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 .
Claims 1-20 have been examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “an image file” on line 10 of the claim, which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the image file refers to the image file on line 1 of the claim or to another. Therefore, the limitation “an image file” on line 10 of the claim is interpreted as “the image file”.
Claims 2-12 are rejected for dependency upon rejected base claim 1 above.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “an image file” on line 13 of the claim, which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the image file refers to the image file on line 1 of the claim or to another. Therefore, the limitation “an image file” on line 13 of the claim is interpreted as “the image file”.
Claims 14-19 are rejected for dependency upon rejected base claim 13 above.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-2, 4-9, 13-18 and 20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 4-9 and 14-20 of U.S. Patent No. US 11,995,453. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. The following example is given:
Claim 1 of Instant Application: A method for generating an image file, comprising:
Claim 1 of U.S. No. US 11,995,453: A method for generating an image file, comprising:
receiving an image file generation request that carries an application installation file;
receiving an image file generation request, the image file generation request carrying an application installation file;
loading a basic image file of an operating system in a preset system area according to the image file generation request, to start the operating system; installing an application corresponding to the application installation file in the operating system, and running the application to obtain a system dataset after the application is run and attribute information of the application;
loading a basic image file of an operating system in a preset system area according to the image file generation request, to start the operating system, wherein the basic image file comprises a read-only layer; installing an application corresponding to the application installation file in the operating system, and running the application to obtain a system dataset after the application is run and attribute information of the application;
identifying application data corresponding to the application from the system dataset according to the attribute information of the application; merging the application data with the basic image file to generate an image file of the application; acquiring an updated basic image file when the basic image file is updated; adding a read-write layer to a read-only layer of the updated basic image file; and adding the application data corresponding to the application to the read-write layer, to obtain a first updated image file of the application.
identifying application data corresponding to the application from the system dataset according to the attribute information of the application; and merging the application data with the basic image file to generate an image file of the application, comprising: adding, according to basic information of a read-write layer, the read-write layer to the read-only layer of the basic image file; and adding the application data to the read-write layer according to basic information of the read-write layer, to obtain the image file of the application.
Claims 2 and 4-9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 2 and 4-9, respectively, of U.S. 11,995,453.
Claims 13-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 14-19, respectively, of U.S. 11,995,453.
Claim 20 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 20 of U.S. 11,995,453.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 USC 112 and double patenting, but would be allowable if the 35 USC 112 and double patenting rejections are overcome.
Claim 20 is rejected under double patenting, but would be allowable if the double patenting rejection is overcome.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The cited prior art taken alone or in combination fail to teach, in combination with the other claimed limitations, merging the application data with the basic image file to generate an image file of the application; acquiring an updated basic image file when the basic image file is updated; adding a read-write layer to a read-only layer of the updated basic image file; and adding the application data corresponding to the application to the read-write layer, to obtain a first updated image file of the application as substantially recited in each of the independent claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Zu (US 2016/0077855) teaches a method for generating an image file.
Sugaya (US 10,394,541) teaches a method for distributing a container image.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QAMRUN NAHAR whose telephone number is (571)272-3730. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-4pm.
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.
/QAMRUN NAHAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2199