DETAILED ACTION
This office action is responsive to claims 1 - 20 filed in this application Greenberg et al., U.S. Patent Application No. 18621952 (Filed March 29, 2024).
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 16 is rejected as being indefinite. Claim 16 recites “the computer system” in the last line of the claim. It is unclear to which “computer system” the term “the computer system” refers, the “computer system” introduced in the second line of the claim or the “computer system” introduced in the fourth line.
Claims 17 - 20 are rejected as depending on claim 16. Claims 18 and 19 are rejected for substantially similar reasoning.
35 USC § 112(f)
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.
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.
Claim 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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “system to:” and “devices to”, in claims 16 – 20.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections 35 U.S.C. §103
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 of this title, 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramaswany et al., United States Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0385091 (Published November 30, 2023, filed May 24, 2022) (“Ramaswany”) in view of Liao et al., United States Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0350588 (Published November 3, 2022, filed June 30, 2021) (“Liao”).
Claims 1, 4, and 16
With respect to claims 1, 4, and 16, Ramaswany teaches the invention as claimed including a computer-implemented method comprising:
executing an instance in a host environment of a computer system of a cloud provider network, the host environment providing a virtualized environment for the instance to execute …receiving an instruction to apply, at an update time, an update to a host software application executing in the host environment, wherein the host software application shares a hardware device of the computer system amongst a plurality of instances including the instance; determining that the instance uses the hardware device; providing an upcoming host software update notification to the… executed in the virtualized environment, the notification indicating the update time; and updating the host software application at or after the update time. / a second one or more computing devices to implement a deployment service in the cloud provider network, the deployment service including instructions that upon execution cause the deployment service to: send, to the computer system, the host software application update. {When a software update is pending for software of one of a plurality of virtual machines, running on a cloud network that is subscribed to updates, a notification of the update time may be presented which allows for acceptance of the update or the submission of a delay that overrides the current update time and specifies a later time or time window for the update at which time the update is applied. Ramaswany at ¶¶ 0111 – 0114; id. at ¶¶ 0017 (a plurality of virtual machine instances may be present on a host OS of the computing device); id. at ¶¶ 0026 – 0029 (VMs running on a cloud computing system which executes on computing hardware devices such as computing cores, memory, and processors); id. at ¶ 0122 (determine update time by a machine learning model based on activity signals and update length); id. at ¶¶ 0104 & 0127 (delay VM update when guest OS on VM is being updated).}
However, Ramaswany doesn’t explicitly teach the limitation:
a guest software application; … guest software application {Liao does teach this limitation. Liao teaches that the method for update notification and rescheduling, as taught in Ramaswany, may include providing multiple notifications of estimated update times allowing a user reschedule the update to a later time. Liao at ¶¶ 0014 – 0017 (multiple notifications are presented as the update time estimate is revised); id. at ¶¶ 0055, 0058, 0059, 0060 (notifications for update and ability to reschedule update); id. at ¶ 0024 (User may manage the notifications they receive via the user interface).
Ramaswany and Liao are analogous art because they are from the “same field of endeavor” and are both from the same “problem-solving area.” Specifically, they are both from the field of software updating, and both are trying to solve the problem of when to deploy the updates.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine an update notification, as taught in Ramaswany, with repeated notification, as taught in Liao. Liao teaches that update notifications are helpful to implement the update. Liao at ¶ 0002. Therefore, one having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine an update notification, as taught in Ramaswany, with repeated notification, as taught in Liao, for the purpose of using a known update notification and rescheduling method with an update method that requires rescheduling updates.}
Claims 2, 5, and 17
With respect to claim 2, 5, and 17, Ramaswany and Liao, teach the invention as claimed including:
wherein the notification is one of multiple notifications of the upcoming host software application update sent to the guest software application, each notification sent at a different time before the update time. {Multiple notifications of estimated update times may be presented and user may decide to reschedule to update to a later time. Liao at ¶¶ 0014 – 0017 (multiple notifications are presented as the update time estimate is revised); id. at ¶¶ 0055, 0058, 0059, 0060 (notifications for update and ability to reschedule update); id. at ¶ 0024 (User may manage the notifications they receive via the user interface).}
Claims 3, 6, and 18
With respect to claim 3, 6, and 18, Ramaswany and Liao, teach the invention as claimed including:
further comprising receiving indications of when to send the multiple notifications relative to the update time. {Multiple notifications of estimated update times may be presented and user may decide to reschedule to update to a later time. Liao at ¶¶ 0014 – 0017 (multiple notifications are presented as the update time estimate is revised); id. at ¶¶ 0055, 0058, 0059, 0060 (notifications for update and ability to reschedule update); id. at ¶ 0024 (User may manage the notifications they receive via the user interface).}
Claim 7
With respect to claim 7, Ramaswany and Liao, teach the invention as claimed including:
further comprising: receiving an indication of an amount of time to delay application of the host software application update after receiving an instruction to apply the host software application update; receiving the instruction to apply the host software application update; and delaying application of the host software application update until the update time. {When a software update is pending for software of one of a plurality of virtual machines, running on a cloud network that is subscribed to updates, a notification of the update time may be presented which allows for acceptance of the update or the submission of a delay that overrides the current update time and specifies a later time or time window for the update at which time the update is applied. Ramaswany at ¶¶ 0111 – 0114; id. at ¶¶ 0017 (a plurality of virtual machine instances may be present on a host OS of the computing device); id. at ¶¶ 0026 – 0029 (VMs running on a cloud computing system which executes on computing hardware devices such as computing cores, memory, and processors); id. at ¶ 0122 (determine update time by a machine learning model based on activity signals and update length); id. at ¶¶ 0104 & 0127 (delay VM update when guest OS on VM is being updated).}
Claim 8
With respect to claim 8, Ramaswany and Liao, teach the invention as claimed including:
wherein the upcoming host software update notification provides an amount of time prior to the update time or a time at or after which the host software application update will be applied. {When a software update is pending for software of one of a plurality of virtual machines, running on a cloud network that is subscribed to updates, a notification of the update time may be presented which allows for acceptance of the update or the submission of a delay that overrides the current update time and specifies a later time or time window for the update at which time the update is applied. Ramaswany at ¶¶ 0111 – 0114; id. at ¶¶ 0017 (a plurality of virtual machine instances may be present on a host OS of the computing device); id. at ¶¶ 0026 – 0029 (VMs running on a cloud computing system which executes on computing hardware devices such as computing cores, memory, and processors); id. at ¶ 0122 (determine update time by a machine learning model based on activity signals and update length); id. at ¶¶ 0104 & 0127 (delay VM update when guest OS on VM is being updated).}
Claim 9
With respect to claim 9, Ramaswany and Liao, teach the invention as claimed including:
receiving, by a service of a cloud provider network that manages virtualization of the computer system, a customer request to enable receipt of performance event notifications by the instance, wherein the host software application update is associated with a performance event; and determining, prior to providing the upcoming host software update notification, that performance event notifications for the instance are enabled. {When a software update is pending for software of one of a plurality of virtual machines, running on a cloud network that is subscribed to updates, a notification of the update time may be presented which allows for acceptance of the update or the submission of a delay that overrides the current update time and specifies a later time or time window for the update at which time the update is applied. Ramaswany at ¶¶ 0111 – 0114; id. at ¶¶ 0017 (a plurality of virtual machine instances may be present on a host OS of the computing device); id. at ¶¶ 0026 – 0029 (VMs running on a cloud computing system which executes on computing hardware devices such as computing cores, memory, and processors); id. at ¶ 0122 (determine update time by a machine learning model based on activity signals and update length); id. at ¶¶ 0104 & 0127 (delay VM update when guest OS on VM is being updated).}
Claim 10
With respect to claim 10, Ramaswany and Liao, teach the invention as claimed including:
receiving, by an application executed in the host environment, a request for performance events from the software application executed in the virtualized environment; and sending, from the application executed in the host environment, the upcoming host software update notification of the host software application update to the software application executed in the virtualized environment in response to the request. {When a software update is pending for software of one of a plurality of virtual machines, running on a cloud network that is subscribed to updates, a notification of the update time may be presented which allows for acceptance of the update or the submission of a delay that overrides the current update time and specifies a later time or time window for the update at which time the update is applied. Ramaswany at ¶¶ 0111 – 0114; id. at ¶¶ 0017 (a plurality of virtual machine instances may be present on a host OS of the computing device); id. at ¶¶ 0026 – 0029 (VMs running on a cloud computing system which executes on computing hardware devices such as computing cores, memory, and processors); id. at ¶ 0122 (determine update time by a machine learning model based on activity signals and update length); id. at ¶¶ 0104 & 0127 (delay VM update when guest OS on VM is being updated).}
Claim 11
With respect to claim 11, Ramaswany and Liao, teach the invention as claimed including:
wherein the application executed in the host environment is a metadata web server, and wherein the request for performance events is a Hypertext Transfer Protocol request. {Liao at ¶¶ 0038 and 0075.}
Claim 12
With respect to claim 12, Ramaswany and Liao, teach the invention as claimed including:
wherein the request is received prior to receiving the host software application update and further comprising delaying providing a response to the request at least until after receiving the host software application update. {When a software update is pending for software of one of a plurality of virtual machines, running on a cloud network that is subscribed to updates, a notification of the update time may be presented which allows for acceptance of the update or the submission of a delay that overrides the current update time and specifies a later time or time window for the update at which time the update is applied. Ramaswany at ¶¶ 0111 – 0114; id. at ¶¶ 0017 (a plurality of virtual machine instances may be present on a host OS of the computing device); id. at ¶¶ 0026 – 0029 (VMs running on a cloud computing system which executes on computing hardware devices such as computing cores, memory, and processors); id. at ¶ 0122 (determine update time by a machine learning model based on activity signals and update length); id. at ¶¶ 0104 & 0127 (delay VM update when guest OS on VM is being updated).}
Claim 13
With respect to claim 13, Ramaswany and Liao, teach the invention as claimed including:
wherein providing the upcoming host software update notification includes writing to a portion of memory of the computer system allocated to the virtualized environment. {When a software update is pending for software of one of a plurality of virtual machines, running on a cloud network that is subscribed to updates, a notification of the update time may be presented which allows for acceptance of the update or the submission of a delay that overrides the current update time and specifies a later time or time window for the update at which time the update is applied. Ramaswany at ¶¶ 0111 – 0114; id. at ¶¶ 0017 (a plurality of virtual machine instances may be present on a host OS of the computing device); id. at ¶¶ 0026 – 0029 (VMs running on a cloud computing system which executes on computing hardware devices such as computing cores, memory, and processors); id. at ¶ 0122 (determine update time by a machine learning model based on activity signals and update length); id. at ¶¶ 0104 & 0127 (delay VM update when guest OS on VM is being updated).}
Claim 14
With respect to claim 14, Ramaswany and Liao, teach the invention as claimed including:
wherein the host software application is virtualization software of a physical resource of the computer system, and wherein the physical resource is at least one of a processor, a memory device, a network adapter, or a storage device. {When a software update is pending for software of one of a plurality of virtual machines, running on a cloud network that is subscribed to updates, a notification of the update time may be presented which allows for acceptance of the update or the submission of a delay that overrides the current update time and specifies a later time or time window for the update at which time the update is applied. Ramaswany at ¶¶ 0111 – 0114; id. at ¶¶ 0017 (a plurality of virtual machine instances may be present on a host OS of the computing device); id. at ¶¶ 0026 – 0029 (VMs running on a cloud computing system which executes on computing hardware devices such as computing cores, memory, and processors); id. at ¶ 0122 (determine update time by a machine learning model based on activity signals and update length); id. at ¶¶ 0104 & 0127 (delay VM update when guest OS on VM is being updated).}
Claim 15
With respect to claim 15, Ramaswany and Liao, teach the invention as claimed including:
further comprising determining, prior to sending the upcoming host software update notification, that the instance uses the physical resource. {When a software update is pending for software of one of a plurality of virtual machines, running on a cloud network that is subscribed to updates, a notification of the update time may be presented which allows for acceptance of the update or the submission of a delay that overrides the current update time and specifies a later time or time window for the update at which time the update is applied. Ramaswany at ¶¶ 0111 – 0114; id. at ¶¶ 0017 (a plurality of virtual machine instances may be present on a host OS of the computing device); id. at ¶¶ 0026 – 0029 (VMs running on a cloud computing system which executes on computing hardware devices such as computing cores, memory, and processors); id. at ¶ 0122 (determine update time by a machine learning model based on activity signals and update length); id. at ¶¶ 0104 & 0127 (delay VM update when guest OS on VM is being updated).}
Claim 19
With respect to claim 19, Ramaswany and Liao, teach the invention as claimed including:
wherein the computer system includes further instructions that upon execution cause the computer system to: receive an indication of an amount of time to delay application of the host software application update after receiving an instruction to apply the host software application update; receive the instruction to apply the host software application update; and delay application of the host software application update until the update time. {When a software update is pending for software of one of a plurality of virtual machines, running on a cloud network that is subscribed to updates, a notification of the update time may be presented which allows for acceptance of the update or the submission of a delay that overrides the current update time and specifies a later time or time window for the update at which time the update is applied. Ramaswany at ¶¶ 0111 – 0114; id. at ¶¶ 0017 (a plurality of virtual machine instances may be present on a host OS of the computing device); id. at ¶¶ 0026 – 0029 (VMs running on a cloud computing system which executes on computing hardware devices such as computing cores, memory, and processors); id. at ¶ 0122 (determine update time by a machine learning model based on activity signals and update length); id. at ¶¶ 0104 & 0127 (delay VM update when guest OS on VM is being updated).}
Claim 20
With respect to claim 20, Ramaswany and Liao, teach the invention as claimed including:
wherein the upcoming host software update notification provides an amount of time prior to the update time or a time at or after which the host software application update will be applied. {Multiple notifications of estimated update times may be presented and user may decide to reschedule to update to a later time. Liao at ¶¶ 0014 – 0017 (multiple notifications are presented as the update time estimate is revised); id. at ¶¶ 0055, 0058, 0059, 0060 (notifications for update and ability to reschedule update); id. at ¶ 0024 (User may manage the notifications they receive via the user interface).}
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEODORE E HEBERT whose telephone number is (571)270-1409. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m..
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, Lewis Bullock can be reached on 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 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.
//T.H./ February 21, 2026
Examiner, Art Unit 2199
/LEWIS A BULLOCK JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2199