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.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on 04/12/2026 has been entered.
Claims 1, 7-8, 13-15 and 20-21 are amended.
Claims 3-4, 10, 19 and 22-23 are cancelled.
Claims 1-2, 5-9, 11-18 and 20-21 are pending of which claims 1, 13 are independent claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 04/12/2026 have been fully considered.
In response to argument that “Xiao only relates to controlling the display of privacy information in response to a single access request, and does not involve at all providing a user with two access options in a subsequent access request directed to the same image, wherein one access option provides the previously modified image, and the other access option provides the user with a display interface for selecting privacy information to be removed”, and “In JEONG, the first virtual device only modifies the shared file but does not access it, and the second virtual device does not initiate an access request. Instead, the second virtual device first receives information that the original shared file has been modified and a secure alternative file has been created. In response to receiving such information, the second virtual device autonomously selects either the modified original shared file or the secure alternative file. That is to say, the second virtual device is not provided with a first access option providing a display interface for selecting privacy information to be removed”, examiner respectively disagree because:
Firstly, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). As discussed in previous office action, JEONG discloses the virtual machine can make a request for selectively referring to the original created file or the modified shared file, while Xiao can provide a display interface for selecting private information to be removed from the shared original image based on the selection of the original file from JEONG. The combination would allow the system to remove the private information from the original files for security.
Secondly, regarding to argument “two access options in a subsequent access request directed to the same image”, there is no support in the claim that the two options directed to the same image. The claimed limitation recites “providing a first access option indicating an access to the target resource and a second access option indicating an access to the target resource copy”. File “target resource” and “target resource copy” are different based on the claim and specification.
Regarding to amended required claim limitation, “If the user selects the second access option, the target resource copy obtained from the stored target resource copy content file is directly invoke”, a new ground of rejection is made below.
Priority/Benefit
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy of China Application CN202011372227.0 filed on Nov. 30, 2020 has been received on 05/27/2023.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 13, Limitations, “a common service entity" is Indefinite because the claim does not provide objective boundaries by which a person having an ordinary skill in the art can determine or what constitutes as a “a common service entity”.
Regarding claims 14 and 20-21, Limitations,”an instruction for reserving the private information-removed copy" Indefinite because the claim does not specify what constitutes as “instruction”, nor how the “instruction” reserves the private information-removed copy.
Regarding claim 17, Limitations, “an address of the privacy information-removed resource" is Indefinite because the claim does not provide objective boundaries by which a person having an ordinary skill in the art can determine or what constitutes as a “an address”.
Dependent claims 14-18 and 20-21 are also rejected for inheriting the deficiencies of the independent claim 13 from which they depend on.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-8 and 11, 13, 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao et al. (CN 110929287A, hereinafter Xiao) in view of JEONG et al. (US 2019/0266338, hereinafter JEONG) and Currenti et al. (Pub. No. : US 2019/0147016, hereinafter Currenti).
Regarding claim 1: Xiao teaches: A resource access control method, comprising:
wherein the modification instruction is configured to indicate modification of the target resource, a target resource copy is obtainable from the target resource copy content file, and the target resource copy is a resource obtained by modifying the target resource according to the modification instruction
in response to a first access request for a target resource, acquiring a modification instruction for the target resource (Xiao - [Page 3, Line 36-39]: if a picture sharing instruction is detected, acquiring a first picture to be shared, wherein the picture sharing instruction is used for indicating that the first picture is shared to a target contact person … calling a sharing process associated with the picture sharing instruction to acquire a target privacy information list);
obtaining a target resource copy by modifying the target resource according to the modification instruction, accessing the target resource copy (Xiao - [Page 6, Line 26-30]: after the camera application acquires the first picture, when the underlying software forms an image or a video, the camera application may process the privacy information in the first picture according to at least one privacy information identifier in the target privacy information list, that is, a mapping table of an application process identifier and a user authorized privacy information identifier is queried, whether a behavior of the user authorized privacy information exists is determined, if so, the authorized privacy information content is incorporated into the metadata, then, other privacy information content of the metadata is deleted); and
and in response to an instruction of selecting the first access option for accessing the target resource, providing a display interface for selecting private information to be removed from the target resource (Xiao - [Page 7, Line 3-6]: when a terminal receives a sharing instruction that a user wants to share pictures with a target contact person, the first picture that the user wants to share is obtained. [Page 7, Line 34-35]: after the user clicks to determine sharing, the terminal deletes the privacy information corresponding to the switch control in the first picture, and then shares the security picture obtained after deleting the privacy information determined not to be shared with the target contact).
However, Xiao doesn’t explicitly teach, but JEONG discloses:
storing a target resource copy content file, wherein the target resource copy is obtainable from the target resource copy content file (JEONG - [0061]: store the modified shared file 300 when the first virtual device 100a makes a modification request to the shared file 300);
after the target resource copy content file is stored, in response to an access request for the target resource (JEONG - [0072]: at operation S900, the controller 407 receives the request for modifying the shared file 300 from the first virtual device 100a. Further, at operation S901, the controller 407 maintains the original copy of the shared file. Then, at operation S903, the controller 407 additionally stores the modified shared file in the storage 405 in response to a request from the first virtual device 100a), providing a first access option indicating an access to the target resource and a second access option indicating an access to the target resource copy (JEONG - [0073]: at operation S1007, the second virtual device 100b makes a request for selectively referring to the created alternative file or the modified shared file 300 to the controller 407);
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Xiao with JEONG so that the modified content can is saved and provided with optional access. The modification would have allowed the system to use modified content at later time.
However, the combination of Xiao and JEONG doesn’t explicitly teach, but Currenti discloses:
and in response to an instruction of selecting the second access option, directly invoking the target resource copy obtained from the stored target resource copy content file (Currenti - [0032]: The system displays on the user's computer a user interface that can present output and also receive input from the user, for example, the user may utilize file directory functions to input selections of an original document and a modified document. [0033]: The user then clicks or selects an interaction that causes the system to begin the comparison process that detects changes between the versions of the document).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Xiao with JEONG and Currenti so that the modified content can is saved and provided with optional access. The modification would have allowed the system to be more efficient.
Regarding claim 2: Xiao as modified teaches wherein
the target resource is an image file (Xiao - [Page 11, Line 31]: acquiring of the first picture to be processed); and
the modification instruction is configured to indicate modification of an exchangeable image file information in the image file (Xiao - [Page 8, Line 55-57]: a mapping table of an application process identifier and a user authorized privacy information identifier is queried, whether a behavior of the user authorized privacy information exists is determined, if so, the authorized privacy information content is incorporated into the metadata, then, other privacy information content of the metadata is deleted).
Regarding claim 5: Xiao as modified teaches wherein storing the target resource copy content file comprises:
providing a store option comprising an option for storing the target resource copy content file and an option for not storing the target resource copy content file (Xiao - [Page 5, Line 20-21]: the user may operate the open/close control corresponding to each piece of privacy information on the display interface to determine whether to share the privacy information in the first picture); and
in response to a selection instruction of the option for storing the target resource copy content file, storing the target resource copy content file (Xiao - [Page 5, Line 21-23]: if the user does not want to share certain privacy information in the first picture, clicking a switch control corresponding to the privacy information, and setting the switch control corresponding to the privacy information which is not wanted to be shared as off).
Regarding claim 7: Xiao as modified teaches wherein storing the target resource copy content file comprises:
storing the target resource copy as the target resource copy content file (JEONG - [0061]: store the modified shared file 300 when the first virtual device 100 a makes a modification request to the shared file 300).
The reason to combine is for the similar rational as discussed in claim 1.
Regarding claim 8: Xiao as modified teaches wherein the second access request for the target resource comprises a request for sharing the target resource (Xiao - [Page 4, Line 32]: if a picture sharing instruction is detected, acquiring a first picture to be shared).
Regarding claim 11: Xiao as modified teaches further comprising:
in response to the instruction of selecting the first access option, acquiring the modification instruction for the target resource (Xiao - [Page 7, Line 32-33]: if the user does not want to share the name information and the address information in the first picture, the switch control corresponding to the name information and the address information is set to off to obtain the privacy information list).
Regarding claim 13: Xiao teaches: A resource access control method, comprising:
in response to a first access request for an original resource, obtaining a privacy information-removed resource by removing privacy information from the original resource (Xiao - [Page 3, Line 36-39]: if a picture sharing instruction is detected, acquiring a first picture to be shared, wherein the picture sharing instruction is used for indicating that the first picture is shared to a target contact person … calling a sharing process associated with the picture sharing instruction to acquire a target privacy information list. [Page 6, Line 26-30]: after the camera application acquires the first picture, when the underlying software forms an image or a video, the camera application may process the privacy information in the first picture according to at least one privacy information identifier in the target privacy information list, that is, a mapping table of an application process identifier and a user authorized privacy information identifier is queried, whether a behavior of the user authorized privacy information exists is determined, if so, the authorized privacy information content is incorporated into the metadata, then, other privacy information content of the metadata is deleted);
in response to selection of the first access option, providing a display interface for selecting private information to be removed from the original resource (Xiao - [Page 7, Line 3-6]: when a terminal receives a sharing instruction that a user wants to share pictures with a target contact person, the first picture that the user wants to share is obtained. [Page 7, Line 34-35]: after the user clicks to determine sharing, the terminal deletes the privacy information corresponding to the switch control in the first picture, and then shares the security picture obtained after deleting the privacy information determined not to be shared with the target contact).
However, Xiao doesn’t explicitly teach, but JEONG discloses:
storing a private information-removed copy [and associating the original resource with the privacy information-removed copy by a common service entity], wherein the privacy information-removed resource is obtainable from the privacy information-removed copy (JEONG - [0061]: store the modified shared file 300 when the first virtual device 100a makes a modification request to the shared file 300);
after the private information-removed copy is stored, in response to a second access request for the original resource (JEONG - [0072]: at operation S900, the controller 407 receives the request for modifying the shared file 300 from the first virtual device 100a. Further, at operation S901, the controller 407 maintains the original copy of the shared file. Then, at operation S903, the controller 407 additionally stores the modified shared file in the storage 405 in response to a request from the first virtual device 100a), returning, by the common service entity, a first access option indicating an access to the original resource and a second access option indicating an access to the privacy information-removed resource (JEONG - [0073]: at operation S1007, the second virtual device 100b makes a request for selectively referring to the created alternative file or the modified shared file 300 to the controller 407);
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Xiao with JEONG so that the modified content can is saved and provided with optional access. The modification would have allowed the system to use modified content at later time.
However, the combination of Xiao and JEONG doesn’t explicitly teach, but Currenti discloses:
associating the original resource with the privacy information-removed copy by a common service entity; and in response to selection of the second access option, directly invoking the privacy information-removed resource obtained from the original resource (Currenti - [0032]: The system displays on the user's computer a user interface that can present output and also receive input from the user, for example, the user may utilize file directory functions to input selections of an original document and a modified document. [0033]: The user then clicks or selects an interaction that causes the system to begin the comparison process that detects changes between the versions of the document).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Xiao with JEONG and Currenti so that the modified content can is saved and provided with optional access. The modification would have allowed the system to be more efficient.
Regarding claim 15: Xiao as modified teaches: wherein in response to the second access request for the original resource, returning, by the common service entity, the first access option and the second access option comprises: in response to the second access request for the original resource from a second application entity, returning, by the common service entity, the first access option indicating an access to the original resource and the second access option indicating an access to the privacy information-removed resource, to the second application entity (JEONG - [0073]: at operation S1007, the second virtual device 100b makes a request for selectively referring to the created alternative file or the modified shared file 300 to the controller 407).
Regarding claim 16: Xiao as modified teaches: wherein in response to selection of the first access option, accessing the original resource and/or a resource associated with the original resource (); and in response to selection of the second access option, accessing the privacy information-removed resource and/or a resource associated with the privacy information-removed resource (Currenti - [0032]: The system displays on the user's computer a user interface that can present output and also receive input from the user, for example, the user may utilize file directory functions to input selections of an original document and a modified document. [0033]: The user then clicks or selects an interaction that causes the system to begin the comparison process that detects changes between the versions of the document).
The reason to combine is similar as claim 13.
Regarding claim 17: Xiao as modified teaches: wherein in response to selection of the second access, accessing a virtual privacy information- removed resource and an address of the privacy information-removed resource (JEONG - [0057]: The common area refers to an area to which the plurality of virtual devices 100 a and 100 b can have an access, and the exclusive area refers to an area to which only the corresponding virtual devices 100 a and 100 b can have an access).
The reason to combine is similar as claim 13.
Claims 6 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao et al. (CN 110929287A, hereinafter Xiao) in view of JEONG et al. (US 2019/0266338, hereinafter JEONG), and Currenti et al. (Pub. No. : US 2019/0147016, hereinafter Currenti) and WALKER et al. (US 2021/0390190, hereinafter WALKER).
Regarding claim 6: Xiao as modified teaches: wherein storing the target resource copy content file comprises:
determining modification setting for the target resource indicated by the modification instruction (Xiao - [Page 4, Line 23-24]: the receiving module is used for receiving an operation instruction of the setting control and modifying the display identifier of the privacy information corresponding to the setting control according to the operation instruction),
However, Xiao as modified doesn’t explicitly teach but WALKER discloses:
storing the modification setting as the target resource copy content file (WALKER - [0035] Computing device 102 may store data/information to storage devices 130, which may comprise, for example, … various inputs received on the screen 110 relating to modification of privacy settings 114).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Xiao and JEONG, Currenti with WALKER so that privacy modification can be stored. The modification would have allowed the system to store modification settings instead of modified resources.
Regarding claim 12: Xiao as modified teaches: wherein storing the target resource copy content file comprises:
determining modification setting for the target resource indicated by the modification instruction (Xiao - [Page 4, Line 23-24]: the receiving module is used for receiving an operation instruction of the setting control and modifying the display identifier of the privacy information corresponding to the setting control according to the operation instruction), and
in response to the instruction of selecting the second access option: modifying the target resource according to the modification setting to obtain the target resource copy, and accessing the target resource copy (JEONG - [0073]: at operation S1003, the controller 407 modifies the shared file 300 based on the modification request of the first virtual device 100 a … at operation S1007, the second virtual device 100 b makes a request for selectively referring to the created alternative file or the modified shared file 300 to the controller 407).
The reason to combine Xiao and JEONG is for the same rational as claim 1.
However, Xiao as modified doesn’t explicitly teach but WALKER discloses:
storing the modification setting as the target resource copy content file (WALKER - [0035] Computing device 102 may store data/information to storage devices 130, which may comprise, for example, … various inputs received on the screen 110 relating to modification of privacy settings 114).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Xiao and JEONG, Currenti with WALKER so that privacy modification can be stored. The modification would have allowed the system to store modification settings instead of modified resources.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao et al. (CN 110929287A, hereinafter Xiao) in view of JEONG et al. (US 2019/0266338, hereinafter JEONG), and Currenti et al. (Pub. No.: US 2019/0147016, hereinafter Currenti) and OKADA et al. (Pub. No.: US 2011/0083107, hereinafter OKADA).
Regarding claim 9: Xiao as modified doesn’t explicitly teach but OKADA discloses: wherein providing the first access option indicating an access to the target resource and a second access option indicating an access to the target resource copy comprises:
providing an original thumbnail as the first access option, and providing a copy thumbnail as the second access option; the original thumbnail comprising a thumbnail of the target resource, and the copy thumbnail comprising the original thumbnail and a preset copy mark (OKADA - [0011]: a control unit to search for, through the communication unit, contents stored in the different device, to generate a list of thumbnail images indicating the searched contents. [0013]: The control unit may update the list through the output unit in such a manner that, when a new content is stored in the different device, a thumbnail image indicating the newly stored content is displayed in the list, or in such a manner that, when a content stored in the different device is deleted, a thumbnail image indicating the deleted content is deleted from the list).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Xiao and JEONG, Currenti with OKADA so that thumbnails are provided for accessing associated resources and thumbnails can have an indication for different types of resources. The modification would have allowed the system to have thumbnails for accessing the respective resources.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiao et al. (CN 110929287A, hereinafter Xiao) in view of JEONG et al. (US 2019/0266338, hereinafter JEONG), and Currenti et al. (Pub. No.: US 2019/0147016, hereinafter Currenti) and OKADA et al. (Pub. No.: US 2011/0083107, hereinafter OKADA) and RAMACHANDRAN et al. (US 2012/0137375, hereinafter RAMACHANDRAN).
Regarding claim 18: Xiao as modified doesn’t explicitly teach but RAMACHANDRAN discloses: wherein the privacy information-removed resource comprises an address of the privacy information- removed resource and a type of removed privacy information resource (RAMACHANDRAN - [0060]: The identifier to the resource can include the host identifier where the resource is located, the access path for the resource, and the type of resource (e.g., file, process, memory page, database record, etc.)).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Xiao and JEONG, Currenti with OKADA so that resource includes path and type. The modification would have allowed the system to access the resource.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14 and 20-21 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if the 112b rejection, set forth in this Office action, are overcome and if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The reason for allowance will be furnished upon allowance of the application.
Conclusion
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 MENG LI whose telephone number is (571)272-8729. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:30.
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, Alexander Lagor can be reached on (571) 270-5143. 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.
/MENG LI/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2437
Prosecution Insights