DETAILED ACTION
1.This communication is in response to the amendment filed on 11/25/2025. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
1a. Status of the claims:
Claims 1, 8, and 15 are amended.
Claims 1- 20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant's arguments filed 11/25/2025 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claims 1, 3, 8, 10, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Shamsutdinov (US 20190251198 A1), RICKLIS (US 2023/0052991 A1), in view of Ng et al. (hereinafter “Ng”) (US 2006/0200565 A1), and further in view of Livshin et al. (hereinafter “Livshin”) (US 2023/0012013 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Shamsutdinov discloses a computer-implemented method of managing progressive web applications, including:
providing a request for a progressive web application (PWA) to a web scrapper ( a request for application is made to a call app using SQL expressions that is a web scrapper based on the definition “A web scraper is automated software that extracts data from websites”, where the application is a progressive web application , Shamsutdinov, [0177]-[0178], the application is disclosed to be a progressive web application in [0464]; the call app disclosed in [0178] acts as a web scrapper performing core operations (extracting data is a core operation) to an AIR database in the internet ); In the reference there are different type of applications. One is Progressive Web Apps (PWAs) that emulate the appearance, functionality, and features of native mobile apps as it is disclosed in the specification [0003]. Another type is web scrapper that performs web search as disclosed [0041] of the specification. The calling app in [0178] is an application but it is an AIR -capable application that is different than the Progressive Web Application. This is in light of the specification that disclosed in[0041] The web scrapper 450 provides data indicating the results of the search (e.g., the PWA URL).
), the request including metadata of a native application associated with the PWA (the request include specified repository id associated with the application , Shamsutdinov, [0193] );
searching, by the web scraper, a first set of PWA directories based on the metadata of the native application ( check for application by requesting the application on the specified repositories , Shamsutdinov, [0193] );
the web scraper unable to locate the PWA in the first set of PWA directions (apps are in different in different AIR database and are not located cannot the located by a SQL request , Shamsutdinov, [0178]-[0180] ), and in response, searching, by the web scraper, a web search based on the metadata of the native application (the call app is used a small fraction of the native application serve as the expected target of the AIR and relies on the target platform as its platform , Shamsutdinov, [0178]-[0180] ; the call app discloses in [0178] act as a web scrapper extracting data to an AIR database in the internet ).
Shamsutdinov does not disclose providing, by the web scraper, data indicating results of the web search, including a uniform resource locator (URL) of the PWA; identifying parameters associated with the PWA, the parameters including the URL associated with the PWA; identifying, based on the parameters associated with the PWA, a manifest file corresponding to the URL; parsing the manifest file to retrieve metadata of the manifest; creating a configuration file for the PWA based on the metadata; identifying a particular application wrapper template based on an operating system for the PWA; injecting the configuration file into the application wrapper template; creating an installation package including the injected application wrapper template; and code-signing the installation package with a certificate.
RICKLIS discloses providing, by the web scraper, data indicating results of the web search, including a uniform resource locator (URL) of the PWA (a URL is identified by name of an web app using a single page application that is equated broadly to web scrapper , RICKLIS, [0042]; Addition details about single page application are giving in [0012]-[0013] that discloses that a single page application (SPA) enables access of a PWA application similarly to a web scrapper that is automates software extracted data ( by extracting data, data also is being accessed) from a website; in addition in [0031] SPA is associated with JAVASCRIP files.); identifying parameters associated with a progressive web application (PWA) ( many web browsers such as app SAFARY are identified as parameters associated with progressive web application (PWA) , RICKLIS, [0004]), the parameters including a uniform resource locator (URL) associated with the PWA ( a URL is identified as a parameters associated with progressive web application (PWA) , RICKLIS, [0021]) ; identifying, based on the parameters associated with the PWA, a manifest file corresponding to the URL (a URL correspond to a manifest that is identified by name of an web app , RICKLIS, [0042]) parsing the manifest file to retrieve metadata of the manifest (metadata stored in a manifest such as metadata (name of an web app , link of the web app icon..) can be retrieved , RICKLIS, [0042]); creating a configuration file for the PWA based on the metadata ( web application data of a PWA are configured using metadata, RICKLIS, [0042]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate RICKLIS’s teachings with Shamsutdinov’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently identify a progressive web application by using a URL that is associated with the progressive web application for doing so.
Shamsutdinov in view of RICKLIS do not disclose identifying a particular application wrapper template based on an operating system for the PWA ; injecting the configuration file into the application wrapper template.
Ng discloses identifying a particular application wrapper template based on an operating system for the PWA (an application wrapper envisioned as software packages operating on a data processing units being identified operating being identified for internet application (Ng, [0015];[0021]; the identification is disclosed in [0021]); injecting the configuration file into the application wrapper template ( suitable instructions in a configuration file and templates are used to provide data to adapt a software wrapper (Ng, [0006];[0051]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Ng’s teachings with Shamsutdinov’s teachings in view of RICKLIS’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently inject configuration file into an application wrapper by providing suitable instruction into a template to provide data to adapt a software wrapper.
Shamsutdinov in view of RICKLIS in view of Ng and in view of Shamsutdinov do not disclose creating an installation package including the injected application wrapper template; and code-signing the installation package with a certificate.
Livshin discloses creating an installation package including the injected application wrapper template ( generate a security deployment package that is used in the template of wrapper ( Livshin, [0146]; [0199]); and code-signing the installation package with a certificate (a certificate of the deployment package that is used in the template of wrapper ( Livshin, [0146]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Livshin’s teachings with in view of Shamsutdinov in view of RICKLIS’s teachings and in view of Ng’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to install the correct application by certifying the deployment package.
Regarding claim 3, Shamsutdinov, RICKLIS, Ng, and Livshin disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the metadata of the manifest includes application name, version, description, and icon associated with the PWA ( a manifest disclosed name, version, description corresponding PWA , RICKLIS, [0024]).
Regarding claim 8, Shamsutdinov, RICKLIS, Ng, and Livshin disclose an information handling system comprising a processor having access to memory media storing instructions executable by the processor to perform operations ( a processor executing instructions stored in a memory, RICKLIS, [0019]); in addition, claim 8 is substantially similar to claim 1, thus the same rationale applies.
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 is substantially similar to claim 3, thus the same rationale applies.
Regarding claim 15, Shamsutdinov, RICKLIS, Ng, and Livshin disclose a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing software comprising instructions executable by one or more computers which, upon such execution, cause the one or more computers to perform operations (a memory storing instructions executed by a processor, RICKLIS, [0019]); in addition, claim 15 is substantially similar to claim 1, thus the same rationale applies.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 is substantially similar to claim 3, thus the same rationale applies.
4a. Claims 2, 9, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Shamsutdinov, RICKLIS, in view of Ng, and further in view of Livshin, and further in view of Straub (US 2020/0110592 A1)
Regarding claim 2, Shamsutdinov, RICKLIS, Ng, and Livshin disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1.
Shamsutdinov in view of RICKLIS in view of Ng and in view of Livshin do not disclose wherein the parameters associated with the PWA include a platform and the operating system.
Straub discloses wherein the parameters associated with the PWA include a platform and the operating system ( platform characteristic such as operation system are features that are used for configuring progressive web applications (Straub, [[0056]; [0060]).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Straub’s teachings with Shamsutdinov’s teachings in view of RICKLIS’s teachings in view of Ng’s teachings and in view of Livshin’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently configure a PWA by associating the PWA with parameters such as operating system.
Regarding claim 9, claim 9 is substantially similar to claim 2, thus the same rationale applies.
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 is substantially similar to claim 2, thus the same rationale applies.
4b. Claims 4, 11, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Shamsutdinov, RICKLIS, in view of Ng, and further in view of Livshin, and further in view of Li et al. (hereinafter “Li”) (CN 111026413 A).
Regarding claim 4, Shamsutdinov, RICKLIS, Ng, and Livshin disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1.
Shamsutdinov in view of RICKLIS in view of Ng and in view of Livshin do not disclose further including uploading the installation package to a data store.
Li discloses further including uploading the installation package to a data store ( uploading a deployment installation package in a storage tool of deployment system ( Li, page 6, paragraph 4th starting with In particular, the storage…) .
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Li’s teachings with Shamsutdinov’s teachings in view of RICKLIS’s teachings in view of Ng’s teachings and in view of Livshin’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently save the file wrapper package by storing the file wrapper package into a data store.
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 is substantially similar to claim 4, thus the same rationale applies.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 is substantially similar to claim 4, thus the same rationale applies.
4c. Claims 5, 12, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Shamsutdinov, RICKLIS, in view of Ng, in view of Livshin, in view of Li, and further in view of Morgenstern (US 8,365,164 B1).
Regarding claim 5, Shamsutdinov, RICKLIS, Ng, Livshin , and Li disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 4.
Shamsutdinov in view of RICKLIS in view of Ng and in view of Livshin and in view of Li do not disclose further including updating an application catalog listing based on the installation package.
Morgenstern discloses further including updating an application catalog listing based on the installation package ( modifying an installation package based on listing of application ( column 3, lines 50-59;Morgenstern, column 19, lines 46-50)
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Morgenstern’s teachings with Shamsutdinov’s teachings in view of RICKLIS’s teachings in view of Ng’s teachings in view of Livshin’s teachings and in view of Li’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to efficiently store a microservice unit by storing it in a casual dependency.
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 is substantially similar to claim 5, thus the same rationale applies.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 is substantially similar to claim 5, thus the same rationale applies.
4d. Claims 6, 13, and 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Shamsutdinov, RICKLIS, in view of Ng, in view of Livshin, in view of Li, in view of Morgenstern, and further in view of George et al. (hereinafter “George”) (US 2021/0182729 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Shamsutdinov, RICKLIS, Ng, Livshin, Li, and Morgenstern disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 5.
Shamsutdinov in view of RICKLIS in view of Ng, in view of Livshin, in view of Li, and in view of Morgenstern do not disclose further including creating an application policy based on the installation package of the application catalog listing.
George discloses further including creating an application policy based on the installation package of the application catalog listing ( control policy-based package deployment being integrated by a Digital Network Architecture Center platform using a software infrastructure ( George, [0026] ).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate George’s teachings with R Shamsutdinov’s teachings in view of ICKLIS’s teachings, in view of Ng’s teachings ,in view of Livshin’s teachings, in view of Li’s teachings, and in view of Morgenstern’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to control the deployment of packages efficiently by using a control policy based on package deployment for doing so.
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 is substantially similar to claim 6, thus the same rationale applies.
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 is substantially similar to claim 6, thus the same rationale applies.
4e. Claims 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Shamsutdinov, RICKLIS, in view of Ng, in view of Livshin, in view of Li, in view of Morgenstern, in view of George, and further in view of Boyappalle et al. ( hereinafter “ Boyappalle”) (US 8,365,164 B1).
Regarding claim 7, Shamsutdinov, RICKLIS, Ng, Livshin, Li, Morgenstern, and George disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 6.
Shamsutdinov in view of RICKLIS in view of Ng, in view of Livshin, in view of Li, in view of Morgenstern, and in view of George do not disclose further including applying the application policy at a client information handling system.
Boyappalle discloses further including applying the application policy at a client information handling system ( implementation of policies at a managed client information handling system ,[0072]) ( Boyappalle, [0072] ).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Boyappalle’s teachings with Shamsutdinov’s teachings in view of RICKLIS’s teachings, in view of Ng’s teachings, in view of Livshin’s teachings, in view of Li’s teachings, in view of Morgenster’s teachings , and in view of George’s teachings. One skilled in the art would be motivated to combine them in order to manage the deployment of packages of an application efficiently by applying the application policy at the client information handling system.
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 is substantially similar to claim 7, thus the same rationale applies.
Conclusion
5. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARIEGEORGES A HENRY whose telephone number is (571)270-3226. The examiner can normally be reached on 11:00am -8:00pm East M-F.
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, Emmanuel Moise can be reached on 571 272-8365. 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.
/MARIEGEORGES A HENRY/Examiner, Art Unit 2455
/ZI YE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455