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 .
Detail Action
This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 10/6/2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Osadchyy et al. (US 20240345902 A1)
Per claim 1,
Osadchyy discloses
in response to a request to deploy software from an image on a computer, identifying deployment environment information for the software; ( [0071-73], see request to pull container image… a type of processor architecture corresponds to identified deployment environment. Fig. 4, [0056]-[0058], disclose mapping operation of original container image/layers vs target container image/layers. Where x390x processor architecture corresponds to target deployment information for the software.)
determining one or more patches for the software based on the deployment environment information;( [0073], see determining…respective images layers correspond to the one or more patches.)
after the software has been compiled into binary code, applying the one or more patches to the binary code to modify the binary code and deploying the modified binary code on the computer (Fig. 4, [0058], [0059], discloses compiler complies the binary of the application along with its associated binary libraries or statically linked binary libraries for a specific platform and processor architect. [0061], see recompile binary code into new binary for the target processor architecture. [0071], see run on the target host computer node.)
Per claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated;
Osadchyy discloses
wherein the deployment environment information comprises hardware information associated with the computer. ([0072], [0073] see type of processor architecture… first type…second type)
Per claim 3, the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated;
Osadchyy discloses
wherein the hardware information comprises at least processor type and/or memory configuration information for the computer. ([0072], [0073] see type of processor architecture… first type…second type)
Per claim 4, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated;
Osadchyy discloses
wherein the deployment environment information comprises optimization information. ([0067], see mapping table and registry being used for optimization of a particular processor architecture)
Per claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated;
Osadchyy discloses
wherein a patch of the one or more patches comprises a zone patch type, a function patch type, or a data patch type. ([0068], discloses image layer with a core function corresponds to a function patch type)
Per claim 6, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated;
Osadchyy discloses
in response to a second request to deploy the software from the image on a second computer, identifying second deployment environment information for the software;
determining one or more second patches for the software based on the second deployment environment information; and
applying the one or more second patches in binary code for the software on the second computer. (continue from rejection of claim 1, additionally see different types of processor architecture)
Per claim 7, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated;
Osadchyy discloses
wherein determining one or more patches for the software based on the deployment environment information comprises:
identifying a processor type associated with the computer; ([0072], see determination of first type and second type of processor architecture)
selecting at least one patch that corresponds to the processor type from a database of potential patches. ([0073], see image layers compatible with the second type of processor architecture)
Per claim 8, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated;
Osadchyy discloses
wherein the software comprises a kernel for the computer. ([0016], discloses layers of images include operating system and [0023] discloses operating systems employ a kernel)
Per claim 9, see rejection of claim 1.
Per claim 10, see rejection of claim 2.
Per claim 11, see rejection of claim 3.
Per claim 12, the rejection of claim 9 is incorporated;
Osadchyy discloses
wherein the deployment environment comprises optimization information, and wherein the optimization information comprises at least use case information associated with the software on the computer. ([0067], see mapping table and registry being used for optimization of a particular processor architecture. [0027], see EUD used and controlled by an end user and provide container mapping recommendation to end user.)
Per claim 13, see rejection of claim 5.
Per claim 14, see rejection of claim 6.
Per claim 15, see rejection of claim 7.
Per claim 16, see rejection of claim 8.
Per claim 17, see rejection of claim 1.
Per claim 18, the rejection of claim 17 is incorporated;
Osadchyy discloses
wherein the deployment environment information comprises hardware information associated with the computer or optimization information associated with a use case for the software on the computer. ([0072], [0073] see type of processor architecture… first type…second type)
Per claim 19, see rejection of claim 3.
Per claim 20, see rejection of claim 7.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/6/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Osadchyy (US 2024/0345902) fails to teach “"applying the one or more patches to the binary code to modify the modify binary code.", as claimed in independent claims 1, 9 and 17. Rejections to the above independent claims have been revised to further matching the amended claims. Osadchyy, [0058], [0059], discloses compiler complies the binary of the application along with its associated binary libraries or statically linked binary libraries for a specific platform and processor architect. [0061], see recompile binary code into new binary for the target. The recompilation of binary code into new binary for the target clearly discloses modifying binary code. For this reason, rejections to argues claims are maintained.
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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Philip Wang whose telephone number is 571-272-5934. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday 8:00AM -4:00PM. Any inquiry of general nature or relating to the status of this application should be directed to the TC2100 Group receptionist: 571-272-2100.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Lewis Bullock, can be reached at 571-272-3759. 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).
/PHILIP WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2199