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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 06/04/2024. Claims 1-11 were canceled; Claim 12 is independent claims. Claims 12-18 have been examined and are pending. This Action is made non-FINAL.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 06/04/2024. These drawings are reviewed and accepted by the Examiner.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted on 06/04/2024 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 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, 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.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Philbrick et al. (“Philbrick,” US 11,757,633), in view of Leon (“Leon,” US 2020/0412733).
Regarding claim 12, Philbrick teaches a vehicle system, comprising:
one or more processors (Col. 3, lines 21-62, processors);
memory (Philbrick: Col. 3, lines 21-62, memory);
an operating system stored into the memory (Philbrick: Col. 4, lines 1-16, operating systems);
a first container stored into memory (Philbrick: abstract, one or more containers; Col. 1, lines 49-59, one or more containers);
a second container stored into memory different from the first container stored into memory (Philbrick: abstract, one or more containers; Col. 1, lines 49-59, one or more containers).
a first set of one or more applications stored with respect to the first container, wherein the first container corresponds to a first digital certificate (Philbrick: Col. 4, lines 1-4, example, as discussed below, metadata (e.g., tags) may be associated with digital certificates associated with applications of one or more operating systems implemented via a container); and
a second set of one or more applications stored with respect to the second container (Philbrick: Col. 4, lines 1-4, example, as discussed below, metadata (e.g., tags) may be associated with digital certificates associated with applications of one or more operating systems implemented via a container)), wherein the second container corresponds to a second digital certificate different from the first digital certificate (Philbrick: abstract; Col. 4, lines 1-4, example, as discussed below, metadata (e.g., tags) may be associated with digital certificates associated with applications of one or more operating systems implemented via a container; Col. 4, lines 10-14, Certificates of containers that have been modified or replaced may themselves be modified or replaced, thereby containers to have the correct digital certificate), and
Philbrick discloses a first set of one or more applications stored with respect to the first container, wherein the first container corresponds to a first digital certificate and a second set of one or more applications stored with respect to the second container, wherein the second container corresponds to a second digital certificate different from the first digital certificate but does not explicitly disclose
wherein the operating system permits the first set of one or more applications to perform a first set of one or more operations according to the first digital certificate; and wherein the operating system permits the second set of one or more applications to perform a second set of one or more operations, different from the first set of one or more operations, according to the second digital certificate.
However, in an analogous art, Leon teaches that Operating System managing container (Leon: pars. 0156 the processing server 206 may run an operating system (OS), and multiple containers can execute in the processing server 206 and share the same OS; par. 0157, the processing server 206 initializes one or more containers, each as a standalone executable. Thus, the initialized containers can share the same OS (e.g., the OS running on the processing server 206). Leon further teaches authentication-based to container (Leon: par. 0155, prompting the user to provide one or more user credentials for authentication ( e.g., username, password, security answer, fingerprint, vein reading, iris scan, digital certificate, security token, etc.); par. 0156; Once the node 110 has authenticated the provided user credential(s) and any secondary authentication factors, the user device 1511 is granted access to a container).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Leon with the method and system of Philbrick to include wherein the operating system permits the first set of one or more applications to perform a first set of one or more operations according to the first digital certificate; and wherein the operating system permits the second set of one or more applications to perform a second set of one or more operations, different from the first set of one or more operations, according to the second digital certificate. One would have been motivated to prevent the contents of such data packets from accessing other resources in the node and/or helps to prevent unauthorized or unintended actions from being executed by the contents of such data packets (Leon: par. 0098).
Claims 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Philbrick et al. (“Philbrick,” US 11,757,633), in view of Leon (“Leon,” US 2020/0412733), further in view of Jiang et al. (“Jiang,” US 2013/0136007).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Philbrick and Leon teaches the vehicle system of claim 12. Philbrick and Leon do not explicitly disclose, further comprising:
a plurality of vehicle components; and
a communication bus that permits the plurality of vehicle components to send and receive data.
However, in an analogous art, Healy discloses
a plurality of vehicle components (Leon: par. 0010, There is shown in FIG. 1, a controller area network (CAN) system 10. The CAN system 10 includes a plurality of electronic control units (ECUs) 12-18 coupled to a communication bus 20 which allows the ECUs to communicate with one another. Each of the plurality of ECUs 12-18 are coupled to one or more sensors, actuators, or control devices (e.g., application components).
a communication bus that permits the plurality of vehicle components to send and receive data (Leon: par. 0010, There is shown in FIG. 1, a controller area network (CAN) system 10. The CAN system 10 includes a plurality of electronic control units (ECUs) 12-18 coupled to a communication bus 20 which allows the ECUs to communicate with one another. Each of the plurality of ECUs 12-18 are coupled to one or more sensors, actuators, or control devices (e.g., application components)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Jiang with the method and system of Philbrick and Leon to include a plurality of vehicle components; and a communication bus that permits the plurality of vehicle components to send and receive data. One would have been motivated to provide the isolated fault within the in-vehicle communication system can be identified utilizing node level diagnostics and network level diagnostics. The effective identification of the exact location of occurrence of the fault the in-vehicle communication system can be performed. The in-vehicle communication system can be corrected and enhanced (Jiang: pars. 0004, 0005, 0033).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Philbrick, Leon, and Jiang teaches the vehicle system of claim 13. The combination of Philbrick, Leon, and Jiang further teaches a manifesto layer, wherein the operating system permits an application to communicate via the communication bus using the manifesto layer based on one or more digital certificates (Philbrick: abstract; Col. 4, lines 1-4; Leon: pars. 0155-0157; Leon: par. 0010;).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Philbrick et al. (“Philbrick,” US 11,757,633), in view of Leon (“Leon,” US 2020/0412733), and Jiang et al. (“Jiang,” US 2013/0136007), and further in view of Wenneman et al. (“Wenneman,” US 2023/0351814).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Philbrick, Leon, and Jiang teaches the vehicle system of claim 14. The combination of Philbrick, Leon, and Jiang further teaches, wherein permitting the application to communicate via the communication bus using the manifesto layer based on digital certificates but does not explicitly disclose “this communication includes permitting data to be obtained by the application.”
However, in an analogous art, Wenneman discloses permitting data to be obtained by the application via the communication bus (Wenneman: par. 0032, the vehicle data client application may be configured to only receive read-only messages via a port connection to a controller area network (CAN) bus of a participating vehicle.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Wenneman with the method and system of Philbrick, Leon, and Jiang to include “permitting data to be obtained by the application.” One would have been motivated to provide the method allows a vehicle manufacturer to collect vehicle status information, such as gas mileage, engine performance and driving conditions, from the vehicles manufactured by the vehicle manufacturer in order to improve vehicle design or performance. The method allows a user to quickly and easily identify the vehicles to include in a vehicle fleet without time-consuming and labor-intensive (Wenneman: pars. 0002, 0004).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Philbrick et al. (“Philbrick,” US 11,757,633) in view of Leon (“Leon,” US 2020/0412733), and Jiang et al. (“Jiang,” US 2013/0136007), and further in view of Barrett et al. (“Barrett,” US 2014/0121891).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Philbrick, Leon, and Jiang teaches the vehicle system of claim 14. The combination of Philbrick, Leon, and Jiang further teaches, wherein permitting the application to communicate via the communication bus using the manifesto layer to the communication bus.
However, in an analogous art, Barrett teaches “permitting the application to write data to the communication bus (Barrett: par. 0008, The data signals generated or received on the CAN bus may be further received at the mobile device and then processed at the mobile device in a variety of mobile device applications. Write signals may also be transmitted from the mobile device to the CAN bus to control or alter various components of the automobile; par. 0011).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Barrett with the method and system of Philbrick, Leon, and Jiang to include “permitting the application to write data to the communication bus.” One would have been motivated to provide the write signals transmitted to the CAN bus may alter various components, resulting in an improved driving experience, improved fuel efficiency or safety, or accessing automobile performance information (Barrett: par. 0008).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Philbrick et al. (“Philbrick,” US 11,757,633), in view of Leon (“Leon,” US 2020/0412733), further in view of Cui et al. (“Cui,” US 2024/0330030).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Philbrick and Leon teaches the vehicle system of claim 12. The combination of Philbrick and Leon teaches vehicle system with containers and digital certificates and operating system managing containers with certificate-based access as recited above but do not explicitly disclose, wherein: the first container has a first application layer; the first container has a second application layer different from the first application layer; an application executing with respect to the first application layer has a first set of restrictions; and an application executing with respect to the second application layer has a second set of restrictions different from the first set of restrictions.
However, in an analogous art, Cui discloses
the first container has a first application layer (Cui. par. 0023, A container image 112 that includes multiple layers 101 may provide a variety of different types of services according to the layers 101, wherein each layer uses (e.g., allocates, reserves) a particular set of computing resources and a particular amount of each computing resource (e.g., memory, processing, storage, and/or network bandwidth, etc.) of the computing environment that executes the container image 112. For example, a first layer (e.g., layer 101-1) of container image 112 may correspond to one or more binary files that use 1 gigabyte (GB) of data storage and 100 megabytes (MB) of memory of the computing environment (e.g., a VMM system 104), and a second layer (e.g., layer 101-2) of the container image 112 may correspond to one or more binary files that use 0.5 gigabyte (GB) of data storage and 50 megabytes (MB) of memory of the computing environment);
the first container has a second application layer different from the first application layer (Cui. par. 0023, A container image 112 that includes multiple layers 101 may provide a variety of different types of services according to the layers 101, wherein each layer uses (e.g., allocates, reserves) a particular set of computing resources and a particular amount of each computing resource (e.g., memory, processing, storage, and/or network bandwidth, etc.) of the computing environment that executes the container image 112. For example, a first layer (e.g., layer 101-1) of container image 112 may correspond to one or more binary files that use 1 gigabyte (GB) of data storage and 100 megabytes (MB) of memory of the computing environment (e.g., a VMM system 104), and a second layer (e.g., layer 101-2) of the container image 112 may correspond to one or more binary files that use 0.5 gigabyte (GB) of data storage and 50 megabytes (MB) of memory of the computing environment);
an application executing with respect to the first application layer has a first set of restrictions (par. 0023, For example, a first layer (e.g., layer 101-1) of container image 112 may correspond to one or more binary files that use 1 gigabyte (GB) of data storage and 100 megabytes (MB) of memory of the computing environment (e.g., a VMM system 104)); and
an application executing with respect to the second application layer has a second set of restrictions different from the first set of restrictions (par. 0023, a first layer (e.g., layer 101-1) of container image 112 may correspond to one or more binary files that use 1 gigabyte (GB) of data storage and 100 megabytes (MB) of memory of the computing environment (e.g., a VMM system 104), and a second layer (e.g., layer 101-2) of the container image 112 may correspond to one or more binary files that use 0.5 gigabyte (GB) of data storage and 50 megabytes (MB) of memory of the computing environment).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Cui with the method and system of Philbrick and Leon to include “the first container has a first application layer; the first container has a second application layer different from the first application layer; an application executing with respect to the first application layer has a first set of restrictions; and an application executing with respect to the second application layer has a second set of restrictions different from the first set of restrictions.” One would have been motivated to provide the method enables solving problems of allowing a user to easily maintain and upgrade a VM without interrupting the application and/or containers that execute within the VM environment. The method enables providing layer of protection against application data theft and protection against wastage of computing resources e.g. memory resources, power resources, processing resources and networking resources, of a computing environment occurred if an attacker exploits the now-closed vulnerability. The method enables pulling image layers from the network instead of the layers to reduce network congestion and improve network bandwidth (Cui: pars. 0012. 0013,0016).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Philbrick et al. (“Philbrick,” US 11,757,633), in view of Leon (“Leon,” US 2020/0412733), further in view of McGuire et al. (“McGuire,” US 2022/0391302).
Regarding claim 18, the combination of Philbrick and Leon teaches the vehicle system of claim 12. Philbrick and Leon do not explicitly disclose wherein the first container is associated with a first type of application, and wherein the second container is associated with a second type of application different from the first type of application.
However, in an analogous art, McGuire discloses
wherein the first container is associated with a first type of application (McGuire: par. 0006, the baseline (e.g., idleness) can vary for different types (and application) of containers; par. 0009, baseline specific to the type (and application) of container; par. 0085, a baseline specific to the type (and application) of the container), and
wherein the second container is associated with a second type of application different from the first type of application (McGuire: McGuire: par. 0006, the baseline (e.g., idleness) can vary for different types (and application) of containers; par. 0084, monitoring for various types (and applications) of containers; par. 0085, a baseline specific to the type (and application) of the container).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of McGuire with the method and system of Philbrick and Leon to include wherein the first container is associated with a first type of application, and wherein the second container is associated with a second type of application different from the first type of application. One would have been motivated to provide the method enables reducing the cloud usage by scaling down the number of containers from a development/rest deployment, and using various clean-ups such as cleaning up old images and old instances of containers (McGuire: par. 0004)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CANH LE whose telephone number is (571)270-1380. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday 6:00AM to 3:30PM other Friday off.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Luu Pham, can be reached at telephone number 571-270-5002. 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 Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/Canh Le/
Examiner, Art Unit 2439
September 11th, 2025
/LUU T PHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2439