CTNF 18/718,227 CTNF 86596 DETAILED ACTION Remarks The present application was filed 10 June 2024 and is a 371 of PCT/JP2021/045939 filed on 14 December 2021. Preliminary amendments were also filed 10 June 2024, in which: Claims 7-8 were amended; Claims 9-18 were added; and The specification was amended. Claims 1-18 are pending. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Specification 06-31 AIA The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation Limitations referring to “a step of” or using the word “step” alone are not interpreted as invoking 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) unless noted herein below and are instead construed as showing that 112(f) does not apply to those limitations. See, e.g., Seal-Flex, Inc. v. Athletic Track and Court Construction, 172 F.3d 836, 850, 50 USPQ2d 1225, 1234 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (Rader, J., concurring) ("…If the claim element uses the phrase ‘step for,’ then Section 112, Para. 6 is presumed to apply…On the other hand, the term ‘step’ alone and the phrase ‘steps of’ tend to show that Section 112, Para. 6 does not govern that limitation.") (from M.P.E.P. § 2181). 07-30-03 AIA 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. 07-30-06 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 (“AI Agent”) 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: The “…update control device that controls update of an application…” in claim 1; The “…update control device executes a creation step of generating a virtual server…” in claim 1; The “…update control device executes...a changing step of sequentially performing a process of changing a stack…” in claim 1. 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 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claims 1-6 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. As to claim 1 , various limitations of this claim noted above invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph as noted. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed functions of each limitation and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the claimed functions. For computer-implemented means plus function limitations, note that the disclosed structure must include an algorithm for performing the function claimed. See MPEP § 2181(II)(B). And the specification provides no algorithm sufficient for performing any of the claimed functions here. It only repeats the language of the claims. Note that to the extent any algorithm is disclosed for certain functions, that algorithm is recited by dependent claims, meaning claim 1 cannot reasonably construed as already covering them. 07-34-23 Since the specification lacks sufficient corresponding structure, the claim is indefinite and an equivalent is any element that performs the specified function . See M.P.E.P. §§ 2181(II)(B) and 2185. As to claims 2-6 , the claims are dependent on claim 1 but do not cure the deficiencies of that claims. Applicant may: (a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph; (b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or (c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)). If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either: (a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or (b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181. 07-30-01 AIA The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. 07-31-01 Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. As to claims 1-6, the claims include means-plus function limitations lacking sufficient corresponding structure as noted above. Such limitations also lack written description. See M.P.E.P. § 2163.03(VI). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112 set forth in this Office action. Claims 2-6 would be allowable by virtue of their dependence from claim 1. 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim 7-18 are allowed. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: As to claim 1 , the closest prior at, Qu (US 9,021,459) (art made of record – hereinafter Qu) discloses An update control method of a redundancy system including a first stack indicating an instance group of a virtual resource, a second stack indicating an instance group of a virtual resource, and an update control device that controls update of an application stored in each of virtual resources of the first stack and the second stack, (e.g., Qu, (e.g., Qu, col. 9 ll. 16-18: if a failure is detected on a master VM 40 on primary RE 20, hypervisor 22A may switch control to slave VM 52A on primary RE 20A [i.e., the slave VM is a redundant VM]; col. 5 ll. 48-54: the ISSU of the primary routine engine may installing an upgraded software system on the second virtual machine [stack indicating an instance group of a virtual resource] on the primary routing engine, switching control of the routing session from the first virtual machine to the second virtual machine [stack indicating an instance group of a virtual resource] on the primary routine engine, and then installing the upgraded software system on the first virtual machine) wherein the virtual servers are redundant in an active state or a standby state , (see immediately above, whichever VM is controlling routing is in an active state) However, the “ …the first stack constitutes a virtual server in association with a third stack indicating a secondary interface for communication with another stack other than the first stack, and the second stack constitutes a virtual server in association with a fourth stack indicating the secondary interface…the update control device executes a creation step of generating a virtual server corresponding to the first stack and including a fifth stack in which a new application indicating the application that is updated is stored and a virtual server corresponding to the second stack and including a sixth stack in which the new application is stored, and a changing step of sequentially performing a process of changing a stack indicating the secondary interface associated with the fifth stack to the third stack and a process of changing a stack indicating the secondary interface associated with the sixth stack to the fourth stack ” features of claim 1, in combination with the other elements recited, are not taught by the prior art and would not have been obvious. Claim 7 and 8 include substantially the same features and are allowable over the prior art for the same reasons. The dependent claims would be allowable via dependency from their respective parents . Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TODD AGUILERA whose telephone number is (571)270-5186. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11AM - 7:30PM 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. /TODD AGUILERA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/718,227 Page 2 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/718,227 Page 3 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/718,227 Page 4 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/718,227 Page 5 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/718,227 Page 6 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/718,227 Page 7 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/718,227 Page 8 Art Unit: 2192 Application/Control Number: 18/718,227 Page 9 Art Unit: 2192
Prosecution Insights