Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/326,258

FILE PROTECTION USING EVALUATION OF FILE-SPECIFIC VALUES

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
May 31, 2023
Examiner
LITTLE, VANCE M
Art Unit
2494
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
DELL PRODUCTS, L.P.
OA Round
3 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
326 granted / 392 resolved
+25.2% vs TC avg
Strong +25% interview lift
Without
With
+25.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
25 currently pending
Career history
417
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.9%
-27.1% vs TC avg
§103
50.2%
+10.2% vs TC avg
§102
9.9%
-30.1% vs TC avg
§112
14.7%
-25.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 392 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
DETAILED ACTION 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 3/12/2026 has been entered. 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 . Response to Amendment Applicant presents amendments to claims 1, 3, 9, 11, and 16. All amendments have been fully considered. Applicant’s amendments are sufficient to overcome the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), providing an unambiguous set of claims. As discussed in a previous interview, the original combination of prior art was directed more toward deduplication because the breadth of the claim language allowed for a reading on that technology. In light of Applicant’s successful clarification of the claims, a new interpretation was made, the previous rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 is withdrawn, and a new search was conducted providing prior art more in line with the intended direction of the invention. Therefore, a new body of relevant references are presented and a new rejection is issued with a new reference selected to serve as the basis for anticipation under 35 U.S.C. 102. Response to Arguments Applicant presents arguments with respect to independent claims 1, 9, and 16. All arguments have been fully considered. The Examiner agrees that in light of the amendments, the previously cited combination of references fails to teach each and every limitation of the claimed invention. As mentioned above, the clarification of the claims leads to a narrower search more in line with the intended subject matter of the invention. A new search was conducted and a new rejection is presented. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 1–20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Alpern (US 2009/0070752 A1, published Mar, 12, 2009). Regarding claims 1, 9, and 16, Alpern discloses: a method, comprising: obtaining, by at least one entity associated with an operating system of at least one processing device, at least a portion of a file to be written to the at least one processing device, wherein the file comprises one or more of: (i) a template and (ii) an image, wherein the one or more of (i) the template and (ii) the image is associated with one or more of: (i) a virtual machine and (ii) a container, and wherein at least a portion of the at least one entity is executed by the at least one processing device (assets include executable virtual machine images, whereas shards atomic units into which all asserts are divided and are discrete pieces of files shared across assets. Alpern ¶¶ 31–32.); obtaining, by the at least one entity, at least one file-specific value associated with the at least a portion of the file (a manifest is created which maps the hierarchical names used by the application for entities (files, etc.) into shard identifiers. Alpern ¶ 67. The tamper-proof virtual machine image is composed of multiple shards glued together by one or more metashards forming a manifest where shards are identified by cryptographic digest of their contents. Alpern ¶ 92.); comparing, by the at least one entity, the at least one file-specific value to at least one value from a list of designated values (the shards are identified by a cryptographic digest of their contents and the digest is recomputed when a shard is first used, then comparing by matching the computed digest with the result stored (understood to be well-known that retrieving values from electronically stored values amounts to retrieving values from a list of stored values) in the cryptographic digest. Alpern ¶ 92.); and initiating, by the at least one entity, at least one automated action based at least in part on a result of the comparison (the VMM will refuse to run the application if the tamper detection mechanism detects any tampering. Alpern ¶¶ 91–92.); wherein the method is performed by the at least one processing device comprising a processor coupled to a memory (Alpern ¶ 4.). Regarding claims 2, 10, and 17, Alpern discloses the limitations of claims 1, 9, and 17, respectively, wherein the at least one automated action comprises one or more of writing the at least a portion of the file to at least one file system; generating at least one notification; deleting the at least a portion of the file from a file system of the at least one processing device; preventing access to the at least a portion of the file; and limiting access to the at least a portion of the file (the VMM will refuse to run the application if the tamper detection mechanism detects any tampering. Alpern ¶¶ 91–92.). Regarding claims 3 and 11, Alpern discloses the limitations of claims 1 and 9, respectively, further comprising storing the one or more of (i) the template and (ii) the image in an inventory of the at least one processing device (prefetching from the server into the client’s local cache before they are required. Alpern ¶ 63–65 and 74.). Regarding claims 4, 12, and 18, Alpern discloses the limitations of claims 1, 9, and 16, respectively, wherein the at least one file-specific value associated with the at least a portion of the file comprises a hash value calculated in response to receiving a request to write the at least a portion of the file to the at least one processing device (the shards are identified by a cryptographic digest of their contents and the digest is recomputed when a shard is first used. Alpern ¶ 92.). Regarding claims 5, 13, and 19, Alpern discloses the limitations of claims 1, 9, and 16, respective, wherein the list comprises a list of file-specific values associated with one or more designated files (the shards are identified by a cryptographic digest of their contents and the digest is recomputed when a shard is first used, then comparing by matching the computed digest with the result stored (understood to be well-known that retrieving values from electronically stored values amounts to retrieving values from a list of stored values) in the cryptographic digest. Alpern ¶ 92. Shards are atomic units into which all asserts are divided and are discrete pieces of files shared across assets. Alpern ¶¶ 31–32.). Regarding claim 6, 14, and 20, Alpern discloses the limitations of claims 1, 9, and 16, respectively, wherein the at least one entity obtains the at least a portion of the file to be written to the at least one processing device by intercepting a request to write the at least a portion of the file to the at least one processing device (intercepting interfaces enabling optimization of software management where shards are fetched as they are needed enabling the asset to be progressively deployed by overlapping deployment with execution. Alpern ¶¶ 35–36.). Regarding claim 7, Alpern discloses the limitations of claim 1, wherein the at least one processing device comprises one or more of a host device and at least one virtual resource executing on a hypervisor (the virtual machine monitor (VMM). Alpern Figure 1 and ¶¶ 4, 42, 91–92, 94). Regarding claims 8 and 15, Alpern discloses the limitations of claims 1 and 9, respectively, wherein the at least one entity associated with the operating system comprises at least one software entity associated with an operating system kernel (Alpern ¶¶ 2–3.). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Duane (US 2011/0246778 A1, published Oct. 6, 2011), VM images used at endpoint machines where the endpoint requires validation that the VM instance runs without tampering; Carter (US 2008/0201708 A1, published Aug. 21, 2008), validating a VM images the ensure the image has not been tampered with prior to installation; Schweitzer (US 9,471,354 B1, issued Oct. 18, 2016), verification of VM images by dissecting the image into data blocks and hashing the blocks; and Srivastava (US 2022/0222100 A1, published Jul. 14, 2022), integrity protection of container images guarding against tampering prior to being run. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VANCE M LITTLE whose telephone number is (571) 270-0408. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9:30am - 5:30pm. 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, Jung (Jay) Kim can be reached on (571) 272-3804. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /VANCE M LITTLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2493
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

May 31, 2023
Application Filed
Jun 13, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Sep 11, 2025
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Sep 11, 2025
Examiner Interview Summary
Sep 16, 2025
Response Filed
Dec 16, 2025
Final Rejection — §102
Feb 17, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 11, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 11, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 12, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Mar 16, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action
Mar 18, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603862
Methods and Systems for Efficient Adaptive Logging of Cyber Threat Incidents
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596819
Method and System for Data Valuation and Secure Commercial Monetization Platform
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12592911
SECURE RELAY DEVICE AND DATA TRANSMISSION RECEPTION SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12574390
Unauthorized Activity Detection Based on User Agent String
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12563057
METHOD AND A SYSTEM FOR TRAFFIC TUNNELING IN A DISTRIBUTED NETWORK FOR MALWARE DETECTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+25.4%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 392 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month