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 .
This action is responding to the amendment filed on12/22/2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending in the application.
The information disclosure statements filed on 1/24/2026, 1/6/2026 and 12/2/2025.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6-12 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mo in view of Mo et al. (CN 110362317, hereafter Mo) in view of Krishnamurthy et al. (US20170357247, hereafter Krishnamurthy).
Per claim 1:
Mo teaches:
A code translation method, wherein the method comprises: obtaining first code, wherein the first code is written based on a platform-dependent language of a source platform, wherein the platform dependent language of the source platform is a language that depends on the platform (Mo, see at least page 2, obtaining first source code needs to be converted according to the transcoding request, the first source code suitable for running on the browser end; page 6, “It should be noted that, the source code adapted to explorer end not suitable for running at the client, the main reason is a programming specification for application development, a browser end and the client are different, the difference between the both programming specification results in source code adapted to the browser end is not suitable for running at the client; page 9, source code with LIGA native programming criterion only compatible IOS platform and the Android platform, not compatible with the access of the browser end; fig.2 and associated texts, Note that the code language only compatible with a certain platform is considered to be platform-dependent);
determining at least one translation rule that matches the first code, wherein the translation rule is used to directly translate code of one platform into code of another platform; and directly translating the first code using the translation rule, to obtain second code applicable to a target platform without mapping the first code to an intermediate language , wherein an instruction set of the source platform and an instruction set of the target platform are different (Mo, see at least page 2, “acquiring the code of corresponding client conversion rule; The code conversion rule, the first source code into the second source code and the second source code suitable for running on the client, the first source code suitable for running on the browser end … a rule obtaining module, used for obtaining the code conversion rule of the corresponding client; a code conversion module, used for according to the code conversion rule, the first source code into the second source code and the second source code suitable for running on the client; page 15, the plurality of source code module for matching with the difference information; the source code module is matched successfully as the first source code module… the first source code input in the syntax converter, indicating the syntax converter according to the difference information identifying a first source code of the first source code module, and converting the first source code module as a second source code module; page 7, second conversion for the first source code to source code, can be identified in the first source code is not suitable for operation by the client source code statement (source code statement or the client is not compatible), the suitable source code statement client operation of transfer is adapted to source code statement run by the client … the plurality of source code module for matching with the difference information between the first program specification and second programming specification; the successfully matched source code module as a first source code module; page 12, Babel compiler in step 206, the second terminal receives and stores the server transmission. wherein, the second terminal can locally set the special compiler storage area, and when the Babel compiler receives the transmission by the server, the received Babel compiler stored in the compiler memory area; Fig. 2b and associated texts, directly converting the need of source code; Note that the code conversion from the first source code to the second source code corresponds to direct translation/conversion without mapping the first source code to an intermediate language because the code conversion is between the first and second code; the first code runs on the browser’s isolated environment while the client device runs the second code on its operating system (different platform boundary)).
Mo does not explicitly teach wherein the first code is a low-level program language, and wherein the second code is a low-level programming language. Krishnamurthy teaches a low-level language as a source language, and wherein the second code is a low-level programming language (Krishnamurthy, see at least [0058], A translator 306 receives the assembly language instructions that are compatible with a legacy platform and translates the assembly language instructions to translated assembly language instructions that can be assembled for execution at a simulation device having an x86 processor, such as the simulator 320. That is, the translator 306 can translate instructions from 68040 assembly language to x86 assembly language; claim 2, compiling the at least one application source code file into first assembly language instructions compatible with the legacy operating system; translating the first assembly language instructions into second assembly language instructions compatible with the second operating system). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Krishnamurthy’s conversion of low-level code to a low-level language with Mo’s code conversion to modify Mo’ system to combine the low-level code conversion as taught by Krishnamurthy, with a reasonable expectation of success, since they are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor related to code development. Combining Krishnamurthy’s functionality with that of Mo results in a system that converts a low-level program into another low-level program. The modification would be obvious because one having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this combination to improve code conversion including conversion of a low-level code to a low-level code for target platform compatibility if desired (Krishnamurthy, see at least [0058], A translator 306 receives the assembly language instructions that are compatible with a legacy platform and translates the assembly language instructions to translated assembly language instructions that can be assembled for execution at a simulation device having an x86 processor, such as the simulator 320. That is, the translator 306 can translate instructions from 68040 assembly language to x86 assembly language; claim 2, compiling the at least one application source code file into first assembly language instructions compatible with the legacy operating system; translating the first assembly language instructions into second assembly language instructions compatible with the second operating system).
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein before the determining at least one translation rule that matches the first code, the method further comprises: receiving a translation rule that is input or modified by a user in a graphical user interface (Mo, see at least page 2, “acquiring the code of corresponding client conversion rule; FIG. 2b, the request input interface may be in the form of the input frame; in the request input interface developer can form the input frame keyed physical path information of the source code (herein source code suitable for running in the browser…The terminal may further include a display unit 406, information of the display unit 406 can be used for display by a user input or provided to various graphical user interface information of the user and the terminal; page 11, , the first terminal may also H5 the programming specifications and/or LIGA native programming specification is updated, obtaining the H5 programming specification and LIGA updated the difference information between the native programming regulation, and updating the code conversion rule according to the difference information has been set, according to the difference information and the updated code conversion rule, and the difference information and a code conversion rule added in the Babel compiler to update. to obtain the updated Babel compiler).
3. The method according to claim 1, wherein before the determining at least one translation rule that matches the first code, the method further comprises: receiving auxiliary information input by a user; and generating, based on the auxiliary information, a translation rule corresponding to an instruction unique to the source platform (Mo, see at least page 4, Fig. 2a and associated texts, code conversion apparatus can provide the code conversion interface to the developer by the located terminal, the code conversion interface comprises a request input interface, as shown in FIG. 2b, the request input interface may be in the form of the input frame; in the request input interface developer can form the input frame keyed physical path information of the source code (herein source code suitable for running in the browser, namely according to programming the standard browser end obtained by compiling source code) needs to be transformed, … to input the confirmation information (e.g., directly pressing the enter key of the keyboard) to trigger a code conversion request, the transcoding request carries the physical path information of developer input).
4. The method according to claim 1, wherein before the determining at least one translation rule that matches the first code, the method further comprises: obtaining historical code applicable to the source platform, wherein the historical code is written based on the platform-dependent language of the source platform; and generating the translation rule based on a feature that affects semantic meaning and that is in the historical code and based on a mapping relationship between the platform-dependent language of the source platform and a target language (Mo, see at least page 6, the browser end using HTML programming specification, source code client uses LIGA native programming specification, written according to the standard HTML programming suitable for running in the browser, but are obviously not suitable for running at the client…. , the code conversion apparatus can be predetermined first programming the standard browser end uses, and determining the client uses of, and then obtaining the difference information of the second programmed standard first programming regulation and adopted by client browser end uses, and then conversion rule set code of the corresponding client according to the difference information between the first program specification and second programming specification … in the browser using HTML (HyperText Markup Language, hypertext markup language) programming specification, client uses LIGA native programming specification, code conversion apparatus can obtain the difference information between HTML programming regulation and LIGA native programming specifications, source code information is set according to the difference code conversion rule, by the code conversion rule in accordance with HTML programming specification into source code with LIGA native programming criterion; page 7, second conversion for the first source code to source code, can be identified in the first source code is not suitable for operation by the client source code statement (source code statement or the client is not compatible), the suitable source code statement client operation of transfer is adapted to source code statement run by the client … the plurality of source code module for matching with the difference information between the first program specification and second programming specification; the successfully matched source code module as a first source code module; page 12, Babel compiler in step 206, the second terminal receives and stores the server transmission. wherein, the second terminal can locally set the special compiler storage area, and when the Babel compiler receives the transmission by the server, the received Babel compiler stored in the compiler memory area; Note that all the source code are developed code (historical code) for retrieving, analysis and conversion).
6. The method according to claim 1, wherein the determining at least one translation rule that matches the first code comprises: extracting a feature from the first code; identifying, from the feature, a feature that affects semantic meaning; and determining the at least one translation rule from the rule base based on the feature that affects semantic meaning (Mo, see at least page 6, he code for the first source to the second conversion of source code, firstly analyzes the first source code, obtaining to the semantics of the source code statement, for these source code sentence according to the semantic obtaining identifying the function source code statement to be achieved. then applying code template to realize the same function, converting the source code sentence to obtain the programming specification of the corresponding client, after the completion of the whole source code statement after the conversion in the first source code, so as to realize the first source code to the second conversion of the source code the code module to code conversion rule may include corresponding LIGA native programming specification of the set, in the code template set comprises a plurality of code template to realize different functions. the first source code module when the conversion of the second source code module, firstly the first source code module to analyze, obtaining to the semantics of the source code statement, for these source code statement. The semantic to the obtained identification to the function source code statement to be achieved, then applying code template to realize the same function, converting the source code sentence to obtain the corresponding LIGA native programming specification of the source code statement after the conversion are combined into a second source code module).
7. The method according to claim 1, wherein the method further comprises: displaying code in a code file to a user in a graphical user interface; and the obtaining first code comprises: receiving the first code that is selected by the user in the graphical user interface (Mo, see at least page 4, Fig. 2a and associated texts, the code conversion interface in the interface in FIG. 2b, further comprises an "open" control, on the one hand, the code conversion device when detecting to the open control trigger, the above code conversion interface pop-up source code selection interface (not shown FIG. 2b). the source code selector interface providing terminal of current file directory to the developer for developer searches and selected to be converted of source code (here source code suitable for running on the browser, namely according to programming the standard writing source code by the browser end) of the icon (or shortcut); On the other hand, the developer may, after the selected icon of the source code to be converted, triggering the confirming control source code provided by the selection interface to input code conversion request to the code conversion apparatus, the code conversion icon of the source code request associated with a developer selected. Further, the developer can further directly converting the need of source code (here source code suitable for running on the browser, namely according to programming the standard compiled source code by the browser end) of the icon, or the icon of the item folder of source code to be conversion of the dragged to code conversion interface, to input code conversion request to the code conversion apparatus, the code conversion request with the developer dragging of icon of the source code are associated.
8. The method according to claim 1, wherein the method further comprises: prompting a difference between the source platform and the target platform (Mo, see at least page 6, “obtaining the browser end of first programming specification and the difference information between the second programming specification of the client; The difference information setting the obtained code conversion rule of the corresponding client,” page 11, the first terminal may also H5 the programming specifications and/or LIGA native programming specification is updated, obtaining the H5 programming specification and LIGA updated the difference information between the native programming regulation, and updating the code conversion rule according to the difference information has been set, according to the difference information and the updated code conversion rule, and the difference information and a code conversion rule added in the Babel compiler to update. to obtain the updated Babel compiler).
Per claims 9-12 and 14-16, they are the device versions of claims 1-4 and 6-8, respectively, and are rejected for the same reasons set forth in connection with the rejection of claims 1-4 and 6-8 above.
Per claims 17-20, they are the medium versions of claims 1-4, respectively, and are rejected for the same reasons set forth in connection with the rejection of claims 1-4 above.
Claims 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mo in view of Krishnamurthy and Choudhary et al. (US20190188049, hereafter Choudhary).
Per claims 5 and 13:
Mo does not explicitly teach wherein the translation rule is stored in a rule base in a form of a table. Choudhary teaches wherein the translation rule is stored in a rule base in a form of a table (Choudhary, see at least [0130] FIGS. 8A and 8B depict an example of a conversion rule table. A conversion rule table 145 is stored in the conversion rule storage unit 123. A plurality of conversion rules regarding the cloud system 20 at the installation location are registered in advance in the conversion rule table 145. The conversion rule table 145 includes items of rule ID, rule name, code pattern, usable service, application condition, template, and cost). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined Choudhary’s rule table with Mo’s code conversion and Krishnamurthy’s conversion of low-level code to modify Mo’ system to combine the rule table as taught by Choudhary, with a reasonable expectation of success, since they are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor related to code development. Combining Choudhary’s functionality with that of Mo and Krishnamurthy results in a system that stores a conversion rule in a table. The modification would be obvious because one having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this combination to store a conversion rule in a database table for data management enabling efficient querying and analysis (Choudhary, see at least [0130] FIGS. 8A and 8B depict an example of a conversion rule table. A conversion rule table 145 is stored in the conversion rule storage unit 123. A plurality of conversion rules regarding the cloud system 20 at the installation location are registered in advance in the conversion rule table 145. The conversion rule table 145 includes items of rule ID, rule name, code pattern, usable service, application condition, template, and cost).
Examiner’s Note
The Examiner has pointed out particular references contained in the prior art of record within the body of this action for the convenience of the Applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply. Applicant, in preparing the response, should consider fully the entire reference as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the Examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/22/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant states that Mo does not teach or suggest directly translating code from one platform (source platform) to another platform (target platform) where the source and target platforms have different instruction sets.
In response, Mo clearly teaches the first code is obtained for conversion into the second code based on conversion rules and the conversion is direct conversion because the conversion is between the first and second code based on the rules. Mo does not require mapping the first source code to an intermediate language. (Mo, see at least page 2, obtaining first source code needs to be converted according to the transcoding request, the first source code suitable for running on the browser end; page 6, “It should be noted that, the source code adapted to explorer end not suitable for running at the client, … a browser end and the client are different, the difference between the both programming specification results in source code adapted to the browser end is not suitable for running at the client; Fig. 2b and associated texts, directly converting the need of source code). Furthermore, the first code runs on the browser’s isolated environment while the client device runs the second code on its operating system (different platform boundary)).
For the limitation, wherein the first code is a low-level program language, and wherein the second code is a low-level programming language, the new reference, Krishnamurthy teaches the limitation, see above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
20210365252 is related to a translation program used to translate first code written in the first assembly language into second code written in a second assembly language.
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 INSUN KANG whose telephone number is (571)272-3724. The examiner can normally be reached M-TR 8 -5pm; week 2: Tu-F 8-5pm.
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, Chat Do can be reached at 571-272-3721. 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.
/INSUN KANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2193