CTFR 18/471,347 CTFR 83092 DETAILED ACTION Remarks Applicant’s amendment and response dated 4/28/2026 has been provided in response to the 2/9/2026 Office Action which rejected claims 1, 3-9, 11-17, 19-25 and 27-30, wherein claims 1, 9, 14, 17, 20, 22 and 25 have been amended and new claim 31 has been added. Thus, claims 1, 3-9, 11-17, 19-25 and 27-31 remain pending in this application and have been fully considered by the examiner. 07-37 Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. 07-40 AIA 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. Response to Arguments 07-37 AIA Applicant's arguments filed 4/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to Applicant’s arguments regarding claim 1 that “ However, Applicant submits that the combination of Frazer, Liu, and Yang fails to describe or make obvious, at least, "determin[ing] essential image sections and non-essential image sections of a working firmware image stored in the flash memory, wherein the essential image sections comprise instructions for booting the computing device, establishing communication with the host device, and executing a device firmware update on the computing device, wherein the non- essential image sections are not required for performing the device firmware update," "initiat[ing] a connection to the host device to verify an integrity of the device firmware update" "based on the integrity being verified, receiv[ing], from the host device, data representing the non-essential image sections," and "stor[ing] the received data in the flash memory," as recited in amended claim 1. For instance, Frazer and Liu are both silent on features relating to "integrity." Yang makes one reference to integrity, namely "[w]hen the firmware in one of the memories is updated, the firmware in other memory is configured to be write-protected to preserve the integrity of firmware." Yang, para. [0005]. Thus, the combination of references fails to describe or make obvious, at least storing data in a flash memory "based on [an] integrity being verified." For at least the reasons discussed above, Applicant respectfully submits that the combination of Frazer, Liu, and Yang fails to disclose or make obvious all features of claim 1. Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that claim 1 is in condition for allowance, see page 14 of Applicant’s remarks, the examiner respectfully disagrees. As noted, the combination of the Frazer, Liu, and Yang references were used to teach the limitations as claimed. For further clarification, Frazer also discloses that “as the communications link 32 or the physical media (wireline connection, etc.) used to transfer the software can be subject to faults or errors, the correctness of the received transfer of the software is verif ied before use. The particular method used to verif y this correctness is not particularly limited and checksums, CRCs, digital signatures, etc. can be employed on all, or portions, of the transfer, as will be apparent to those of skill in the art (see e.g. [0060]). Liu also discloses that his method includes identifying essential software within the device, the essential software including software necessary to operate the device and provide external communication s (see e.g. col.1 lines 53-56) and also that the operating system of client device 106 is further configured to determine which existing code/data is essential to the device's operation during upgrade and which code/data is not essential to the device's operation during upgrade. For example, the TCP/IP code would be designated by the operating system as being essential code, while a word processor (user) application would be designated as being non- essential code. During an upgrade to the operating system (which in this example includes only essential code/data), the newly downloaded essential code/data will be written into memory (See e.g. col.5 lines 9-23). In addition, Liu also discloses that “Following the download, client device 106 will attempt to reboot and reconnect to server device 102 using the newly downloaded code/data, i.e., the upgraded operating system ( i.e. to verify an integrity of the update ). If the reboot and reconnection work correctly ( i.e. the integrity is verified by successfully reconnecting ), then any non- essential code/data that was overwritten, is downloaded from server 102 and written to free memory including that previously used by the old version of the operating system (see e.g. col.5 lines 24-33). As such, the combination of Frazer, Liu and Yang still teaches the newly added limitations as claimed and the rejection of record is maintained . 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation 07-30-03 AIA 5. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 07-30-05 6. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claims 25 and 27-30 limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA 7. Claim s 9, 11-17, and 19-24 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 9, “transmit” in line 10, “initiate” in line 17, “receive” in line 19 and “store” in line 21 should be --transmitting--, --initiating--, --receiving--, and --storing--, respectively. Claim 14, line 5, “the successful reconnection” lacks proper antecedent basis. Claim 17, line 21, “store” should be --storing--. Claim 22, line 7, “the successful reconnection” lacks proper antecedent basis. Dependent claims 11-16 and 19-21, 23, and 24 do not overcome the deficiency of the base claims and, therefore, are objected to for the same reasons as the base claims . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 8. 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. 07-21-aia AIA 9. Claim s 1, 3-9, 11-17, 19-25, and 27-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frazer et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2005/0055595 A1) in view of Liu et al. (US Patent 7,143,405 B2) and Yang (US Patent Application Publication 2007/0055969 A1, all art already of record ) . As to claim 1 , Frazer teaches a computing device (see e.g. Fig. 3, 28 and associated text), comprising: one or more memories (See e.g. Fig.3, 82 and associated text, e.g. [0043]- In subscriber station 28, memory unit 78 comprises of two principal components: (1) a volatile random access memory ("RAM") 82, which may be dynamic RAM (DRAM) or synchronous DRAM (SDRAM), used by micro process or-assembly 72 for storing instructions and data required for operating subscriber station 28 ); a flash memory (see Fig.3, 86 and associated text, e.g. [0043]- a non-volatile rewritable storage unit, RSU 86, which in subscriber station 28 is flash memory, used to store data, including instructions, that is not lost when subscriber station 28 is without power ); and a processing system coupled to the one or more memories and flash memory, and including one or more processors (See Fig.3, 72 and associated text, e.g. [0042]- Micro process or-assembly 72 can include, for example, a StrongARM process or manufactured by Intel, and performs a variety of functions, including implementing A/D-D/A conversion, filters, encoders, decoders, data compressors, de-compressors and/or packet disassembly) configured to : receive an update firmware image from a host device ( e.g. update server , see Fig.36 and associated text, e.g. [0059]- When it is desired to update the core firmware in the core firmware partition 108, the update core firmware is transferred from an update server 36 over the communications link 32 to subscriber station 28); determine essential image sections (e.g. core firmware) and non-essential image sections (e.g. auxiliary software) of a working firmware image stored in the flash memory (See e.g. [0048]- In subscriber station 28, the RSU 86 is initially divided into three partitions, namely a boot partition 104, a core firmware partition 108 and an auxiliary software partition 112 and [0051]- The core firmware needed to provide at least minimum functionality to subscriber station 28 is initially written into core firmware partition 108. The core firmware is responsible for providing the basic operations of subscriber station 28. These basic operations can include memory management, task handling, managing files, input/output, etc. and at least the minimum amount of functionality required to allow subscriber station 28 to communicate with the base station 24 (but not necessarily enough functionality to provide any end user services) and [0054]- The auxiliary software is not particularly limited and can include optional device drivers, user applications, system software applications, data files, software and end user applications such as telephone call processing software, voice and audio codecs, software filters, firewalls, utilities, help files, subscriber data files, digital media files, and other such applications and data files); erase data in the non-essential image sections from the flash memory (See e.g. [0061]- Once a complete correct copy of the update/replacement core firmware , i.e.--the "new" core firmware , is received at subscriber station 28 and stored in the RAM 82, the update process continues by writing the new core firmware over all or part of the portion of the RSU 86 previously occupied by the auxiliary software partition 112. In order to perform this overwriting, any remaining processes which were executing on subscriber station 28 and which require read access to the auxiliary software in the auxiliary software partition 112 are terminated; As used herein, the terms "overwriting" and "overwritten" are intended to comprise the necessary operations for placing new data into a non-volatile memory to replace previous data and includes, in the case of flash memory, first erasing the memory before writing new data to it), store essential image sections of the update firmware image to the flash memory (see e.g. [0061]- Once these processes, if any, are terminated, the new core firmware is copied from RAM 82 and written to the RSU 86. The new core firmware is indicated in FIG. 4b as a new core firmware partition 108' ) and reboot the computing device from the essential image sections of the update firmware image stored in the flash memory (See e.g. [0066]- When the contents of the new core firmware partition 108' have been verified as having been written correctly, the new core firmware partition 108' is identified to subscriber station 28 as containing the most recent core firmware; Once this is done, the boot loader on the next reboot of subscriber station 28 will only locate the superblock of the new core firmware partition 108', which is the most recent valid core firmware partition, and subscriber station 28 will boot from partition 108'). Frazer does not specifically teach wherein the essential image sections comprise instructions for booting the computing device, establishing communication with the host device, and executing a device firmware update on the computing device, wherein the non-essential image sections are not required for performing the device firmware update, initiate a connection to the host device to verify an integrity of the device firmware update, based on the integrity being verified, receive, from the host device, data representing the non-essential image sections, and store the received data in the memory. In an analogous art of updating software/firmware, however, Liu teaches wherein essential image sections ( e.g. essential software ) comprise instructions for booting the computing device, establishing communication with the host device ( e.g. server device ) and executing a device firmware update on the computing device, wherein non-essential image sections ( e.g. non-essential software ) are not required for performing the device firmware update (see e.g. col.1 lines 53-56 : method includes identifying essential software within the device, the essential software including software necessary to operate the device and provide external communication s , col.5 lines 9-14: the operating system of client device 106 is further configured to determine which existing code/data is essential to the device's operation during upgrade and which code/data is not essential to the device's operation during upgrade and lines 43-50: the operation software was divided into two groups. The first group consisted of all the software necessary to do an upgrade, i.e., essential software. This essential software included the full operating system, file system, drivers, full Internet Explorer (IE) browser, graphics and upgrade application. The second group contained code/data that is not required during the upgrade process, i.e., the non- essential software and e.g. Fig.4 and associated text, e.g. col.6 lines 39-42: In step 406, the essential software is used to connect to server device 106 and download new essential software, overwriting all or part of non- essential software, as needed), initiate a connection to the host device to verify an integrity of the device firmware update (See e.g. col.5 lines 23-26: Following the download, client device 106 will attempt to reboot and reconnect to server device 102 using the newly downloaded code/data, i.e., the upgraded operating system ( i.e. to verify an integrity of the update )), based on the integrity being verified (i.e. a successful reconnection), receive, from the host device, data representing the non-essential image sections, and store the received data in the memory (See e.g. col. 5 lines 26-30: If the reboot and reconnection work correctly, then any non- essential code/data that was overwritten, is downloaded from server 102 and written to free memory including that previously used by the old version of the operating system) . It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Frazer to incorporate/implement the limitations as taught by Lui in order to provide a more efficient method/system of upgrading software and other data in devices in a failsafe manner. Frazer in view of Liu teaches the non-essential image sections stored in the flash memory (see e.g. Frazer: [0043], [0051] and [0054]), but does not specifically teach transmit the non-essential image sections stored in the flash memory for storage in memory of the host device which provided the update firmware image. In an analogous art of updating firmware, however, Yang teaches transmit image sections ( e.g. original code 124 ) stored in a flash memory ( e.g. first memory 120 ) for storage in memory of a host device ( e.g. storage device 200 ) which provided the update firmware image (see Figs.1,2 and associated text, e.g. [0015]- the storage device 200 is a storage server located at a remote site, hence the I/O interface 114 is a communication adaptor for communicating with the server via the communication link 300, including wired links, such as cable, optical fiber, telephone wire, Ethernet cable, etc., and wireless links, such as IEEE 802.11 series, WiFi, Bluetooth, GPRS, 3G, etc., [0017]- The storage device 200 has an update code 220 and a backup region 240 for storing a backup code 242 and [0018]- when the updating process is performed to the original code 124, the processor 110 copies the original code 124 through the second memory 140 to the backup region 240 as indicated by the backup code 242; the original section in the first temporary 146 is copied to the backup region 240 of the storage device 200, as indicated as Arrow B in FIG. 2. After the original section is backed up, the update section in the second temporary region 148 is copied to the first memory 120 to replace the corresponding original section, as indicated as Arrow C in FIG. 2). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Frazer in view of Liu to incorporate/implement the limitations as taught by Yang in order to provide a more efficient method/system of upgrading firmware in devices in a failsafe manner. As to claim 3 , Lui further teaches wherein one or more processors (see e.g. col.3 lines 58-64: Computing system 200 is, in this example, in the form of a PC, however, in other examples computing system may take the form of a dedicated server(s), a special-purpose device, an appliance, a handheld computing device, a mobile telephone device, a pager device, etc. As shown, computing system 200 includes a processing unit 221 ) are further configured to send a request to establish a connection to a host device ( e.g. server 102 ) in response to rebooting a computing device ( e.g. client device 106 ) from the essential image sections of the update firmware image stored in the memory (see e.g. Fig.4: 408, 410 and associated text, e.g. col.6 lines 20-22: new essential software 320 is used to reboot client device 106 and if successful to then reconnect client device 106 to server device 102 and lines 43-47: in step 408, client device 106 attempts to reboot and reconnect to server device 102, using the new essential software. If the attempts in step 408 are successful, then method 400 continues to step 410, wherein new non-essential software is downloaded, as needed and overwriting any old software too). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Frazer to incorporate/implement the limitations as taught by Lui in order to provide a more efficient method/system of upgrading software and other data in devices in a failsafe manner. As to claim 4 , Liu further teaches wherein the one or more processors of the processing system are further configured to detect a failure to establish a connection to the host device and reboot from the essential image sections of the working firmware image ( e.g. old essential software ) in response to detecting a failure to establish a connection to the host device (see e.g. Fig.4: 408, 411 and associated text, e.g. col. 6 lines 42-50: in step 408, client device 106 attempts to reboot and reconnect to server device 102, using the new essential software; If the attempts in step 408 fail , then method 400 proceeds to step 411, wherein client device 102 is booted and subsequently connected to server device 106 using the old essential software). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Frazer to incorporate/implement the limitations as taught by Lui in order to provide a more efficient method/system of upgrading software and other data in devices in a failsafe manner. As to claim 5 , Frazer also teaches wherein the one or more processors of the processing system are further configured to request and receive the data in the non-essential image sections from the host device after rebooting from the essential image sections of the working firmware image; and store the received data in the flash memory (see e.g. [0067]- the subscriber system 28 can be rebooted to execute the new core firmware and the aux iliary software can then be downloaded from the update server and stored in the new aux iliary software partition 112' and [0068]- a transfer of valid aux iliary software can be requested from the update server 36 and stored in the RSU 86 as a restored aux iliary software partition 112 ). As to claim 6, Liu further teaches wherein the one or more processors of the processing system are further configured to detect a successful reconnection to the host device, commit the essential image sections of the update firmware image to the flash memory in response to the successful reconnection to the host device, erase the essential image sections of the working firmware image, and store non-essential image sections of the update firmware image received from the host device in the flash memory (See col.6 lines 16-28: During the upgrade process, essential software 310 remains intact, while all or part of non-essential software 312 is overwrit ten by new essential software 320, as depicted at time t.sub.1. At time t.sub.2, new essential software 320 is used to reboot client device 106 and if successful to then reconnect client device 106 to server device 102. Assuming that the reboot and reconnect are successful, then any new non-essential software 322 is downloaded, as needed, to replace overwrit ten portions of non-essential software 312 and/or provide upgrades to non-essential software 312. The upgrade process ends at time t.sub.3, wherein new non-essential software 322 has overwrit ten a portion of the old essential software 310). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Frazer to incorporate/implement the limitations as taught by Lui in order to provide a more efficient method/system of upgrading software and other data in devices in a failsafe manner. As to claim 7 , Frazer also teaches wherein the host device is a remote application (e.g. radio sector manager) operating on a server computing device that is connected to the computing device over wire or wireless communication channels (see e.g. [0038] - a software update server 36 that contains software loads for subscriber stations 28 and [0059]- the update core firmware is transferred from an update server 36, as described in more detail below, over the communications link 32 to subscriber station 28; and [0076]- Radio sector manag ers 204 are preferably located in each base station 24 of the network 20 and can be co-located with or implemented within the update server 36). As to claim 8, Frazer also teaches wherein the host device is a memory controller component (e.g. update client) of the computing device (see e.g. [0076]- each subscriber station 28, as part of its core firmware, includes an update client 208, which executes on subscriber station 28). As to claim 9 , the limitations of method claim 9 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 1, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 11 , the limitations of method claim 11 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claims 3 and 4, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 12 , the limitations of method claim 12 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 4, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 13 , the limitations of method claim 13 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 5, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 14 , the limitations of method claim 14 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 6, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 15 , the limitations of method claim 15 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 7, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 16 , the limitations of method claim 16 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 8, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above As to claim 17 , the limitations of medium claim 17 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 1, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 19 , the limitations of medium claim 19 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 3, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 20 , the limitations of medium claim 20 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 4, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 21 , the limitations of medium claim 21 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 5, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 22 , the limitations of medium claim 22 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 6, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 23 , the limitations of medium claim 23 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 7, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 24 , the limitations of medium claim 24 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 8, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 25 , the limitations of device claim 9 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 1, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 27 , the limitations of device claim 27 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 3 , and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 28 , the limitations of device claim 28 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 4, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 29 , the limitations of device claim 29 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 5, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above. As to claim 30 , the limitations of device claim 30 are substantially similar to the limitations of device claim 6, and therefore, it is rejected for the reasons stated above . 07-22-aia AIA 10. Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Frazer et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2005/0055595 A1) in view of Liu et al. (US Patent 7,143,405 B2) and Yang (US Patent Application Publication 2007/0055969 A1) , as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Choi-Grogan et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2011/0124325 A1) . As to claim 31, Frazer in view of Liu and Yang teaches the limitations of claim 1, but does not specifically teach subsequent to transmitting the non-essential image sections, entering the computing device into a firmware upgrade (DFU) only mode. In an analogous art of upgrading software/firmware, however, Choi-Grogan teaches subsequent to transmitting the non-essential image sections ( e.g. user settings ), entering the computing device into a firmware upgrade (DFU) only mode ( e.g. receiving/executing the upgrade , see Fig.4 and associated text, e.g. [0046]- At step 420, having received advance notice of a pending OTA wireless network access software upgrade, the method 400 begins storing/caching user settings in preparation for the impending wireless network access software upgrade download and installation and [0047 ]- In step 430, the method 400 receives an OTA wireless network access software upgrade. For example, the method may receive the OTA software upgrade from a wireless network 205 via base station 250 and [0048]- At step 440, the method 400 executes/installs the wireless network access software upgrade). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Frazer in view of Lui and Yang to incorporate/implement the limitations as taught by Choi-Grogan in order to provide a more efficient method/system of upgrading software and other data in devices in a failsafe manner. Conclusion 11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHENECA SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-1651. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00AM-4:30PM EST. 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, Hyung S Sough can be reached at 571-272-6799. 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. /CHENECA SMITH/ Examiner, Art Unit 2192 /S. Sough/SPE, Art Unit 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 2 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 3 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 4 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 5 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 6 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 7 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 8 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 9 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 10 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 11 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 12 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 13 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 14 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 15 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 16 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 17 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/471,347 Page 18 Art Unit: 2192
Prosecution Insights