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 in response to the claimed listing in the preliminary amendment filed on 07/31/2023.
Claims 1-7, 10-11 and 14-19 are pending in this office action.
Claims 8-9, 12-13 are cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/20/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s argument:
Apparently, Da merely focuses on how to generate an AAR packet that enables programmers to use internal base libraries as if they were writing their own code during the code development process and allows the SDK access party to automatically parse and download external dependent open-source libraries without affecting the version of the open-source library they decide to use. However, Da does not address how to provide a hotfix function for an accessing-party app though the generate AAR packet. Thus, Da does not disclose that the keep rule in the target file is updated to the updated keep rule to generate a binary archive file, which is used for providing a hotfix function for a target application accessing the hotfix SDK. Therefore, Da also fails to disclose the above distinguishing feature b of amended claim 1.
Examiner response:
The applicant’s argument recites that Da does not provide a hotfix, but generate an SDK and uses an AAR packet to provide an update to an application (download library).
So at least Da provides a library and the library is downloaded to a system for usage. That is providing an update to the system.
Lu in the other hand download an update(library) and link the update to the system in hot upgrade:
” There is no pre-verify problem caused by load plan. The invention borrows ideas from the hot update mechanism of the Instant Run, it can achieve instant effect, without restarting the application, the repair of the invention supports method level, supporting new method and the like, supports repair of the resource file.”;
Applicant’s argument:
Furthermore, the hotfix solution providing the incremental update for the integrated Android application based on React Native disclosed in Lu is totally different from the hotfix solution in which the content that needs to be kept in the SDK is generated as the updated keep rule, and the updated keep rule is synchronized to the target file to generate the binary archive file. In fact, Lu’s hotfix solution does not involve any content that needs to be kept in a hotfix SDK. Thus, Lu does not disclose that the keep rule in the target file is updated to the updated keep rule to generate a binary archive file, which is used for providing a hotfix function for a target application accessing the hotfix SDK. Therefore, Lu fails to disclose the above distinguishing features b and c of the subject claim.
Examiner’s answer:
The applicant’s representative argued that the hotfix of Lu does not use the updated rule in providing the hotfix. As explained above Da provides an update using an updated rule(proguard.txt) and a final confusion file and the data resource combined, create AAR packet. And the AAR packet is downloaded to the system.
The downloaded AAR is an update to the system.
In order to apply the update Lu uses a hotfix method as explained by the applicant’s representative. By applying and providing AAR using LU, the hotfix is used by the system while running: Native dynamic loading mode to realize a stronger compatibility and real-time validation of hot-repairing frame.
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 1-2, 6-7, 10-11, 14-15 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DA et al: CN-110502222-A in view of LU et al: CN-109491695-A
As per claim 1, Da discloses a hotfix method, wherein the method comprises:
searching for a target file for storing a keep rule used during code obfuscation:
page 6 lines:24-26 “step S110: collecting all internal confusion file and inserted into the aapt-rules.txt file, converting the internal confusion file informing confusion to the external file are combined to generate a final document proguard”;
searching for content that needs to be kept in a hotfix SDK, to generate an updated keep rule based on the content; :
page 6lines 3-5 “internal library resource needs as resources of our own writing, collected together, this step needs the programmer finish the merge, assets and SO packet, etc. of all AndroidManifest files are to be as collecting and processing in order to ultimately AAR product”;
updating the keep rule in the target file to the updated keep rule, and generating a binary archive file:
page 6 lines 34-37 “the aapt front-url generated by inserted into the proguard rule, for subsequent mixing operation,proguard.txt In addition, the interior of the nanorod in dependence to the collected, and as proguard.txt in the program development process, integral to the AAR product of the SDK, in this way it can ensure access side can correctly of confusion..”;
But not explicitly:
compiling a software development kit (SDK) for a hotfix:
wherein the binary archive file is used for providing a hotfix function for a target application accessing the hotfix SDK:
Lu discloses
compiling a software development kit (SDK) for a hotfix:
page 2 lines 27-30 “when step 2) application problem needs updating, the reference instant Instant Run compiling technology principle of implementing an incremental patch, obtained using RocooFix patch.jar patch, technology principle of implementing an incremental patch, obtained using RocooFix patch.jar patch,bsdiff compares the bundle file of the two versions to obtain the difference file, and transmitting the incremental patch;
wherein the binary archive file is used for providing a hotfix function for a target application accessing the hotfix SDK:
page 2 lines 31-32“ detecting the updating, downloading the incremental patch and verifying, repairing the problem using hot loading mode code, can be repaired without restarting the application;
It would have obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of cited references. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of LU into teachings of DA to update third-party libraries with drop-in replacements by their newer versions. Furthermore, to avoid an attack surface of a host app if an included library contains vulnerabilities because external dependencies are a double-edged sword. Finally, to integrate third-party libraries developed by other organizations and the app developers know little to nothing about the libraries’ internals.(Huang introduction).
As per claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and furthermore Da discloses:
wherein the hotfix SDK comprises a self-code and a dependency code except the self-codepage:
page 6 lines 36-39 “the aapt front-url generated by inserted into the proguard rule, for subsequent mixing operation,proguard.txt In addition, the interior of the nanorod in dependence to the collected, and as proguard.txtin the program development process, integral to the AAR product of the SDK, in this way it can ensureaccess side can correctly of confusion. the aapt front-url generated by inserted into the proguard rule, for subsequent mixing operation,proguard.txt In addition, the interior of the nanorod in dependence to the collected, and as proguard.txt in the program development process, integral to the AAR product of the SDK, in this way it can ensure access side can correctly of confusion”;
before the generating the binary archive file, the method further comprises: in response to an instruction to execute compiling of the hotfix SDK, compiling the hotfix SDK, and generating a first code, wherein the first code is used to indicate that obfuscation is applied to a self-code when executing an operation of compiling the hotfix SDK:
page 3 lines 11-16 “a first-generation unit for putting the file after initially combining adding packing tool link, generating the text file; a second generating unit for collecting all internal confusion file, into the text file, the internal confusion file informing confusion to the external file are combined to generate a final file; a third generating unit for combining the final confusion file with the data resource combined, createAAR packet.”;
and using a class name of the first code and a class name of the dependency code as the updated keep rule.
Page 6 lines:25-27 “step S110: collecting all internal confusion file and inserted into the aapt-rules.txt file, converting the internal confusion file informing confusion to the external file are combined to generate a finaldocument proguard.”;
As per claim 6, DA discloses a hotfix method, comprising:
acquiring a compiled hotfix SDK and a target file comprising an updated keep rule in a binary archive file:
page 6 lines 34-37 “the aapt front-url generated by inserted into the proguard rule, for subsequent mixing operation,proguard.txt In addition, the interior of the nanorod in dependence to the collected, and as proguard.txt in the program development process, integral to the AAR product of the SDK, in this way it can ensure access side can correctly of confusion..”;
But not explicitly
accessing the compiled hotfix SDK, acquiring the updated keep rule from the target file, and performing secondary obfuscation according to the updated keep rule:
and performing, by using a hotfix function of the compiled hotfix SDK, a hotfix on a secondary obfuscated code,
wherein a code of the compiled hotfix SDK is an obfuscated code.
LU disacoses:
accessing the compiled hotfix SDK, acquiring the updated keep rule from the target file, and performing secondary obfuscation according to the updated keep rule:
Page 7line 6-12 “Further, in step 2), the code confusion and optimizing packet size uses the idea of ProGuard, solves the problem that code the adopted method is as follows: generating a patch for code before obfuscation. then using mapping file formal and package generated in the corresponding mapping relationship of the class, the class in the application package do processing on the string so that it using confusion in the operation environment of the class name, optimizing packet size is the all of the method are for unique mapping with the int value during compilation, and storing all mapping relationships to a separate document, it only needs to read the corresponding method by mapping file”;
and performing, by using a hotfix function of the compiled hotfix SDK, a hotfix on a secopagendary obfuscated code:
`page 7 line 23-27 :step 4), class file in order to protect Java source code, we need the edited after mixing, using the short name of meaningless to rename the class, field and method, and removing code is not used in LIGA Native Java, finally obtaining a smaller APK file. using Proguard code confusion problem solving and optimizing packet size, in LIGA Native enabled Proguard, modify the android/app/build.gradle file defenableProguardInReleaseBuilds=true, last publishing application”;
wherein a code of the compiled hotfix SDK is an obfuscated code;
page 4 lines 1-2 “page ProGuard is a tool for obfuscating code, besides, also can be used for compression, optimized code. Because the java code is very easy to reverse compiling android is the use of compiled java code, in order to protect the work result of developer, the invention uses ProGuard tool for java code confusion.
Page 5 line 45-48 “2) for method of private, to be copied to heavy load restoration of all private method, when the method invokes private heavy load needed in the method of the HotFix type, directly calls the private method of the heavyload.”;
It would have obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of cited references. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of LU into teachings of DA to update third-party libraries with drop-in replacements by their newer versions. Furthermore, to avoid an attack surface of a host app if an included library contains vulnerabilities because external dependencies are a double-edged sword. Finally, to integrate third-party libraries developed by other organizations and the app developers know little to nothing about the libraries’ internals.(Huang introduction).
As per claim 7, the rejection of claim 6 is incorporated and furthermore Da discloses:
accessing the compiled hotfix SDK; and performing the secondary obfuscation on other codes except the updated keep rule in all codes of the accessed compiled hotfix SDK.
page 3 lines 13-17“a second generating unit for collecting all internal confusion file, into the text file, the internal confusion file informing confusion to the external file are combined to generate a final file; a third generating unit for combining the final confusion file with the data resource combined, create AAR packet.”;
Claims 10, 15 are the electronic device claims corresponding to method claims 1, 2 and rejected under the same rational set forth in connection with the rejection of claims 1, 2 above.
As per claim 11, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated and furthermore Da discloses:
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein the computer-readable storage medium stores computer-executed instructions, and when a processor executes the computer-executed instructions, the hotfix method according to claim 1 is implemented:
Da page 3 lines 23-25 “The specific embodiment of the present disclosure, a third aspect, the present disclosure provides a computer readable storage medium, on which a computer program is stored, the program, when executed by a processor implement method according to any one of above.”
As per claim 14, the rejection of claim 6 is incorporated and furthermore Da discloses:
non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, wherein the computer- readable storage medium stores computer-executed instructions, and when a processor executes the computer-executed instructions, the hotfix method according to claim 6 is implemented:
Da page 3 lines 23-25 “The specific embodiment of the present disclosure, a third aspect, the present disclosure provides a computer readable storage medium, on which a computer program is stored, the program, when executed by a processor implement method according to any one of above.”
As per claim 19, the rejection of claim 6 is incorporated and furthermore Da discloses:
An electronic device, comprising: at least one processor, a memory, and a communication interface; wherein the communication interface is used to communicate with a network device; the memory stores computer-executed instructions; the at least one processor executes the computer-executed instructions stored in the memory, causing the at least one processor to execute the hotfix method according to claim 6.
Page 9 lines 1-4 “As shown in FIG. 4, this embodiment provides an electronic device, the device for AAR packing, the electronic device comprising: at least one processor, and a communication connection with the at least one processor of a memory, wherein the memory storing instructions executable by the one processor, the instructions are executable by the at least one processor, to cause the at least one processor to execute said method steps in the above embodiment.”;’
Claims 3-5 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DA et al: CN-110502222-A and LU et al: CN-109491695-A in view of Chen et al: CN-108073406-A.
As per claim 3, the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated and furthermore DA disclose:
when executing the operation of compiling the hotfix SDK, generating a mapping table for storing a mapping relationship between the self-code and the first code:
acquiring a position of the mapping table, and extracting, a class name after obfuscation, from the mapping table, according to the mapping relationship;
page 6 27-32 “internal confusion file is an encrypted file with a certain mapping relationship in order to secure the program compiled by the program developer, such as code, namely the command A and command int corresponding int confusion is A, and the like, executable program, when executed to A, it will automatically transition command function is int, but external personnel see A, does not know what is the corresponding command meaning”;
updating the target file by storing, the class name after obfuscation, into the target file:
page 6 line 35-36 “ the aapt front-url generated by inserted into the proguard rule, for subsequent mixing operation, proguard.txt In addition, “;
But not explicitly:
acquiring, a dependency code in the hotfix SDK, from a hotfix task when executing the operation of compiling the hotfix SDK; and updating the target file by storing the class name of the dependency code into the target file:
Chen discloses:
acquiring, a dependency code in the hotfix SDK, from a hotfix task when executing the operation of compiling the hotfix SDK; and updating the target file by string the class name of the dependency code into the target file:
page 7 lines 11-15 “Preferably, in the embodiment of the invention comprises jar packet of the third-party SDK code maybe a omponentClasses.jar packet. to find each word in the dependency class file according to the generated componentClasses.jar. each character and each character class-dependent class path int he componentClasses.jar will be written to the file maindexlist.txt. The maindexlist.txt generating mainDex.”;
It would have obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of cited references. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Chen into teachings of DA and LU to update third-party libraries with drop-in replacements by their newer versions. Furthermore, to avoid not detecting dependency and control of main Dex and code injection in order for the system will throw the java.lang exception.(Chen page 2).
As per claim 4 the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated and furthermore DA does not explicitly disclose:
adding the first code and the dependency code into the target file, according to a found position of the target file:
Chen discloses:
Page 4 lines 40-43 “In this case particularly easy to access third party APK, code dependence injection third party APKtask transformClassesWithDexFor$ (variant.name.capitalize ()), thereby not detecting dependency and control main Dex and only code injection”;
It would have obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of cited references. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to incorporate the teachings of Chen into teachings of DA and LU to update third-party libraries with drop-in replacements by their newer versions. Furthermore, to avoid not detecting dependency and control of main Dex and code injection in order for the system will throw the java.lang exception.(Chen page 2).
As per claim 5, the rejection of claim 4 is incorporated and furthermore DA discloses:
wherein the dependency code is a code in other hotfix SDKs, and the code in the other hotfix SDKs is at least one of the following: a code that has not been obfuscated in the other hotfix SDKs,and/or an obfuscated code in the other hotfix SDKs.
page 3 lines 13-17“a second generating unit for collecting all internal confusion file, into the text file, the internal confusion file informing confusion to the external file are combined to generate a final file; a third generating unit for combining the final confusion file with the data resource combined, create AAR packet.”;
Claims 16, 17, 18 are the electronic device claims corresponding to method claims 3, 4, 5 and rejected under the same rational set forth in connection with the rejection of claims 3, 4, 5 above.
Pertinent arts:
CN 103838572 A:
The invention claims a packaging system and method for Android development system comprises a code library unit for constructing data packet packing of compiling and runtime environment, a PackageName obtaining unit jar packet information for obtaining user input of new PackageName and to be altered source code modifications and packaging unit, which is used for the SDK source code involved in keyword jar packet of the package name is changed to the new PackageName, and generating new jar packet according to the new source code and storing, transferring naming space changing unit.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRAHIM BOURZIK whose telephone number is (571)270-7155. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (8-4:30).
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, Wei Zhen can be reached at 571-270-2738. 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.
/BRAHIM BOURZIK/Examiner, Art Unit 2191
/WEI Y MUI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2191
Prosecution Insights