(s) 5, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conboy et al. (US 2011/0173178 A1), in view of Awasthi (US 2012/0179779 A1) and further in view of Johnstone et al. (US 2012/0129572 A1).
Re Claim 5, Conboy-Awasthi discloses the method according to claim 4, yet does not explicitly suggest wherein the external application is dynamically loaded to run through an additional software module, wherein the additional software module is another independently running software system or a software component that can dynamically load and run a heterogeneous system, and wherein the software module and the additional software module are executed in a same operating system (OS) process or different OS processes.
However, in analogous art, Johnstone teaches wherein the external application is dynamically loaded to run through an additional software module, (Johnstone; FIG. 1; ¶ [0001]-[0010]; [0054]-[0081]; External application loaded and run via software.)
wherein the additional software module is another independently running software system or a software component that can dynamically load and run a heterogeneous system, and (Johnstone; FIG. 1; ¶ [0001]-[0010]; [0054]-[0081]; Various software to run programs in various mobile environments.)
wherein the software module and the additional software module are executed in a same operating system (OS) process or different OS processes. (Johnstone; FIG. 1; ¶ [0001]-[0010]; [0054]-[0081]; Executing application in various operating systems.)
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Conboy-Awasthi in view of Johnstone to run applications in various operating systems for the reason of coordinating integration of a new application in a network system. (Johnstone Abstract)
Re Claim 8, Conboy-Awasthi-Johnstone discloses the method according to claim 5, wherein the content of the information exchange request contains an information that is used to generate the response interface,
wherein the response interface is generated by the external application, the software system or the software module during an operation of the connection flow, (Johnstone; FIG. 1, 3, 6, 8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0032]-[0038]; Employing software generated interfaces to transmit data.)
or
the response interface is generated by the additional software module that is triggered during the operation of the connection flow, wherein a man-machine interface template of the response interface is applied when the response interface is generated, and the task of accessing the information exchange activity is executed after the user performs an operation on an operable window component in the response interface, wherein the operable window component provides a confirmation intention to guide the user to access the information exchange activity.
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Conboy-Awasthi in view of Johnstone to run applications in various operating systems for the reason of coordinating integration of a new application in a network system. (Johnstone Abstract)
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conboy et al. (US 2011/0173178 A1), in view of Awasthi (US 2012/0179779 A1) and further in view of Lazaridis et al. (US 2011/0149864 A1)
Re Claim 6, Conboy-Awasthi discloses the method according to claim 1, yet does not explicitly suggest wherein the information exchange request is transmitted from the external network to a machine running the software system, and the information exchange request is transmitted to the software module, wherein the external network is an information transmission channel, wherein when the information exchange request is sent to the machine, a transmission identification code for receiving the information exchange request is not previously registered to at least one of the information transmission channel, the software system and/or the software module by the external application.
However, in analogous art, Lazaridis teaches wherein the information exchange request is transmitted from the external network to a machine running the software system, and (Lazaridis; FIG. 1-8; Background, ¶ [0019]-[0048]; Software, various devices, exchanging data between network devices.)
the information exchange request is transmitted to the software module, (Lazaridis; FIG. 1-8; Background, ¶ [0019]-[0048]; Software components.)
wherein the external network is an information transmission channel, (Lazaridis; FIG. 1-8; Background, ¶ [0019]-[0048]; An external network, communication paths.)
wherein when the information exchange request is sent to the machine, a transmission identification code for receiving the information exchange request is not previously registered to at least one of the information transmission channel, the software system and/or the software module by the external application. (Lazaridis; FIG. 1-8; Background, ¶ [0019]-[0048]; No device registration is discloses, various machines, transmitting identification related information.)
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Conboy-Awasthi in view of Lazaridis to transmit identification information for the reasons of exchanging identification information in a communication path. (Lazaridis Abstract)
Re Claim 7, Conboy-Awasthi-Lazaridis discloses the method according to claim 6, wherein a process of identifying the information exchange request is implemented by identifying a data structure of the information exchange request,
and/or identifying the information transmission channel, (Lazaridis; FIG. 1-8; Background, ¶ [0019]-[0048]; Identifying communication paths.)
or identifying a service identification code corresponding to the information exchange activity or the external application.
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Conboy-Awasthi in view of Lazaridis to transmit identification information for the reasons of exchanging identification information in a communication path. (Lazaridis Abstract)
Claim(s) 9-10, 20, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conboy et al. (US 2011/0173178 A1), in view of Awasthi (US 2012/0179779 A1) and further in view of LAMOUREUX et al. (US 2013/0138476 A1).
Re Claim 9 & 20, Conboy-Awasthi discloses the method according to claim 1, yet does not explicitly suggest wherein the content of the information exchange request contains a metadata of the information exchange activity, and the external application accesses the information exchange activity according to an information of the metadata.
However, in analogous art, LAMOUREUX teaches wherein the content of the information exchange request contains a metadata of the information exchange activity, and the external application accesses the information exchange activity according to an information of the metadata. (LAMOUREUX; FIG. 1-3; ¶ [0037]-[0040], [0044]-[0045], [0067]-[0088]; The embodiment(s) describe including metadata in online user communication and content exchange.)
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Conboy-Awasthi in view of LAMOUREUX to include metadata for the reasons of implanting a bundle-passing interface between a plurality of network users. (LAMOUREUX Abstract)
Re Claim 10 & 22, Conboy-Awasthi-LAMOUREUX discloses the method according to claim 9, wherein the metadata is embedded in the link in the content of the information exchange request. (LAMOUREUX; FIG. 1-3; ¶ [0037]-[0040], [0044]-[0045], [0067]-[0088]; The embodiment(s) describe embedding metadata in communication exchanges.)
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Conboy-Awasthi in view of LAMOUREUX to include metadata for the reasons of implanting a bundle-passing interface between a plurality of network users. (LAMOUREUX Abstract)
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conboy et al. (US 2011/0173178 A1), in view of Awasthi (US 2012/0179779 A1), in view of Johnstone et al. (US 2012/0129572 A1) and further in view of Geisinger (US 2008/0028401 A1).
Re Claim 11, Conboy-Awasthi-Johnstone discloses the method according to claim 5, yet does not explicitly suggest wherein the software component that can dynamically load and run the heterogeneous system is a software component embedded in a software application, and the software component executes the heterogeneous system through a software engine that is independent of the software application,
However, in analogous art, Geisinger teaches wherein the software component that can dynamically load and run the heterogeneous system is a software component embedded in a software application, and (Geisinger; FIG. 1-21; Background, ¶ [0088]-[0121]; Software component loaded and ran on systems.)
the software component executes the heterogeneous system through a software engine that is independent of the software application,
the heterogeneous system is executed in an independent sandbox, wherein the heterogeneous system is a Web system, a native application or any software service that can be dynamically loaded to run. (Geisinger; FIG. 1-21; Background, ¶ [0088]-[0121]; Applications, software programs and sandbox operating system.)
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Conboy-Awasthi-Johnstone in view of Geisinger to independently run software programs in a systems for the reasons of installing virtual machines in a network system. (Geisinger Abstract)
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conboy et al. (US 2011/0173178 A1), in view of Awasthi (US 2012/0179779 A1) and further in view of Nakamura (US 2008/0082675 A1).
Re Claim 12, Conboy-Awasthi discloses the method according to claim 1, yet does not explicitly suggest wherein the content of the information exchange request contains an access token for acquiring an authority of accessing the information exchange activity.
However, in analogous art, Nakamura teaches wherein the content of the information exchange request contains an access token for acquiring an authority of accessing the information exchange activity. (Nakamura; FIG. 1; ¶ [0056]-[0061]; Generating token for communication exchange and data access.)
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Conboy-Awasthi in view of Nakamura to grant access for the reasons of generating token for data access in a data transmission related system. (Nakamura ¶ [0056]-[0061])
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conboy et al. (US 2011/0173178 A1), in view of Awasthi (US 2012/0179779 A1) and further in view of Menezes et al. (US 2012/0167185 A1).
Re Claim 15, Conboy-Awasthi discloses the method according to claim 14, yet does not explicitly suggest wherein the network communication service is an authorized network communication service with a permission, and the permission is authorized by the information transmission channel or the software system so as to transmit the information exchange request, wherein when the information exchange request is transmitted, the network communication service and a client software of the network communication service are not installed or imported into the software system and a machine running the software system.
However, in analogous art, Menezes teaches wherein the network communication service is an authorized network communication service with a permission, and (Menezes; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0021]-[0030]; Authorized network communication.)
the permission is authorized by the information transmission channel or the software system so as to transmit the information exchange request, (Menezes; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0021]-[0030]; Authorization via the software system.)
wherein when the information exchange request is transmitted, the network communication service and a client software of the network communication service are not installed or imported into the software system and a machine running the software system. (Menezes; FIG. 1-8; Background, Summary, ¶ [0021]-[0030]; The transmission of data in the network communication system between devices.)
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Conboy-Awasthi in view of Menezes to grant network access for the reasons of implementing a network access control system in a network. (Menezes Abstract)
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conboy et al. (US 2011/0173178 A1), in view of Awasthi (US 2012/0179779 A1) and further in view of Stollarski et al. (US 2014/0282081 A1).
Re Claim 16, Conboy-Awasthi discloses the method according to claim 1, yet does not explicitly suggest wherein the information exchange request is used for importing a work process corresponding to the information exchange activity, and the work process is dynamically imported into a machine running the software module according to an execution state of the information exchange activity.
However, in analogous art, Stollarski teaches wherein the information exchange request is used for importing a work process corresponding to the information exchange activity, and the work process is dynamically imported into a machine running the software module according to an execution state of the information exchange activity. (Stollarski; FIG. 1, 31; Summary, ¶ [0216]-[0232; The embodiment(s) detail information exchange request, importing data and a machine running software.)
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Conboy-Awasthi in view of Stollarski to import data for the reasons of conducting business transactions between users in a network. (Stollarski Abstract)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER B ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0702. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-3:00 EST.
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, Nicholas R Taylor can be reached at 571-272-3889. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER B ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443